Loading...
Nton Airport planning docs• CITY OF NORTHAMPTON PLANNING BOARD APPLICATION AMM MMENT All of the following information is required. Incomplete applications will not be accepted. If you wish to review application materials with the Senior Planner prior to submission, please ca114 ]3-587-1287. tWl �.� _ a ":.:.. ;. . - .. _. ............. . . ... .. . . . . e_tofllin; .ttits�a _IiC alien I fa . irriattan ls.located:otn Butldin Ins s~ttar's Revlew:Ft�rm; which is a rere ulstt " Intermediate Projects ($155.00) _r Major Projects ($$95,00) - New construction or additions of 2,000 - 4,999 - Now construction or additions of 5,000+ gross sq. ft gross square footage (excluding single family - Commercial Parking lots and parking garages homes and agricultural uses) - Tale -out restaurants and convenience stores (Except - Projects requiring 6-9 additional parking spaces in the Central Business District) - Ptwmcd village Projects that arc not a Mujor . Automobile service stations Project _ Projects that require 10+ additional parking spaces - Flag, lots (additional fee required) -Residential Incentive and Planned Business Park projects r Site Plan (complete 1-8F) Pr,. Site Plan (complete 1-13) Special Permit with Site Plan (complete 1-8N) )—. Special Permit with site Plan (complete 1-13) 2 .P,errtiftis.Requesteo` lnderZoningOrdinance {)and Page(s) Building Inspector's Review Form I Section/Page Section/Page Sectiorga a Section/ft—re Section/Page '3. Parcel jnformavon Ac1tLeess: 152 Cross Farh Road Assessor Identification: Map # ppa I 25- 1 15 , 2nd Map #, Parcel #: 26-1 Zoning Di SC _ (if applicable) 6 ,,"971,5 155 _ Recorded in Hampshire Registry of Deeds or Land Court Book: 23( gb Page: 4;J ppliCailt.i4orm::ati�ri S.QwnerfromMpplicaot Name Robert Bacon Northampton Airport, Inc. Address P.Q. Box 076 Telephone 413-584-7980 >~rnail Fax Status o If: Ownei r-` Contract Purc aser Applic r Lesst<e j'"•'', Other 4�4f//EZ_/ _ i Daw SignatureDate ty. thi oimation contain erein is true an accurate to the—best of my knowledge; the abovesigoed owner(s) grant the Board and its agents permission to alter die prupurty w 1'Cviuw this application; I understand all documents will be entered into the public record and will be available on the internet; I understand that if neighboring issues have not been addressed/ resolved prior the hearing, the Board will continue the hearing. 411/2005 1:21 PM 1 003.pdf IT/b8 30Vd 1N3WNOdI11N3 31ViSAVS 8bE89Z9Etb Zb:BZ 9882/ZZ/98 • 6, Check boxes below indicating that you have provided the following documentation: © Sita vicinity Map/Plan ® Site or Plot Plan at 1" = 40' or greater Piling Pec (which ineludca tho advertising fee) made payable to the City of Northampton ($185 or $335) 0 Owner's Signature on Application Form or letter from owner authorizing applicant to sign on behalf of owner ® Stamped, Bclf Addrossod (to owner and applicant) Envelope(s) 16 complete packages collated & stapled (original and 15 copies) Two set- of .stamped envelopes addressed to each of the abutters within 300' and planning boards in adjacent towns (the abutters list can be found at www.norffimptoma.gov/opd/), If within 300' of a neighboring town, [,A the onvelopes must include the abutters within said town. The return address of all the envelopes should be labeled as: Plauuiub anti DevnlvNiucut, City of Northampton, City Unit, 210 Main Strcct, Room 11, Northampton, MA 01060-3198. A printed list of all abutters (from above section). Q Zoning Permit Review Form with Building Inspector's endorsement and application. Site 'Plans for major projects prepared and stamped by a Registered Architect, Landscape Architect, or Professional Engineer (At least 1 pian mus[ have an original stamp; remaining plans must either have an original stamp or copy of original stamp.) fuldud Plaiu- all pliuvs 11' x 17' ui Lugw must be folded aid collated with each appplication (Cf 24' x 36' plan sheets are included, they may contain 7 full sets with the remaining 9 at 11' x 17' size.) (-1 Traffic Study (Applicable to major projects) Stormwater Management flan, including soils information and depth to groundwater (Applicable to mayor projects) Building'Elevations Lighting, if applicable WAIVER Rr.Qt 1 F.S-r_ All items below are required unless a waiver is reaucArd. To request a waiver for an item, check the item and provide your reason for requesting a waiver. jR; Site plan(s) at a scale of 1"=40' or larger 1" 1001 due to property size FX Name and address of the owner and the developer, name of project, data and scale plans: r Plan showing Location and boundaries of: a. the lot, with adjacent streets or ways b. all properties and owners within 300 feet c. all zoning districts within 300 feet j Existing and proposed: a, buildings b. setbacks from property lines c. building elevations d, all exterior entrances and exits (elevation plans for all exterior facades structures are encouraged) Proaent and proposed use of: a, the land b. building 4/1/240$ 1:21 PM 003.pdf 21;/90 3917d 1N314NOK AN3 31d1SAVS 806896SEtb Zt? :01; 90071/7,Z/90 • Existing and proposed topography (for intermediate projects the permit granting authority may accept generalized topography instead of requiring rnntour lines) showing: a. two foot contour intervals b_ wetlands, streams. surfgne water bodies c, drainage swales and floodplains d, unique natural land features f7Location of a, patkiuy and luaaLS areas b. public and private ways c. driveways and walkways d. access and egress points e. proposed surfacing f. Location and description of: a. all stormwater drainage/detention facilities b. water quality structure c. public and private utilities/easements d, eewage dispoeal facilities C, water supply facilities Existing and proposed: a, landscaping, trees and plantings (size and type of plantings) b. stone walls c. buffers and/or fencing Signs: existing and proposed: a. Location b. dimensions/height c, color and illumination Provisions for refuse removal, with facilities for screening of refuse when appropriate M; Lighting: a. Location b. Details c. Photometric Plan showing no more than 0.5 foot candle at property line An erosion control plan and other measures taken to protect natural resources & water supplies (major projects only) Estimated daily and peak hour vehicles trips generated by the proposed use, traffic patterns for vehicles and ( pedestrians showing adequate access to and from the site, and adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulation within the site (major projects only) I understand that 1 will file this application with the City Clerk's Office first, then with the Northampton El Planning and Development Office. 4/1/2003 1:21 PM 003.pdf TT/90 39Vd 1N3WN061AN3 31ViSAVS 8bE85ZSETb Zb:0T 900Z/ZZ/90 7. Describe proposed project/work below, Requeet amended site plan approval to allow proposed curb cut. 8. Site Plan and Special Permit Approval Criteria. (If any permit criteria does not apply, explain why.) Section 8.9, Item 7. allows additional curb cutis to promote and improve safe and efficient traffic circulation. A. How will the requested use protect adjoining premises against seriously detrimental uses? Haw will the projeot provide for: L surface water drainage: No change from original approval. ii. Pound and siabt buffers: iii, the preservation of views, light and air: B. How will the requested use promote the convenience and safety of pedestrian movement within the site and on, adjacent streets? No change from original approval. i. flow will the prgjcct minimize traffic impacts on the streets and roads in the ansa? ii. 'Where is the location of driveway openings in relation to traffic and adjacent streets? iii. What features have been incorporated into the design to allow for: 4/1/2005 1:2I PM a_ access by emergency vehicles; b. the safe and convenient arrangement of parking and loading spaces: C. provisions for persona with disabilities: 4 003.pdf TT/!B 39tld 1N3WN061AN3 31ViSAVS 8bE89Z9ETb Zb:BT 9082/ZZ/98 • C. How will the proposed use promote a harmonious relationship of structures and open spaces to: i. the naturallandsoapo: 'NQ change from original approval. ii. to existing buildings: iii. other community assets in the area: D. What measures are being taken that show the use will not overload the City's resources, including: i, water supply and distribution system: No chaztge from original approval. ii. sanitary sewage and storm water collection and treatment systems: iii. fire protection, streets and schools: How will the proposed project mitigate any advcrsc irnpads uai ilii: CiVb cos:,urcos, as lis" above? E. List the section(s) of the Zoning Ordinance that states what special regulations are required for the proposed project (flag lot, common drive, lot size averaging, etc.) 8.9 p 7. requires that additional curb cuto mint promote and improve eafo and efficient: traffir.rirr.itlation. llow docs the project mcct the apccwl rcquirernenta'? (Ure additional cheats if necrarEary) Existing facility has three (3) curb cuts along its 1,411* linear feet frontage on Cross Path Road. The proposed curb cut will allow for access and the new hangar spaces and minimize the use of vehicular traffic on airport surfaces. F. State how the project meets the following technical performance standards: i. Curb cuts are minimized: rhMrk nt'Pall that Apply in the. Project. use of a commoxi driveway for access to more than one business f` use of an existing side street IX—.' use of a looped service road 4JU2005 1:21 PM 5 003.pdf ZZ/80 39Vd 1N3WN06IAN3 31ViSAVS 8bE89Z5Etb Zb'0Z 500Z/ZZ/90 • ii. Does the project require more than one driveway cur? r- NO P�, YES (if "yes", explain why) See Ab ov e iii. Are pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular traffic separated on-site? F- YES rKs NO (if "no", explain why) Not necessary 10-X Applicants for Intermediate Site Plan Approval ONLY, stop here. I 5.:...p .qa. otts;F eR.F s .. ,a so'cpn a n. e a ..aw sr .... O. Explain why the requested use will: No change from original application i. Not unduly impair the integrity or character of the district or adjoining zones: ii. not be detrimental to the health, morale or general welfare: iii. be in hannony with the general purpose and intent of the Ordinancu: H. Explain how the requested use will promote City planning objectives to the extent possible and will not adversely affect those objectives, defined in City master study plans (Open Space and Recreation Flan; Northampton State Hospital Rezoning Plan; and Downtown Northampton, Today, Tomorrow mud the Future). No change from origiztal application 4/113005 1:21 PM Applicants for lotermediate Special Permit Approval ONLY, step Mere. 6 003.pdf TT/60 39tld 1N3WN06IAN3 31ViSAVS 8tI689ZG6TtI ZtI:0T 900Z/ZZ/90 0 . (:"I'S �ViUS'I": AI.,Sa Ct]Ml'I:.ETE TH.E .:.......... Does the project ... .'.:Corporate oot sumps Into . e s `.. MAJ.OR',k'll�. 9. in the Storm water contro system. F, YES rr. NO (explain why) No point source runoff 10. Will the project discharge stormwater into the City's storm drainage system? r- YRfi F. 'NO (answer the following) Do the drainage calculations submitted demonstrate that the project has been designed so that .there is no increase in peak flows from pre- to poet development conditions during the: 1, 2, or t0 year Soil Conservation Service design storm? r" YES NO (if "no", explain why) No point source runoff 11. Will all the runoff from a 0.4 Inch rainstorm (first flush) be detained onsite for an average of 6 hours? [7 YES r7! NO (if "no", explain why) 12. Is the applicant requesting a reduction in the parking requirements? I— YF -S;. If "yes", what steps. bowie hisrn taken to reduce the need for parking. and number of trips per day? KC', NO No change from original applicae.ian 13. Traffic Study: &timated daily and peak hour vehicles trips generated by the proposed use, traffic patterns for vehicles and pedestrians showing adequate access to and from the site and surrounding intersections, and adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulation within the site. What mitigation is proposed for incremental impacts? 4/1/2005 1:21 PM L 7 o03.pcif TZ/0Z 39tld 1N3WN06IAN3 31ViSAVS 8V689Z96TV Zb:OZ 9O0Z/ZZ/90 • on of summer ix nUILLWy uwun.•+1• Generally, oar meets the 2.T&4,b urs y o eac mon wt a excepts The deadline date for filing applications is one calendar month prior to the next meeting date. ready 1, pace your application has been filed,ic Hearing staff review thclt toneX a available agenda aF the board and place alegal ad in ine if the application is Complete public hearing. We will schedule a Pu a local paper to appear a minimum of two (2) weeks prior to the hearing date, 2. The Wednesday 15 days before date, if check nte pwftorthamptonma. ov/a d/, public meeting notice to fid out your prje+:t has been Office d or the next hearing. cted, applicant must be present, and if all information is completu, the hearing is 3. The public hearing is condu closed. up to go days to make a decision on the permit. (The Board rarely takes 4, pace the hearing is closed, the Board has that long). 5. Once a decision is approved by the Board, (usually occurs at the same public hearing) the Board has fourteen (14) days from the date that the decision is made to file the decision with the City Clerk's gfticu. 6, After the decision has boon filed with the City Clerk's Office, a twenty (20) day appeal period begins. Once the twenty ion dam appeal y Cierk's office and period Passesut an record eco d it at the Registrypeal being ,of Deedsapplicant or Land Court, as applicable. copy oFthe decision from theCity The permit is not valid until recorded. 7, Proof that the decision has been filed at the Registry of Deeds must be brought to the Building Department, before a Building Permit will be issued. The short time Frame for issuing a Special Permit or Site Plan Approval is two (2} to three (3} months. The long time frame is four (4) to six (6) months. r L 003.pdf 4/1/2005 1:21 PM ZZ/ZZ 39tid 1N3WN06IAN3 31ViSAVS 8V689ZS6TtI Zb :0Z 9002/ZZ/90 r-rs F EGE F( E Egk1D L DS 7 , SEE se zlis " P&. 158 E #VO TE TH/S CX&I Lc EST�46 3 IT DCI ;r//F �,�ljU,tlD 1SHED y f,CURAICr DCCUP,gT/OAl A_r�EC0,�1,G/E,�1DED 4T T/W DF 7///,f �SU�1lEy 3 AGS THAT flOCU,G/F,VT�S I T lS r EE&EJJ T BE ZECD�DED >!EFC EC T/A/& ABUTTQ�CS NUPEUP TH }t rm �. LA I 4 Yr�r v�I y�i 5Hr' • r Lr •� CO. (Ilk �` IlI7�.i .t •. i Y In13 DETAIL r I 4A f DLL) LJE of 1 I . DAVE'S ELECTRIC, IUC SEE: BK. 2557 - PG 2 1 rt WILLIAM C. FEINSTEIN SEE • BK 2557 - PG. 2' � l . MICHAEL L. DISCENZA SEE. BK 2557 - PG 2 �� 4. NATHANIEL REED SEE• BK. 2557 - PG. 2. �. S. STEVEN W. ERODE SEE• BK. 2557 - PG. 2_ _ /k i. STEVEN W ERODE SEE • BK 2557 - PG 290 -x { 7. MARK E. L CELESTE BENOIT SEE BK. 2558 - PG 294 ^ � Y .f 8• MARK E. L CELESTE BENOIT SEE- BK 2558 - PG 290 • ,t i t �• ± 9. MARK E. L CELESTE BENOIT •SEE- BK 2558 - PG. 286 10. BENJAMIN A. SURNER, JR L STEPHEN G. FELLERS SEE- BK 2 - PG 150 *14 1 I . BENJAMIN A SURNER, JR. L E STEPHEN G. FELLERS SEE • BK. 2547 - PG. 190 12 BENJAMIN A. SURNER, JR STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE BK 2547 - PG 186 1 r 1 S. BEN JAMIN A. SURNER, JR L *, STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE- BK 2547 - PG 182 F •� 14. BENJAMIN A SURNER, JR L STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE- BK 2547 - PG 178 ` '15. BENJAMIN A. SURNER, JR L STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE BK 2547 - PG. 174 F 16. BENJAMIN A SURNER, JR L l STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE- BK 2547 - PG. 110 1 I T. BEN JAMIN A. SURNER, JR L _�•# STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE: BK 2547 - PG 166 4 1 111. BEN JAMIN A. SURNER, JR. L ` STEPHEN G. FELLERS SEE. BK 2547 - PG 162 19. BENJAMIN A SURNER, JR L STEPHEN G. FELLERS SEE. BK. 2547 - PG. 158 &••2n otcu Ikuiu A SlIRUFR _IR 1l ' P¢a"fknsr�N ALE N T - - Ut DOC) NALAX pv y TIE CDUESE FDA/ PIAI TO PIAI Z,- �c.T.'r• ...� SSD --34'- 4L%E P SQ�,Q ��. ��• baa ,�o 00 �o �o Qo�S v o h �Q P�q� tips ^�po "� a �= �G Ply � 46 % TIE CDULSE FLd,U 4iQ Pap.J TT. P/,cl .- a��. 45 00, ps n U La Y/ ��01 . a �'� fid• Q - r% BELDW W. /Z F1 R F-TimCK�&- -� v DulMnIP OF +. r A C '('AG A p T ra •� ��� �Or e/ �j//� r 4 A t It INjm__ A Ari t ;zclt _c r r --s rr r- Yr�r v�I y�i 5Hr' • r Lr •� CO. (Ilk �` IlI7�.i .t •. i Y In13 DETAIL r I 4A f DLL) LJE of 1 I . DAVE'S ELECTRIC, IUC SEE: BK. 2557 - PG 2 1 rt WILLIAM C. FEINSTEIN SEE • BK 2557 - PG. 2' � l . MICHAEL L. DISCENZA SEE. BK 2557 - PG 2 �� 4. NATHANIEL REED SEE• BK. 2557 - PG. 2. �. S. STEVEN W. ERODE SEE• BK. 2557 - PG. 2_ _ /k i. STEVEN W ERODE SEE • BK 2557 - PG 290 -x { 7. MARK E. L CELESTE BENOIT SEE BK. 2558 - PG 294 ^ � Y .f 8• MARK E. L CELESTE BENOIT SEE- BK 2558 - PG 290 • ,t i t �• ± 9. MARK E. L CELESTE BENOIT •SEE- BK 2558 - PG. 286 10. BENJAMIN A. SURNER, JR L STEPHEN G. FELLERS SEE- BK 2 - PG 150 *14 1 I . BENJAMIN A SURNER, JR. L E STEPHEN G. FELLERS SEE • BK. 2547 - PG. 190 12 BENJAMIN A. SURNER, JR STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE BK 2547 - PG 186 1 r 1 S. BEN JAMIN A. SURNER, JR L *, STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE- BK 2547 - PG 182 F •� 14. BENJAMIN A SURNER, JR L STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE- BK 2547 - PG 178 ` '15. BENJAMIN A. SURNER, JR L STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE BK 2547 - PG. 174 F 16. BENJAMIN A SURNER, JR L l STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE- BK 2547 - PG. 110 1 I T. BEN JAMIN A. SURNER, JR L _�•# STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE: BK 2547 - PG 166 4 1 111. BEN JAMIN A. SURNER, JR. L ` STEPHEN G. FELLERS SEE. BK 2547 - PG 162 19. BENJAMIN A SURNER, JR L STEPHEN G. FELLERS SEE. BK. 2547 - PG. 158 &••2n otcu Ikuiu A SlIRUFR _IR 1l ' P¢a"fknsr�N ALE N T - - Ut DOC) NALAX pv y TIE CDUESE FDA/ PIAI TO PIAI Z,- �c.T.'r• ...� SSD --34'- 4L%E P SQ�,Q ��. ��• baa ,�o 00 �o �o Qo�S v o h �Q P�q� tips ^�po "� a �= �G Ply � 46 % TIE CDULSE FLd,U 4iQ Pap.J TT. P/,cl .- a��. "sill t4 • _L,4 tv r_ WALK WAY 1 189315' Tt--Rvw4�- , AJZ5 •- 53 '- 50 "LU QLD FEEtLl lP OQD oo A 33'W1315 C IT4 WAL4 r TAI', h't ...�.' . - - ......., - �.,• . A,Rh% G L"I T�l OV1;Tk -,116C CA)V, �... .. ,r. • LEGEND o V kwbk1U,UEiJT ED POW T • I P TO 8E SET o &.S IS FDUUD SCALE X FEET ¢Q 0 CU 4-lJ (a() Z)U IUD /LV t)D - 06 3 I C1GJ �0 • r ` O �9G CQ � FAQ Q 9 GQ �dlJ RESERVED FOR REGISTERS USE ONLY _ j I REPORT THAT THIS PIAN SHOWS THE PROPERTY THIS PLAN AND LINES OF EXISTING. OWNERSHIPS AND THAT THE SURVEY CONFORMS TO THE TECHNICAL LINES OF STREETS OR WAYS SHOWN ARE THOSE AND PROCEDURAL STANDARDS FOR THE PRACTICE OF LAND SURVEYING OF PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREETS OR WAYS IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF ALREADY ESTABLISHED AND THAT NO NEW LINES MASSACHUSETTS FOR THE DIVISION OF EXISTING OWNERSHIPS OR !HIS PLAN HAS BEEN FOR NEW WAYS ARE SHOWN. PREPARED IN CONFORMITY WITH THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS OF DEEDS OF THE SIGNEDCpAAMpNyyE TH OF MASSACHUSETTS. DATE, SIGNED' Ff DATE ■ '•t. 1 00, Y/ ��01 . a �'� fid• Q F1 R F-TimCK�&- G MbOLh� _ " S, WALh LAN�_ A F INjm__ mow Fy 41 41 _c r r --s rr r- AJOUHAGI PTOu Al -PUTr Inc � � O _1ru , X,17, ---- ---- 1 �S�Q - Q 1, ANE "sill t4 • _L,4 tv r_ WALK WAY 1 189315' Tt--Rvw4�- , AJZ5 •- 53 '- 50 "LU QLD FEEtLl lP OQD oo A 33'W1315 C IT4 WAL4 r TAI', h't ...�.' . - - ......., - �.,• . A,Rh% G L"I T�l OV1;Tk -,116C CA)V, �... .. ,r. • LEGEND o V kwbk1U,UEiJT ED POW T • I P TO 8E SET o &.S IS FDUUD SCALE X FEET ¢Q 0 CU 4-lJ (a() Z)U IUD /LV t)D - 06 3 I C1GJ �0 • r ` O �9G CQ � FAQ Q 9 GQ �dlJ RESERVED FOR REGISTERS USE ONLY _ j I REPORT THAT THIS PIAN SHOWS THE PROPERTY THIS PLAN AND LINES OF EXISTING. OWNERSHIPS AND THAT THE SURVEY CONFORMS TO THE TECHNICAL LINES OF STREETS OR WAYS SHOWN ARE THOSE AND PROCEDURAL STANDARDS FOR THE PRACTICE OF LAND SURVEYING OF PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREETS OR WAYS IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF ALREADY ESTABLISHED AND THAT NO NEW LINES MASSACHUSETTS FOR THE DIVISION OF EXISTING OWNERSHIPS OR !HIS PLAN HAS BEEN FOR NEW WAYS ARE SHOWN. PREPARED IN CONFORMITY WITH THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS OF DEEDS OF THE SIGNEDCpAAMpNyyE TH OF MASSACHUSETTS. DATE, SIGNED' Ff DATE ■ '•t. 1 May 27, 2005 • Bruce Young, Land Use and Conservation Planner Northampton Conservation Commission 6AYSTATE City Hall, 210 Main Street ENVIRONMENTAL Northampton, MA 01060 CONSULTANTS INC. RE: Request to Approve Revised Plans Northampton Airport DEP File No. 246-551 BEC File No. 04-0418 Civil Engineers Environmental Dear Mr. Young: Scientists On behalf of the Northampton Airport, Baystate Environmental Consultants, Inc. (BEC) is pleased to present the enclosed two (2) copies of revised development plans for the Northampton Airport, specifically Sheets 3 and 4, of 4, revised 05/11/05. These revised plan sheets detail two proposed changes in the development plan. Firstly, the number of proposed buildings has been reduced from the originally approved plans. Three (3) new T -hangar buildings were originally proposed; this has been reduced to two (2) hangar buildings. Secondly, areas of existing taxiway paving that were originally slated for removal are now proposed to remain in place. These include the Taxiway "A" connector to the runway, and the runway turnaround bulb. The proposed aprons and taxiways immediately adjacent to the new T -hangars have been modified slightly to reflect the smaller hangar spaces. Removal of the taxiway surfaces was to have allowed for the necessary grading to achieve the compensatory storage requirements. The plans, cross sections, and summary tabulation reflect revised grading which accomplishes the necessary elevations to ensure the project remains in compliance with the requirements of the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act and the City of Northampton Wetlands Protection Ordinance. We look forward to presenting these changes to the Conservation Commission at their June 9 public meeting. If we may provide any additional information, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, An Equal Opportunity Employer ME 7l BEC, Inq: Tom Je cins; P.E. -' 296 North Main Street Senior Engineer East Longmeadow, MA 01028 Tel (413) 525-3822 Enclosures Fax (413) 525-8348 Other Office: Ce: Robert Bacon East Hartford, CT An Equal Opportunity Employer ME 7l important: When filling out forms on the computer, use only the tab key to move your cursor - do not use the return key. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection WPA Form 9A - Enforcement Order Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. C. 131, §40 A. Violation Information DEP File Number: Provided by DEP This Enforcement Order is issued by: October 26, 2001 Northam ton Conservation Commission Date Conservation Commission (Issuing Authority) WPA Forth 9A Rev. 02/00 To: Richard Giusto Name of Violator Old Ferry Road Address 1. Location of violation: Property Owner (if different) Northampton Airport, Old Ferry Road Street Address 01060 Northampton City/Town 25 Assessors Map/Plat Number Zip Code 1,15-19,53,71 Parcel/Lot Number 2. Extent and Type of Activity: Brin in fill into the floodplain without prior approval. This activit was conducted well over month after staff met with the owner to ciear)y define the information required to conduct this activit , including information about necessary documents for filin a Notice of Intent with the Commission. B. Findings described above is in The Issuing Authority has determined that theactivity (310 CMR 10 00), because: of the Wetlands Protection Act (M.G.L. C. 131, § 40) and its Regulations ® the activity has been/is being conducted without a valid Order of Conditions. ❑ the activity has been/is being conducted in violation of the Order of Conditions issued to: Dated Name File Number Condition number(s) Page 1 of 3 ❑ Other (specify): DEP File Number: Provided by DEP C. Order The issuing authority hereby orders the folio {te skanll that d all others shall immediately cease and ® The property owner, his agents, pe ' desist from the further activity affecting the Buffer Zone and/or wetland resource areas on this property. ❑ ulting from said activity should be corrected and the site returned to its Wetland alterations res original condition. ® attached Notice of Intent. The completed application and plans for all Complete the attarequired by the Act and Regulations shall be filed with the Issuing proposed work to November 22, 2001 Date No further work shall be performed until a public hearing has been held and an Order of Conditions has been issued to regulate said work. ® The property owner shall take the following action to prevent further violations of the Act: ndition b the end of the da 10/26. if site is not restored to Site shall be restored to ori final co the owner will be to fines from the Commission of up to $100 for each day of the violation, beginning on the day fill was brought in. l action. ts Failure to comply with this order may �ovidesstitute 9r`Wh eveounds �rvio a'tesnany pal aovision of this section t(a) General Laws Chapter 131, Section plars or by ent for not shall be punished by a fine of not more than twenty-five thousand doll) be subject ct imprison civil penalty not more than two years, or both, such fine and imprisonment; or (b) shato exceed twenty-five thousand dollarsforeach violation". Each day or portion thereof of continuing violation shall constitute a separate D. Appeals/Signatures rvation commission Courtcannot be appealed to the Department of An Enforcement Order issued by a Conse Environmental Protection, but may be filed in Superior Page 2 of 3 WPA Form 9A Rev. 02/00 WPA Forth 9A Rev. 02/00 Massachusetts Department f Wetland ental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection WPA Form 9A - Enforcement Order Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Questions regarding this Enforcement Order should be directed to: Carolyn Misch, Senior Land Use Planner/Permits Man a er Name 587-1287 Phone Number 8:30 a m to 4:30 P.M. Mon -Fri Hours/Days Available Issued by: Cit of NorthamCCommission Conservation Commission DEP File Number: Provided by DEP e member In a situation regarding immediate action, a Enforcement scheduled meeting ng of they b agent of the Commission and ratifiedy majority of the members at he next Commission. Sign res: i Signature of delivery person or certified mail -number, Page 3 of 3 City of Northampt l it sachusetts Office of Planning and Development city Hall . 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 . (413) 586.6950 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation • Historic Preservation of Appeals • planning Board • Zoning Board Date Submitted OPD Staff Review Conservation Commissionb3�7) Map ID F i ler # u98' C;c'c Pr►,» s/g ?f Legal Notice Gazette (Not 14,k G 1; 9d 5 Business Days before Meeting) Legal Notice Posted s Letter to Owner with yellow notice to be posted V Agenda Posted Copy to Conservation Commission Members Order/Determination filled out (w/out conditions) Conservation Commission Hearing Conservation Conservation Decision G Decision filed with Registry of Deeds Decision to Building Inspector G U. 6 9r Decision to DEP Decision to PB/ ZBA Permit entered on Computer Decision filed OPD (Memorex: ConCom\CCINSTRU 4/3/92) Scanned Digitized Checked -- Planning Board - Decision City of Northampton Hearing No.: PLN -2006-0063 Date: July 25, 2006 APPLICATION TYPE: SUBMISSION DATE: Amendment to Permit 6/14/2006 Applicant's Name: Owner's Name: Surveyor's NAME: 152CROSS PATH RD Name: Robert Bacon NAME: NAME: SECTION OF BYLAW: Northampton Airport, Section 11: Site Plan ADDRESS: ADDRESS: LOT: Northampton Airport ACTION TAKEN: : 015 PO Box 878 P.O. Box 878 TOWN: STATE: ZIP CODE: TOWN: ;;]ZA""RE NORTHAMPTON MA 01060 NORTHAMPTON PHONE NO.: FAX NO.: PHONE NO.: .: EMAIL ADDRESS: EMAIL ADDRESS: EMAIL ADDRESS: Site Information: STREET NO.: SITE ZONING: 152CROSS PATH RD SC TOWN: SECTION OF BYLAW: NORTHAMPTON MA 01060 Section 11: Site Plan MAP: BLOCK: LOT: MAP DATE: ACTION TAKEN: 25 015 001 Approved NATURE OF PROPOSED WORK: Amend site plan approval to change hanger sizes and types. HARDSHIP: CONDITION OF APPROVAL: STATE: I ZIP CODE: FAX NO.: FINDINGS: The Planning Board approved the modification of the site plan for a change in the size and type of airplane hangars based upon the following plans submitted with the application: 1. "Proposed Conditions Plan" Northampton Airport, Prepared by Baystate Environmental Consultants, Inc., dated May 19, 2004, change #4 dated 6/13/06. The Planning Board approved the change of the original site plan only for the alteration of building sizes and orientation. All other aspects of the original plan stand. The Board found that: 1. The requested use protects adjoining premises against seriously detrimental uses. The modified building size will not change the original permit. Conservation Commission will review the alterations relative to conformance with flood storage capacity. 2. The requested use addresses safety of vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site and on adjacent streets. There will be no significant changes over original permit. 3. The requested use will promote a harmonious relationship of structures and open spaces to the natural landscape, existing buildings and other community assets in the area. 4. The requested use will not overload, and will mitigate adverse impacts on, the City's resources including the effect on the City's water supply and distribution system, sanitary and storm sewage collection and treatment systems, fire protection, streets and schools. 5. The requested use does not trigger compliance with special regulations set forth in the Zoning Ordinance other than for site plan review. 6. Compliance with the following technical performance standards have been met: A. Additional curb cuts are not required. B. Pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular traffic movement on site are separated. C. The applicant will mitigate stormwater as addressed in original permit. COULD NOT DEROGATE BECAUSE: GeoTMS® 2006 Des Lauriers Municipal Solutions, Inc. Planning Board - Decision City of Northampton Hearing No.: PLN -2006-0063 Date: July 25, 2006 FILING DEADLINE: MAILING DATE: HEARING CONTINUED DATE: DECISION DRAFT BY: APPEAL DATE: 612212006 71612006 votes to 711312006 Jennifer Dieringer REFERRALS IN DATE: HEARING DEADLINE DATE: HEARING CLOSE DATE: FINAL SIGNING BY: APPEAL DEADLINE: 6/29/2006 811812006 711312006 712712006 811412006 FIRST ADVERTISING DATE: HEARING DATE: VOTING DATE: DECISION DATE: David Wilensky 6/29/2006 1 711312006 711312006 712512006 SECOND ADVERTISING DATE: HEARING TIME: VOTING DEADLINE: DECISION DEADLINE: 1 7/6/2006 1 8:55 PM 711312006 712712006 MEMBERS PRESENT: - i . George Russell votes to Grant Frances Volkmann votes to Grant Jennifer Dieringer votes to Grant Paul Voss votes to Grant George Kohout votes to Grant Keith Wilson votes to Grant Kenneth Jodrie votes to Grant David Wilensky votes to Grant ION MADE BY: SECONDED BY: VOTE COUNT: DECISION: Keith Wilson George Russell 8 Approved MINUTES OF MEETING: Available in the Office of Planning & Development. 1, Carolyn Misch, as agent to the Planning Board, certify that this is a true and accurate decision made by the Planning Board and certify that a copy of this and all plans have been filed with the Board and the City Clerk on July 25, 2006. I certify that a copy of this decision has been mailed to the Owner and Applicant. Notice of Appeal An appeal from the decision of the Planning Board may be made by any person aggrieved pursuant to MGL Chapt. 40A, Section 17 as amended within twenty (20) days after the date of the filing of the notice of the decision with the City Clerk. The date is listed above. Such appeal may be made to the Hampshire Superior Court with a certified copy of the appeal sent to the City Clerk of the City of Northampton. GeoTMS® 2006 Des Lauriers Municipal Solutions, Inc. • June 13, 2006 City of Northampton Office of Planning and Development 210 Main Street, Room 11, City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Attn: Ms. Carolyn Misch RE: Application for Site Plan Amendment Northampton Airport, Inc. 152 Cross Path Road; Northampton, MA Dear Ms. Misch: As Applicant on the above -referenced submittal for Site Plan Amendment, I hereby give Tom Jenkins, of Baystate Environmental Consultants, authorization to sign the application on my behalf. Sincerely, Robert Bacon Fi f-EgAJOLDS << ,1" SE Be. Z15S oP&. ISS 52, r00%A „� ,i� 3SGt DD _ • •_ MOTE ,tc�a TABC�SyED yS sS ,3s • ��'r� o. � -�' ��b+W-8(/ fC77�JCOC�P.4T/O�IG71W DFTf!/gDfTAT Do��Zjjrlj7j- /T /sQGLEE&EllT BEV480TrrZE01 TH�EC�E� /•.F. � �y 4)7- �' cam' '� �� 4 TIE CDUCSE FWAI 'e��/ Qct ♦ PIAI TD PIA.1 E. o qp »• . x, Lo ZN tx ►r � � fir � �• ���� p0 �h �' i P P/ * rFp c� ti 't �**) � �, �,, Q ti o� , o 4 LA AV `f,� Q O 48 SEE aFLOW FM r1E ODJ�IE�CSNlP OF �r ,. � „`PQC[�1LSE Fra '1 `c.4tvJ, . AtRatArwr 'OrAA t FIR' E Trmv,,&- A tAtu tA m C C_ — 117 Us LANE NEEL— ir r --S* L A tir-_ ' +'• WZTNA U TOu AX PMT, luc �� - v 0� �y 5NE0 ` r - - Lj ELS_ l,� , �,�� i -- --- 1 �S�Q . o , e s o a• �t::7C ;;�' 1. '+ V pG `" � •�IjAM? Doc) s �LANE'r NF- AQK� '24 lscGNQ•_�Q -%%%%S `�� � n•_ OR- :,I �' _ -NS NAL&L EIn13 iS' '41' _ �.WALK WAY r u ---- DETAILa- �,�--- P < � � --•-�4 .�--� �.. �t1l�S'- 53' -SD "!1J � -� �C1s��X8;/3_ ' -- 4 — _"� !U - OLD A 33' WIDE C IT4 LL)AL4 OWLIE � E OF �c AlECEAFT NQ�IC� CD Uhl�0*0 - s F, , H 1 O I. DAVE'S ELECTRIC, I1JC SEE: BK. 255T - PG tib _�/►'KKtt,IG t.C��+Air 4VQ ,SOU �'AR 2. WILLIAM C. FEINSTEIN SEE: BK. 2557 - PG.2T2 K I N C_....L..OT OV F � v C A t xt 3. MICHAEL L. OISCENZA SEE: BK. 2557 - PG.27T RKIN6- Lot_ .C_ ,.� vER so o CABS. ___� .. 4. NATHANIEL REED SEE: BK. 2557 - PG. 281 CO 5. STEVEN W. BRODE SEE: BK. 2557 - PG. 286 BRh1h(,L0T "V OV 5� a,OOO C^RS t 0, �C i. STEVEN W ERODE SEE. BK. 2557 - PG. 290 -HANDICAP Lo 0 y -E 106 Cii • 7. MARK E. t CELESTE BENOIT SEE. BK. 2558 - PG 2942.00 CA ik.S 1. MARK E t CELESTE BENOIT SEE BK 2558 - PG.290 9. MARK E. L CELESTE BENOIT SEE BK. 2558 - PG.286 10. BENJAMIN A SURNER, JR d ' STEPHEN G. FELLERS SEE- BK 2547 - PG. 150 . 1 1 . BENJAMIN A SURNER, JR. t ' STEPHEN G. FELLERS SEE: BK. 2547 - PG. 190 ' 12. BENJAMIN A. SURNER, JR, L STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE BK 2547 PG 186 r RESERVED FOR REGISTERS USE ONLY ��... uu APR ;'?n9 q CITY CLERKS OFFICE " • NORTHAMPTON MA 01060 , mssX06 a • F� st ' q � /24 A 1 Ei 1 • STEPHEN G. FELLERS SEE: BK. 2547 - PG. ►5B DA . _/�iA D t 3� 40 O ZD 4-d [ 0 86 /Da /ZO 'i • 1 20, BENJAMIN A. SURNER, JR. L STEPHEN G. FELLERS SEE: BK 2547 - PG. 154 SUCE lJU , f;r6t ` 0 os r DATE •., 8 -oo - PUU DF L UD Illi FIELD-RK ComptrATow, ° T ". U OETHAUPTDIJ, &Z.54040SETT5 • SUNEyFD FOL K DTR SCA6ES i":166 LIOETRA41PTOM AIEPOET, luce I REPORT THAT THIS PLAN SHOWS THE PROPERTY THIS PLAN AND IS. , � BEN JAMIN STEPHEN A. G SURNER. FELLERS JR. t SEE: BK 2547 - PG. 182 LEGENDSURVEY — LINES OF EXISTING. OWNERSHIPS AND THAT THE CONFORMS TO THE TECHNICAL f , 6 OLWAIUVE) TED P011170' PROCEDURAL STANDARDS FOR 14. BENJAMIN A SURNER, E JR L • I P rD 8E SET LINES OF STREETS OR WAYS SHOWN ARE THOSE LINES THE P'RACT I CE OF LAND SURV EYIN G STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE: BK 2547 - PG 178 O Gr.S. g. FDUJl.1D OF PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREETS OR WAYS IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF i S. DEN JAMIN STEPHEN A G SURNER, FELLERS JR t SEE: BK. 2547 - PG, 174 ALREADY ESTABLISHED AND THAT NO NEW LINES MASSACHUSETTS ` 16. BENJAMIN A SURNER, JR L FOR THE DIVISION OF EXISTING OWNERSHIPS OR CHIS PLAN HAS BEEN STEPHEN G. FELLERS SEE: BK 2547 - PG. 170' PREPARED IN CONFORMITY WITH THE FOR NEW WAYS ARE SHOWN. M , 11. BENJAMIN A SURNER, JR b RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE ' STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE: BK. 2547 - PG. 166 REGISTERS OF DEEDS OF THE • Ib. BENJAMIN A. SURNER, JR. L - B '/' SCALE �� FEEr SIGNED COM TH OF MASSACHUSETTS. STEPHEN G FELLERS SEE. BK. 2547 - PG. 162l� �►c N��t� G 1 u s•tv O SO kv /SOZ5D 4& " 19. BENJAMIN A. SURNER, JR. t _ 72.Tpy_V-rg/V Pp - TE SIGNED- 0, A L 1 4 eZ 4401- • STEPHEN G. FELLERS SEE: BK. 2547 - PG. ►5B DA . _/�iA D t 3� 40 O ZD 4-d [ 0 86 /Da /ZO 'i • 1 20, BENJAMIN A. SURNER, JR. L STEPHEN G. FELLERS SEE: BK 2547 - PG. 154 SUCE lJU , f;r6t ` 0 os r DATE •., 8 -oo - PUU DF L UD Illi FIELD-RK ComptrATow, ° T ". U OETHAUPTDIJ, &Z.54040SETT5 s S 6 ui SUNEyFD FOL K DTR SCA6ES i":166 LIOETRA41PTOM AIEPOET, luce DATE$ W4CC14 IS. 11 �tK AcMER r. V� HUNT '� •� IO EY dr7 ALMER HUNTLEY, JR. a ASSOCIATES. INC. SURVEYOR S - ENGINEERS - PLANNERS 125 PLEASANT STRE@wanned a5 00I NORTHAMPTON, MAS:Id • JfB : Ito -IoZ -S SHET& /2t, OV i to, "re �82 Z6jK�, January 14, 2000 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT CITY OF NORTI3AmPTpN CitN Hall • I z o Mwn Street . N044" ton, MA 0 z 060 1413587-1266 • �(4>;31587-1264 wareFidenDirectr•emaii:pianning@cit, o-Vno►tham t0n na.ns • Internet: wwwxity.northamptpn.ma.nS Richard Guisto Northampton Airport, Inc. Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA 01060 Re: Order of Conditions Issued June 26, 1998 for Construction of DEP File #246-428 Storage Building Dear Mr. Guisto: I understand that the storage building approved by the Conservation Co Notice of Intent for this project called for Providing ow been constructed. Commission with the P ding compensato As you may remember, the of a mound of earth adjacent to the building site. compensatory storage by removal of portions It has come to my attention that this mound of fulfill your obligations under the exthat earth is still intact. Please forty (340) cubic feet of this pile, as a g Order of Conditions b _taking e steps to greed, at your earliest convenience. three hundred and In addition, a review of the Commission's minutes reveals that the allowing you to remove the entire pile and -bank- re was discussion of of the pile. If you are interested in doin compensatory storage for the un requesting credit for the additional compensatory storage so membersused P°mon se Provide a letter to the Commission request. (You will need to provide information as to the total volume of material r approve your material removed.) I am sending you copies submitted with the Notice of Intent relative to of the meeting minutes, as well as co les of compeatory storage.P the information If you have any questions with regard to this matter Office of Planning & Development at 587-1266• , Please do not hesitate to contact the Best Regards, —11z�1 W4. Laura Krutzler Board Secretary, Northampton Conservation Commission Scanned enclosures cc: Almer Huntley, Jr. �igiti2ed &Associates, Inc., Attention: Andrew P.O. Box 568, Northampton, MA 01061-0568. Kawcza1c�30�Inkd d Planning board •conservation commission •z economic development oning board o f apneas •housing partnership • redevelopment anthoritr� • communitr�development • historic district commission .%istoricalcommission ,Hort pant pton GIS 060inn1pintaon rayc(ui Pape, Certification shall be by a Professional Engineer. Fournier raised the possibility of allowing the applicant to "bank" compensatory storage for the unused portion of the pile of material to be removed from the site. Members and the applicant discussed this possibility, with Fournier commenting that, if the applicant was removing more material than he needed to provide the required storage, he should get credit for that. Members indicated that they would be receptive to the idea, and Roy suggested that the applicant write a letter to the Commission requesting credit for a certain amount of additional compensatory storage so that the Commissioners could formally approve the request. Roy moved to issue the orders. Rosen seconded. The motion passed unanimously 4:0 Complaint of Wetland Violations on Property Belonging to the Amo's. Bennet said that the Charlands delivered copies of photos and were asking what action the Commission was to take. He said that three issues had been identified - 1) the little drainage channels dug out on the side of the road (erosion), 2) whether things can be moved, and 3) a tree cut down (six-foot diameter) on the Amo's property. Bennett noted that the Amo's left the root base to hold the bank, but the top was never removed and was still there. Roy suggested asking the Amo's to remove the top of the tree from the river. She said they could leave the trunk on the bank. Members discussed writing a letter requesting that the Amo's fill in the ditches and remove the tree. After discussion, members decided the buses at the property were not an issue for them, and they should direct the Charlands to the Building Inspector for resolution of this issue. Plumb Auto Supply Order of Conditions. Members agreed to issue the following orders: ---- Standard Conditions #1 - #22. POST CONSTRUCTION SUBMITTALS & WORK IN BUFFER ZONE: 2. If checked: [X ) YES Upon completion of the work covered by this Order, the applicant shall submit an as -built plan, signed and stamped by a registered professional engineer or land surveyor, together with a written request for a Certificate of Compliance. 21 6AYSTATE ENVIRONMENTAL INC. Civil Engineers Environmental Scientists 296 North Main Street East Longmeadow, MA 01028 Tel (413) 525-3822 Fax (413) 525-8348 June 13, 2006 City of Northampton Office of Planning and Development 210 Main Street, Room 11, City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Attn: Ms. Carolyn Misch RE: Application for Site Plan Amendment Northampton Airport, Inc. 152 Cross Path Road; Northampton, MA BEC Project No. 04-0418 Dear Ms. Misch: Baystate Environmental Consultants, Inc. (BEC) is pleased to present the enclosed Application for Amended Site Plan Approval for the Northampton Airport, Inc., with supporting paperwork (original + 15 copies). This application requests approval of a re -sizing of one (1) proposed hangar, and a change from two (2) proposed hangars to two (2) proposed T -hangars adjacent to Old Ferry Road. The proposed alterations to the approved plan are shown on the site plan attached to the application, "Proposed Conditions Plan", by BEC, revision #4, dated June 13, 2006. We look forward to meeting with the Planning Board to discuss the Amendment Application. Also enclosed are revised Open Space calculations which reflect the changes to the site plan. The proposed changes result in slightly more impervious area, but with the proposed Site Plan alterations, the site has more Open Space than the Existing Conditions at the time of original Site Plan approval in June, 2004. As can be seen, adequate open space has been provided to allow for all of the proposed impervious surfaces to be installed. The "raw" Open Space (if the "credit" taken for the land across Riverbank Road is omitted) is approximately 75%, well beyond the current allowable minimum open space requirements of the SC zone (50%). Included with this submittal is the filing fee check in the amount of $500.00, and two (2) copies of abutter labels. If we can provide any additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, BEC, Inc. Tom Jenkins, P. . Senior Engineer Cc: Robert Bacon Other Office: I East Hartford, CT enclosures An Equal Opportunity Employer • NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT SITE RATIOS TOTAL SITE AREA = 49.416 Acres = 2,152,561 Sq.Ft. TOTAL PAVED AREAS = 340,627 EXISTING BUILDING AREAS: PROPOSED CONFIGURATION (in SgFt) 11,014 EXISTING CONFIGURATION (in SgFt) 13 695 EXECUTIVE T -HANGARS _ 11,385 EXISTING PAVED AREAS: _185,418 TWCj2L- UNIT T -HANGARS - - RUNWAY ,--15,892 TAXIWAY "A" 192 TAXIWAY "A..[RUNWAY 24,799 4,949 TAXIWAY"B" 24,799 _40,567 TAXIWAY "B" - 9E T HANGAR APRONS AND DRIVES _ SKYDIVING FACILITY __ CENTER TAXIWAY AREA TOTAL BUILDING AREA = FBO PARKING AND WALKS - 16,250 T -HANGAR APRONS _- 34,588 FUEL AREA 5,639 T HANGAR DRIVES 59,356 -- JET FUEL AREA 1,000 FBO APRON & PARKING 4 986 APRON AREA 57,449 FUEL AREA 5 639 T_HANGAR PAVING 92,361 TOTAL PAVED AREAS = 340,627 EXISTING BUILDING AREAS: T -HANGARS 1-10 _ 11,014 T -HANGARS 11-20 13 695 EXECUTIVE T -HANGARS _ 11,385 BALLOONING BUILDINGS (2 Exi 9L___2,880 - BLDG #1-A TWCj2L- UNIT T -HANGARS - - BLDG #1-B 5,027 _ BLDG #1-C 192 BLDG #2 _ 5,140 BLDG #3 7,64 _ FAA BUILDING - 9E TOTAL BUILDING AREA = 57,649 TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA= 398,276 = 18.50% TOTAL OPEN SPACE AREA = 1,754,285 = 81.50% TOTAL PAVED AKtAs=1_wo�'ili EXISTING BUILDING AREAS TO REMAIN OR BE _ RECONSTRUCTED: _ T -HANGARS 1-10 11,014 T -HANGARS 11-2013,695 EXECUTIVE T -HANGARS _11,385 BALLOON BUILDING 1 tq Remain as FBO) _ 1,440 BLDG #3 (Hangar) _ _ 7,643 FAA BUILDING _- _ -- 98 PROPOSED BUILDINGS: TWCj2L- UNIT T -HANGARS - - 19,278 108' x 69' HANGAR __- __ 7,452 __8 _ . 8 - UNIT T -HANGAR _. 9,639 10 UNIT T -HANGAR _ - 11,781 SKYDIVING FACILITY __ 2,940 TOTAL BUILDING AREA = 96,365 TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA= 535,740 = 24.89% SUBTRACT "NEW" OPEN SPACE = 166,384 (= 3.82 ac_) ADJUSTED IMPERVIOUS AREA = 369,356 = 17.16% TOTAL OPEN SPACE AREA = 1,783,205 = 82.84% OPEN SPACE TO BE "BANKED"= 28,920 Sq.Ft. REVISION No. 3 FOR PLANNING BOARD REVIEW JUNE 13, 2006 Page 1 of 1 C BAYSTATE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC. 296 N. MAIN STREET EAST LONGMEADOW, MA 01028 Exactly Five hundred and no / 100 Dollars PAY TO THE City of Northampton ORDER OF 7618 WESTFIELD BANK WESTFIELD, MA 01086 53-7160-2118 7 618 DATE AMOUNT t 6/13/2006 $500.00 filing fee 04-0418 M' 11200 7 6 1811' 1: 2 1 18 7 1601,1: 1028 7 5 211' ,� PREPARED BY 11UNTLEY AL1i[ER HUNTLEYp JR. do ASSOCIATES. INC. SURVEYORS ENGINEERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 30 INDUSTRIAL DRIVE EAST NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS D:/'O'- - '..' -".e DATE:'117 /Z.,,,g COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS AIRPORT ASMP MASSACHUSETTS AERONAUTICS COMMISSION APPROVED: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DATE: APPROVED: AIRPORT ENGINEER DATE: AERONAUTICS COMMISSION SAFETY AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT 98- 7B2-03 PAVEMENT REPAIRS IN THE CITY OF NORTHAMPTON, MASS. HAMPSHIRE COUNTY i" = 700'± CITY OF NORTHAMPTON Scanned Digitized Checked SHEET No. 2 3 4 .. INDEX DESCRIPTION TITLE SHEET AND INDEX OVERALL SITE PLAN DETAILED SITE PIAN CONSTRUCTION DETAILS • CITY OF NORTHAMPTON PLANNING BOARD APPLICATION AMENDMENT i 32006 .a� lY''.;l_E KS OFFICE V\!: ' -sAMP i OSI MA 010E,": All of the following information is required. Incomplete applications will not be accepted. If you wish to review application materials with the Senior Planner prior to submission, please call 413-587-1287. 1 rc )pct Type (Ch'4& Box) Irifbrmati n, is'°(ocated on Building Inspector's Revi Intermediate Projects ($200.00) - New construction or additions of 2,000 - 4,999 gross square footage (excluding single family homes and agricultural uses) - Projects requiring 6-9 additional parking spaces - Planned Village Projects that are not a Major Project - Flag lots (additional fee required) ,A. v Form, which is a prerequisite tojiling this application: or Major Projects ($500.00) plus $0.05/per square foot of proposed new building square footage - New construction or additions of 5,000+ gross sq. ft. - Commercial Parking lots and parking garages - Take-out restaurants and convenience stores (Except in the Central Business District) - Automobile service stations - Projects that require 10+ additional parking spaces -Residential Incentive and Business Park projects F_ Site Plan (complete 1-8F) IR Site Plan (complete 1-13) F— Special Permit with Site Plan (complete 1-8H) F_ Special Permit with Site Plan (complete 1-13) 2. Permit is Requested Under Zoning Ordinance Section(s) and Page(s) From 1 II / / / / / Building Inspector's Review Form I Section/Pae I Section/Pae Section/Pa e Section/Page Section/Page 3. Parcel Information Address: J SZ CK -05S PATO ROAD 2S - 1 IS 2nd Map #, Parcel #: Z(c - 1 Zoning District: Assessor Identification: M#ar Ile t-191 S3 1 (if applicable) Recorded in Hampshire Registry of Deeds or Land Court Book: 2-3a lP Page: 1 SS e 11- l-11 DAA 1 uVi'p i • 6. Check boxes below indicating that you have provided the following documentation: Site Vicinity Map/Plan ® Site or Plot Plan at I" = 40' or greater (� Filing Fee made Payable to the City of Northampton ($200 or for Major Projects and Flag Lots $500.00 plus $0.05/per sq. foot of proposed new building sq. footage. Amount Enclosed: $ 5co• �2 Stamped, Self Addressed Envelope(s) to Owner and Applicant. 16 complete packages (original and 15 copies). Each packet must include all application material and be ® collated, stapled and banded together. Two separate rubberbanded sets of stamped envelopes addressed to each of the abutters within 300' and planning boards in adjacent towns. The abutters list can be found at www northamptonma eov/opd/. If within 300' of a neighboring town, the envelopes must include the abutters within said town. The return address of all the envelopes should be labeled as: Planning and Development, City of Northampton, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Room 11, Northampton, MA 01060-3198. ® A printed list of all abutters (from above section). Number of Abutters on the list is: F] Zoning Permit Review Form with Building Inspector's endorsement and application. Site Plans for major projects prepared and stamped by a Registered Architect, Landscape Architect, or Professional Engineer (At least 1 plan must have an original stamp; remaining plans must either have an original stamp or copy of original stamp.) Folded Plans- all plans I1' x 17' or larger must be folded and collated with each appplication (If 24" x 36" plan sheets are included, they may contain 7 full sets with the remaining 9 at 11" x 17' size.) F] Traffic Study (Applicable to major projects) Stormwater Management Plan, including soils information and dep Elprojects) to groundwater (Applicable to major projects) F] Building Elevations F] Lighting, if applicable WAIVER REQUEST. All items below are required unless a waiver is requested. To request a waiver for an item, check the item and provide your reason for requesting a waiver. (x Site plan(s) at a scale of 1"=40' or larger 1�1= koo 1 DUE To p iz-opc QT`( 51:2:C Name and address of the owner and the developer, name of project, date and scale plans: Plan showing Location and boundaries of: a. the lot, with adjacent streets or ways b. all properties and owners within 300 feet c. all zoning districts within 300 feet F— Existing and proposed: a. buildings b. setbacks from property lines c. building elevations d. all exterior entrances and exits (elevation plans for all exterior facades structures are encouraged) Present and proposed use of: a. the land b. building 4/l/2005 1:21 PM 2 003.pdf • Existing and proposed topography (for intermediate projects the permit granting authority may accept generalized topography instead of requiring contour lines) showing: a. two foot contour intervals b. wetlands, streams, surface water bodies c. drainage swales and floodplains d. unique natural land features F7 Location of: a. parking and loading areas b. public and private ways c. driveways and walkways d. access and egress points e. proposed surfacing F, Location and description of: a. all stormwater drainage/detention facilities b. water quality structure c. public and private utilities/easements d. sewage disposal facilities e. water supply facilities F— Existing and proposed: a. landscaping, trees and plantings (size and type of plantings) b. stone walls c. buffers and/or fencing F— Signs: existing and proposed: a. Location b. dimensions/height c. color and illumination F- Provisions for refuse removal, with facilities for screening of refuse when appropriate FLighting: a. Location b. Details c. Photometric Plan showing no more than 0.5 foot candle at property line An erosion control plan and other measures taken to protect natural resources & water supplies F (major projects only) Estimated daily and peak hour vehicles trips generated by the proposed use, traffic patterns for vehicles and F' pedestrians showing adequate access to and from the site, and adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulation within the site (major projects only) I understand that it is required that I take this application to get date stamped at the City Clerk's Office first, prior to filing it with the Northampton Planning and Development Office. 4/1/2005 1:21 PM 3 003.pdf • 7. Describe proposed project/work below: EQU.ES"( AMeNDeo 5MC PLATS A'FP9-66AL Dt= AAzD1Ct" kAt.1 AAk. Sk LeS AYAD -TYPES . 8. Site Plan and Special Permit Approval Criteria. (If any permit criteria does not apply, explain why.) S SMP "'e C►d4N4E of gU��1,U1h14 Lq`4Ou� i -- No CNA1.14t t►J P KoPDsCr> USE of- A. How will the requested use protect adjoining premises against seriously detrimental uses? How will the project provide for: L surface water drainage: a CH Ameke FK a a,• 3-t (A A L a PP 9-66 A L _ ii. sound and sight buffers: iii. the preservation of views, light and air: B. How will the requested use promote the convenience and safety of pedestrian movement within the site and on adjacent streets? ND LN A rA(AG FK -3 tA aQ-,4 t NA L_ A PPP-- v A L. i. How will the project minimize traffic impacts on the streets and roads in the area? ii. Where is the location of driveway openings in relation to traffic and adjacent streets? iii. What features have been incorporated into the design to allow for: a. access by emergency vehicles: b. the safe and convenient arrangement of parking and loading spaces: c. provisions for persons with disabilities: 4/1/2005 1:21 PM 4 003.pdf • C. How will the proposed use promote a harmonious relationship of structures and open spaces to: i. the natural landscape: Np 5V tJ( Fl CAtST C RA t -A4 AA, u 4kt-IA L APPX03AL-. ii. to existing buildings: iii. other community assets in the area: D. What measures are being taken that show the use will not overload the City's resources, including: i. water supply and distribution system: Ra CH A 1,14 E V- f -a .0- bV( 4 1 P�S A L APP9.3tsA L . ii. sanitary sewage and storm water collection and treatment systems: iii. fire protection, streets and schools: How will the proposed project mitigate any adverse impacts on the City's resources, as listed above? E. List the section(s) of the Zoning Ordinance that states what special regulations are required for the proposed project (flag lot, common drive, lot size averaging, etc.) fro CKAt`141v ;::� v(t-(-(.}kI)AI.. A PP" b A -L- . How does the project meet the special requirements? (Use additional sheets if necessary) F. State how the project meets the following technical performance standards: i. Curb cuts are minimized: Ko C FkA; r.14 �. PJLo'M D NSA �- Check off all that apply to the project: F use of a common driveway for access to more than one business F use of an existing side street (— use of a looped service road 4/1/2005 1:21 PM 5 003.pdf • ii. Does the project require more than one driveway cut? F_ NO (— YES (if "yes", explain why) iii. Are pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular traffic separated on-site? F_ YES F_ NO (if "no", explain why) oo Applicants for Intermediate Site Plan Approval ONLY, stop here. A° hA � ati8ns an P app �cat»ns a so contain t e. o owing: _7T G. Explain why the requested use will: NLO (;6 AA, i. Not unduly impair the integrity or character of the district or adjoining zones: ii. not be detrimental to the health, morals or general welfare: iii. be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Ordinance: H. Explain how the requested use will promote City planning objectives to the extent possible and will not adversely affect those objectives, defined in City master study plans (Open Space and Recreation Plan; Northampton State Hospital Rezoning Plan; and Downtown Northampton: Today, Tomorrow and the Future). v\ Nko CKA►.lC{t �U-,A O�\414A� AJ>P .ICA llON °off Applicants for Intermediate Special Permit Approval ONLY, stop co here. 4/1/2005 1:21 PM 6 003.pdf • f— YES F>-< NO (explain why) No QO 1►JT -51 u P C C g u.tJb Fes, 10. Will the project discharge stormwater into the City's storm drainage system? f- YES 1X NO (answer the following) Do the drainage calculations submitted demonstrate that the project has been designed so that there is no increase in peak flows from pre- to post -development conditions during the: 1, 2, or 10 year Soil Conservation Service design storm? f- YES �( NO (if "no", explain why) (ALO Q011JT 'j t, uf-cC ?_ U.►.iO4nf--, 11. Will all the runoff from a 0.4 inch rainstorm (first flush) be detained on-site for an average of 6 hours? F— YES F NO (if "no", explain why) 12. Is the applicant requesting a reduction in the parking requirements? F YES . If "yes", what steps have been taken to reduce the need for parking , and number of trips per day? (k NO NLO Ck4F_ FK6M Oi;�Ca�t�SAL A�PI,ILpT�ot�1_ 13. Traffic Study: Estimated daily and peak hour vehicles trips generated by the proposed use, traffic patterns for vehicles and pedestrians showing adequate access to and from the site and surrounding intersections, and adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulation within the site. What mitigation is proposed for incremental impacts? 4/1/2005 1:21 PM 7 003.pdf • �o- Generally, the Board meets the 2.d & 4th Thursday of each month (with the exception of summer & holiday months). The deadline date for filing applications is one calendar month prior to the next meeting date. The application (with copies) must be date stamped in at the city clerk's office prior to Tiling the application with the office of Planning and Development. I. Once your application has been filed, staff will review it to determine if the application is complete and ready for public hearing. We will schedule a Public Hearing for the next available agenda of the Board and place a legal ad in a local paper to appear a minimum of two (2) weeks prior to the hearing date. 2. The Wednesday 15 days before the next meeting date, you may check the Planning Office web page, www.northamptonma.gov/opd/ public meeting notice to find out if your project has been scheduled for the next hearing. 3. The public hearing is conducted, applicant must be present, and if all information is complete, the hearing is closed. 4. Once the hearing is closed, the Board has up to 90 days to make a decision on the permit. (The Board rarely takes that long). 5. Once a decision is approved by the Board, (usually occurs at the same public hearing) the Board has fourteen (14) days from the date that the decision is made to file the decision with the City Clerk's Office. 6. After the decision has been filed with the City Clerk's Office, a twenty (20) day appeal period begins. Once the twenty (20) day appeal period passes, (without an appeal being filed) the applicant must pick up a Certified copy of the decision from the City Clerk's Office and record it at the Registry of Deeds or Land Court, as applicable. The permit is not valid until recorded. 7. Proof that the decision has been filed at the Registry of Deeds must be brought to the Building Department, before a Building Permit will be issued. The short time frame for issuing a Special Permit or Site Plan Approval is two (2) to three (3) months. The long time frame is four (4) to six (6) months. 4/1/2005 1:21 PM 8 003.pdf Northampton Airport Inc. Re -calculated filing fee worksheet Previously submitted fees: Commonwealth of Massachusetts = $25 (see attached sheets for additional supporting details) Re -calculated VWPA fees (totaled) Commonwealth of Massachusetts = $250 City of Northampton = 275 Total WPA fees = $525 City of Northampton wetland bylaw fee = $35 ITherefore re -submitted fees for Commonwealth of Massachusetts = ($250 - $25) = $225 Therefore re -submitted WPA fees for City of Northampton = $275 Therefore re -submitted local bylaw fees for City of Northampton = (+$35) = 35 Total re -submitted fees to City of Northampton = $310 VIA AS YA-A NOTICE OF INTENT FEE TRANSMITTAL FORM DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION OF WETLANDS AND WATERWAYS NOTICE OF INTENT (NOI) APPLICANT Name: Northampton Airport, Inc. Street: Old Ferry Road City/Town: Northampton State: MA Zip Code: 01060 Phone Number: (413)584-7980 PROPERTY OWNER: Name: Same Street: City/Town: State: Zip Code: Phone Number: PROJECT LOCATION: Street/Lot Number: Northampton Airport off Old Ferry Road City/Town: Northampton DEP FILE NUMBER (if available): (3-N N -S ► f� L.) NOI FILING FEE Total NOI Filing Fee: JL5M State Share of Filing Fee: 25.00* City/Town Share of Filing Fee: 12Qa (WQA 0N1q) DISPUTED FEE Total Disputed Fee: - $470.00 (as determined in Notice of Insufficient Fee letter from conservation commission) State Share of Fee: $225.00 City/Town Share of Fee: $245.00 *Northampton Airport Inc. previously issued check(copy attached) of $25.00 payable to DEP. Not shown on this transmittal is the separate Northampton Wetlands bylaw fee. New filing fee calculation worksheet is attached. 1. Send this Fee Transmittal form and a check or money order, payable to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, to the DEP Lock Box at: Dept. of Environmental Protection Box 4062 Boston, MA 02211 2. Attach a copy of this form to the Notice of Intent submitted to the local Conservation Commission. 3. Attach a copy of this form and a copy of the DEP check to each of the Notice of Intent forms submitted to the DEP regional office. 11/20/92 04%23/98 13:11 '&941358712eA NORTHAMPTON, MA 11 STATEMENT INDICATING HOW FEES ARE CALCULATED The Wetlands Protection Act anFor d the Northapton Wetlands Ordinance Write is the number of each activity proposed in a resource area or buffer zone, the total fee, using worksheet on last page, Add up Cate 1, (555.00 each activity) a. Any work on a single family residential lot including a house addition, deck garden, pool, shed, or driveway. Activities excluded from Category 1 include dri geways reviewable under 310 CMR 10.53 (3)(e) (See Category 2f), co single family house, nstruction of an unattached and construction of a dock, pier, or other coastal engineering st►vcture. b. Site preparation of each single family house lot', including removal of v etati excavation and grading, where actual comsttuction of the house is not prop on, unde1 e Notice of Intent C. Control of nuisance vegetation by removal, herbicide treatment or other means, from a resource area, on each single family lot, as allowable under 310 CMR 10.53 (4). d• Resource improvement allowed under 310 CMR 10.53 (4), other than removal of aquatic nuisance vegetation, as allowed under 310 10.53 (4). e• Construction, repair, replacement or upgrading of a subsurface septic system or any part of such a system f. Activities associated with installation of a monitoring well, other than construction of an access roadway thereto. g• New agriculture, including forestry on land in forest use (3 10 CMR 10.53(3)(r)and(s)), and aquaculftual projects. Subtotal Category 1 2. "Cat ory 2• ($250.00 each activity) a• Construction of each single family house (including single family houses in a subdivision), any part of which is in a buffer zone or resource area. Any activities associated with the construction of said house(s), including associated site preparation and construction of retention/ detention basins, utilities, septic systems, roadways and driveways and other than roadways and driveways reviewableunder 310 CMR 10.53 (3)(e)(see category 2f), shall not be subject to additional fees if all said activities are type buildings reviewed under a single Notice of Intent. (For apartment/condomis see Category 3.) g 9 002 04/23/98 13:11 0 '6'94135871: L Cat o 2 continued : ($250,00 each activity) NORTHAMPTON, SIA 9003 b• Parking lot of any size. C. The placement of sand for purposes of beach nourishment. d• Any project reviewable under 310 CMR 1024(7)(a) through (c). e• Any activities reviewable under 310 CMR 10.53(3xd) and 310 CMR 10.53(3)(1) through (1), except for those subject to 310 CMR 10.03(7xc)4.b. Where more than one activity is Proposed within an identical footprint (e.g., construction of a sewer within the footprint of a new roadway), only one fee shall be payable. f Construction of each crossing for a driveway associated with an unattached single family house, reviewable under 310 CMR 10.53(3)(e). $• Any point source discharge. h. Control of nuisance vegetation, other than on a single family lot, by removal, herbicide treatment or other means, reviewable under 310 CMR 10.53(4). L Raising or lowering of surface water levels for flood control or any other purpose. J. Any other activity not described in Categories 1,3,4 or 5. k. The exploration for (but not development, construction, expansion, maintenance, operation or replacement of) public water supply wells or wellfields derived from groundwater, reviewable under 310 CMR I0.53(3x0). Subtotal Category 2 CategTory 3: ($525.00 each activity) a. Site preparation, for development other than an unattached single family house(s), including the removal of vegetation; excavation'and grading, where actual construction is not proposed in the Notice of Intent Xb. Construction of each building for any commercial, industrial, institutional, or apartment/ condominium/ townhouse -type development, any part of which is in a buffer zone or resource area. Any activities associated with the construction of said building, including associated site preparation and construction of retention/ detention basins, septic systems, parking lots, utilities, point source discharges, package sewage treatment plants, and roadways and driveways other than those roadways or driveways reviewable under 310 CMR 10.53(3)(e), Shall not be subject to additional fees if all said activities are reviewed under a single Notice of Intent. C. Construction of each roadway or driveway, not reviewable under 310 CMR 10.53 (3)(e), and not associated with construction of an unattached single family house. d. Any activity associated with the clean up of hazardous waste, except as otherwise noted in Category 4, including excavation, destruction of vegetation, change in surface hydrology, placement of collection wells or other structures for collection and treatment of contaminated soil and/or water U Cate of 3 continued • (S525.00 each activity) e. The develo Pment, CO��ctio (but not exploration for n'Pansiot; maintenance Operation, groundwater, review )public water Supply wells or wellfields de i e replace able under 3I0 C meet of MR I0.53(3)(0), raved from Subtotal Category 3 4 Cat or 4. (S72S 00 each activity) a. Construction of each crossin reviewable under 310 CMR g for a limited Project ac cess 10.53(3)(e) assoi institutional development commercial, °r driveway Pment or with any residec atewith a ntial d mercial, industrial, or Y associated with constructiconstruction (other than a roadway or on of an unattached single family house). b. Construction, modification, or repair of a flood tidegate, sluiceway, or appurtenant works. control structure such as a dam, reservoir, C. d• Creation, operation maintenance or expansion of a public or private landfill. — Creation, operation, maintenance operation including but not limited to ezccaavai oof a public or private sand and/or 4 fitting, and stockpiling. grave! e• Construction of new railroad lines or extensions of existing - Placement of track, signg lines, including ballast area, � and switches and other related structures. f. Construction, reconstructio n. expansion, or maintenance of any bridge, except to gain amily house loL access to a single f g• Any alteration of a resource area(s) to divert water for the clean up of a hazardous waste site, for non-exempt mosquito control project, or for any other purpose not expressly identified elsewhere in this fee schedule. h• Any activities, includingthe construction of structures, associated with a dredging operation conducted on land under a waterbody,'waterway, or the ocean. If the is directly associated with the construction of a new dock, pier or other structureedgmg identified in Category 5, only the Category 5 fee shall apply. L Construction of, or the discharge from, a package sewage treatment plant 1 Airport vegetation removal projects reviewable under 310 CMR 10.24 7 c 5 and 10.53(3)(n). ()( ) k Landfill closure projects reviewable under 310 CMR 1024(7)(c)4 and 10.53(3)(n). I Any activities, including the construction of structures, associated with the assessment, monitoring, containment, mitigation, and remediation of, or other response s , a release or threat of release of oil and /or hazardous material reviewable under ons3 10 CMR 10.24(7)(c)6, or 310 CMR 10.53(3xq). Subtotal Category 4 5. Cate_go`n+ 5� ($20.00 linear foot, Min. $50.00, Max. $1,000) f a. Construction, reconstruction, repair or replacement of docks, piers, revetm other engineering structures on coastal or inland resource areas of rip rap or other material on coastal or inland resource areas. ' ents, dikes o including the placement Subtotal Category 5 6• Cate'ory 6• ($1.00 linear foot (single family project), Max. S250.00; $1,000.00 for any other activity) a Delineation of bordering vegetated wetlands. (For single family house projects) Subtotal Category 6 7• Cate_ ¢ U 7.. — a• Work in river front area, o 50 /o of fee calculated for activities in another resource area(s). Subtotal Category 7 8 Cat_—eg°r1+-8-: Notices filed under the Northampton Wetlands Ordinance WI UNDER WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT MI—HO—UT FILING a• Any work on a single building lot or housing unit $25.00 b Each additional lot or housing unit - c Commercial, industrial, . institutional projects..... $50.00 $100.00 plus $0.10 square foot of resource area activity Plus $0.02 square foot of buffer zone activity. Subtotal Category 8 9. Category, g. Fee for permit under the Northampton Wetlands Ordinanc ' permit under the Wetlands Protection Act: e m add____ itt`on to fee for a• Request for Determination: b, $20.00 Notice of Intent (including requests for amendments) e $35.00 ✓ C. Extension of an Notice of Intent/Order of Conditions permit $50.00 d. Certificate of Compliance: $ Subtotal Category 9 Complete the summary fee worksheet page and submit with Permit to Conservation Commission 04/23/98 13:13 '&94135871264 NORTHAMPTON, 31A 4 FEE WORKSHEETS RY PAGE to be submitted Category I activities x $55.00 #—Category 2 activities x $250.00 # &ategory 3 activities x $525.00 # Category 4 activities x $725.00 #.................. S lf CategOly 5 activities x $2.00/ft{min$50) $ #—Ir Category 6 activities x $1. 00/ft(rnax $250orSj000)..S AL_Category 7 activities 50% of fee for other resource areas $'_ SUBTOTAL .......................... 150 ONE HALF SUBTOTAL Check #1 to: Minus: S 12.50 The Commonwealth of Massach- Usetts" SUBTOTAL.........�01 0"'F"'ALJF SUBTOTAL ONE , 0 PLUS: plus: $ 12-50 Category 8 activities @ $ 0 PLUS Cate gorY9 activities TOTAL FEE: $ s, 0 0 Check #2 to: 0, 0"a "The City of Northampton" 9004 07/13/06 12:51 pm P. MEMORANDUM TO: Francis Johnson, Chair, Planning Board FR: Ned Huntley, P.E., Director of Public Works, City Engineer DA: July '12, 2006 RE: File: Northampton Airport, 152 Cross Path Road — hangar revisions Map ID: 25-1,15,16,17,19,71,53 and 26-1 CC: file The Department of Public Works has reviewed the above referenced application for the following items: Traffic: x Volume & Impact on City Street x Roadway Capacity Adequacy of City Road Construction Site Distances x Parking x Driveway Openings Utilities: Sanitary Sewer Water Drainage Into City Stormwater System Capacity of Stormwater Line Northampton Stormwater Permit NPDES Phase I1 Compliance Other: The Department of Public Works has the following comments: x No Concerns, project will not have an impact on any items reviewed Traffic Study is required Roadway does not have adequate capacity to handle the additional. traffic Roadway is not adequately constructed to handle proposed increase in traffic Site Distances are not adequate for proposed project Parking spaces do not meet minimum requirements Parking spaces are too close to driveway opening Driveway openings are not adequate for proposed use Sanitary Sewer line is not adequately sized for proposed use Sewer line connection is not properly shown Water line is not adequately sized for proposed use Water line connection is not properly shown _ City stormwater system is not adequate to handle increase in drainage _._ Stormwater system does not meet minimum requirements for reduction of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Northampton Stormwater Management Permit has not been approved or conditions for approved permit have not been met Other Comments: VOLUME TO BE REMOVED (WHOLE PILE) 125 ± 20.6 cu. ft. -� 124 ± 117 cu. ft. - 12J ± 240 cu. ft. ---- 12 ±450 cu. ft. 12� *SEE NOTE > 300 cu. ft. 126 TOTAL=±1127.6 cu. ft. DATUM =v 119.00 AIRCRAFT HANGAR CONDOMINIUMS 12077 12Q 90 120.98_ _ _ _ 121.10 x 16' Wide Road --t21- x 12079 X 12a 61 12a58 12a 88 12Q 77 120.77 x 12a 19 X 12a J7 X 120.48 X 50 120.45 0 12x28 12a 17 1242 12a 89 \ 1 \ x x x r 12051 X 120.84 120.61 X PILE TO BE REMOVED FOR 1 1 120.92 COMPENSATORY STORAGE \ \x 120.7, x I \I A - 12a xri ,. I 12075 "T.B.M " F F.=123.07 EXISTING GRADE CONCRETE SLAB FINISH FLOOR ELEV.=120.55 12 OS A a9 iii� 1 12aR2s i� iii �i 1 1 I I 12 J8 120. s1 120.88 \ x'0"/ �i� i���2 �! I I I �� C \\ 120.9 124 I x120.4t \ 111 1 \ Concrete Jill 1� �5# 1 1 1 1 ! EXISTING GRADE 1 1\�1r I I I 1 1 1 / 93120.9 11970AW\1\,\ III 1 1 I I x 12jQ � 120.65 � \ \\ \ n\-� I ( I 1 ! 12a29 12X41 x12ax x x 1?1 11 x Light 12a.12 X12a38 I \\ X Pole 120.84 \� 121.28 1241 x 12� 1s •AL �r i iiNt�►.Ii/. ����/S/It iii �►:i.� 28.4 cu. ft. t � 99 BY OTHERS X ` - (24.5' x 60.51 Bit FINIT F�OOR=120.55y Pave I 28.4 cu. ft. x 12 Xs o 120.42 28.4 cu. ft. W/F x x f SHED I1 IN 12X28 B - 28.4 cu. ft. 1 12.8 cu. ft. I 120.88 lev.=120.55 ft. 1 ` 12a 59 TOTAL=126.4 cu. ft. �- PROPOSED GRADE 12Xs7 1 �"T.B.M." 12 X�'i? OF` _4 AA f1 At *NOTE: VOLUME BETWEEN ELEVATION 120.55 AND 121.0 BUILDING FOOT PRINT 60.50' 4.25 0.5' Outside 0.184' Equiv. Flood Thickness Storage Thickness Note: Hollow wall thickness outside to inside is 0.5'. Equivalent flood storage thickness is 0.184' derived from architectural letter dated February 9. 1998 produced by Metcalf Associates. Total area = area of building footprint plus area of stairway sunk = ((60.5' x 0.184 x (2) walls)) + ((24.5'-1.0') x 0.184' x (1) wall) +((4.25' - 0.59) x 0.184' x (2) walls) + (0.33' x 0.33' x (4) legs) = 28.4 Overhead 24.50 Doe, Area square feet. COMPENSATORY STORAGE 28.4 square feet x (el. 125.0' - el. 120.55')=28.4 square feet x 4.45 feet = 126.4 cubic feet required. 4.25, GRAPHIC SCALE w s 10 30 +o 11,1116 .,...--(4)4"x 4" Lumber For Stairs 1 I � i �----- - r I I k � I k t � 1 ' � J 10 20 30 SECTION A -A SCALE: HORIZ.: 1" = 10' VERT: 1 " = 2' 12 OS A a9 iii� 1 12aR2s i� iii �i 1 1 I I 12 J8 120. s1 120.88 \ x'0"/ �i� i���2 �! I I I �� C \\ 120.9 124 I x120.4t \ 111 1 \ Concrete Jill 1� �5# 1 1 1 1 ! EXISTING GRADE 1 1\�1r I I I 1 1 1 / 93120.9 11970AW\1\,\ III 1 1 I I x 12jQ � 120.65 � \ \\ \ n\-� I ( I 1 ! 12a29 12X41 x12ax x x 1?1 11 x Light 12a.12 X12a38 I \\ X Pole 120.84 \� 121.28 1241 x 12� 1s •AL �r i iiNt�►.Ii/. ����/S/It iii �►:i.� 28.4 cu. ft. t � 99 BY OTHERS X ` - (24.5' x 60.51 Bit FINIT F�OOR=120.55y Pave I 28.4 cu. ft. x 12 Xs o 120.42 28.4 cu. ft. W/F x x f SHED I1 IN 12X28 B - 28.4 cu. ft. 1 12.8 cu. ft. I 120.88 lev.=120.55 ft. 1 ` 12a 59 TOTAL=126.4 cu. ft. �- PROPOSED GRADE 12Xs7 1 �"T.B.M." 12 X�'i? OF` _4 AA f1 At *NOTE: VOLUME BETWEEN ELEVATION 120.55 AND 121.0 BUILDING FOOT PRINT 60.50' 4.25 0.5' Outside 0.184' Equiv. Flood Thickness Storage Thickness Note: Hollow wall thickness outside to inside is 0.5'. Equivalent flood storage thickness is 0.184' derived from architectural letter dated February 9. 1998 produced by Metcalf Associates. Total area = area of building footprint plus area of stairway sunk = ((60.5' x 0.184 x (2) walls)) + ((24.5'-1.0') x 0.184' x (1) wall) +((4.25' - 0.59) x 0.184' x (2) walls) + (0.33' x 0.33' x (4) legs) = 28.4 Overhead 24.50 Doe, Area square feet. COMPENSATORY STORAGE 28.4 square feet x (el. 125.0' - el. 120.55')=28.4 square feet x 4.45 feet = 126.4 cubic feet required. 4.25, GRAPHIC SCALE w s 10 30 +o 11,1116 .,...--(4)4"x 4" Lumber For Stairs 1 6-22-98 AJK CALCULATIONS FOR COMPENSATORY STORAGE r 15.5 VERT SCALE: N/A FIELD WORK: P.C. FINAL DATE: -15.55 COMPS: M.S.D. CHECKED: -7.75 SURVEYOR: P.R.L. DESIGN: A.J.K. ENGINEER: D.L.L. DRAFTING: M.S.D. BUFFER ZONE 0 SF 0 N0. I DATE BY REVISIONS (INP) I inch = 10 & CURRENT DATE: 6/22/97 HORIZ SCALE: 1 "=10' r 15.5 VERT SCALE: N/A FIELD WORK: P.C. FINAL DATE: -15.55 COMPS: M.S.D. CHECKED: -7.75 SURVEYOR: P.R.L. DESIGN: A.J.K. ENGINEER: D.L.L. DRAFTING: M.S.D. 120 118 DATUM ELEV 116.00 CONCRETE SLAB FINISH FLOOR ELEV.=120.55 100 YEAR COMPENSATORY STORAGE Elevation Range Cut (CY) Fill (CY) Net Volume Change (CY) r 15.5 10 20 SECTION B -B SCALE: HORIZ.: 1' = 10' VERT: 1 = 29 100 YEAR COMPENSATORY STORAGE Elevation Range Cut (CY) Fill (CY) Net Volume Change (CY) 120-121 15.5 4.48 -11.02 121-122 16.6 1.05 -15.55 122-123 8.8 1.05 -7.75 123-124 4.3 1.05 -3.25 124-125 0.76 1.05 +0.29 Resource Arec /moods BORDERING VEGETATED WETLANDS 0 SF 0 SF ISOLATED VEGETATED WETLANDS 0 SF 0 SF BANK 0 L 0 L LAND UNDER WATER 0 SF 0 SF 100 YR. FLOODPLAIN 8.68 CY ± 45.96 CY ± BUFFER ZONE 0 SF 0 SF NOTES: 1. REFERENCE IS MADE TO A PLAN ENTITLED "PLAN OF LAND IN NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS SURVEYED FOR NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC.," DATED MARCH 25, 1986 PREPARED BY THIS OFFICE. 2. 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN OBTAINED FROM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP, APRIL 3, 1978. MAP NUMBER 250167 0002 A. 100 YEAR FLOOD ELEVATION = 125'. 3. TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY ALMER HUNTLEY, JR. do ASSOCIATES ON SEPTEMBER 21, 1997. 4. HORIZONTAL DATUM IS NAD 1983, SPECIFICALLY MASSACHUSETTS MAINLAND, DESIGNATION: LAFLEUR. VERTICAL DATUM IS NGVD 29. 120 EEIev M. Found oad Spike .P. #25 6`x 9' =123.2d' G.S.B. 118 Up 11\ Lf DATUM ELEV 116.00 Oxl� I.G. SOIL PILE USED FOR .� COMPENSATORY STORAGE MADPW Disc ---I LAFLEUR AZ Found In Conc. Banister On 1-91 North Bound Lanes Bridge. 6'x 6, G.S.B. Flush IV wu: ;A t T.B.M. Hydrant Top Spindle Elev.=122.39' LOCUS C lror °ft �dO�riln,'angor 4n�s AIroro� y'angor C Ondorn/nf1j nes To Rom 9 T&'Er GRAPHIC SCALE ISO o W 100 No HANGAR IN na 1 lrah 100 fit. PROPOSED BUILDING SITE NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS PREPARED FOR NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC. OHangar/ ice Hangor PROPOSED BUILDING AND CONCRETE SLAB LOCATION OLD FERR D a 33 WqF C1ry W,• r HUNTLEY ALMER HUNTLEY, JR. & ASSOCIATES, INC SURVEYORS ENGINEERS LANDSCAPE ARdUTECTS 30 INDUSTRIAL DRIVE EAST NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS PROJECT N0: 97-250 DRAWING NO: 97250 FILE NO: 97-250 SHEET NO. Sc ned OFO Ch�c�;ed M AutoCAD File: S:\Projects\04 Projs\04-0418 Northampton Airport\14autcad\14acadwn\04-0418 NOW Airport\PLANNING BOARD DWGS\PROPOSEDi-REV4.dwg Plotted at: Tue Jun 13 13:23:28 2006 BEC, Inc. M44 0 L�l 0 0 0 DZ -0;U viDrri � D��m D2oD MD0� ZDm m0Z:Nt� G7 0 s z0" M -� m n O rnO- K m Z r, 0 x >0� O D ;az G7 Z O c." O w CD �U C) 0 • � D v I � x D �? r - O M �o> '000A -0l 0 000"--*" D X Z � CRSS PATH ROgD >;UO 1 �z I � D �s z C) 1 %i ? i `� P KIND i r i z> X_ acs mac, z n C . . . . . . . . . . . . M O mZ 57j_ (n 0 0 --� j r t1� O) O r- --i G7 D z o o z " D Z z rn rn °� ! ♦ / 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - / >x� �M no�� Uj C4 �3 'A C r 1 z > - >10, ' c3 � =� � O Z C);:0 D c- f, > > M;U i z Z x -n -0 / c0 0- C� > > L ZO ' rn0 / z rn Dm / z > , _0 O M 0 A 0 D r -'r7 / / s = � , � !`1" � D o Ln QD r, C _0 aD o� / AQ C7 o� / w ' C �7 r- 0 o �' > / > C) + r� o rr C O v� I wo�Co0) rr7 c� j' � 1� r l0) , U 1rri> C)/ c) Ch o) G4 �03 o i i' n NUAz / ii ,-4 00 M 0 rn 0440 10, 00, CD CD CD CD /Aio a�yOO�a "'000z .--� j (/) C 04/ Cg © 0-0� N o _ 0 • z �m �o �v rrl a o Z i= Ca Ca 0 " 1 N 0 000"--*" D X Z � CRSS PATH ROgD >;UO 1 �z I � D �s z C) 1 %i ? i `� P KIND i r i z> X_ acs mac, z n C . . . . . . . . . . . . M O mZ 57j_ (n 0 0 --� j r t1� O) O r- --i G7 D z o o z " D Z z rn rn °� ! ♦ / 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - / >x� �M no�� Uj C4 �3 'A C r 1 z > - >10, ' c3 � =� � O Z C);:0 D c- f, > > M;U i z Z x -n -0 / c0 0- C� > > L ZO ' rn0 / z rn Dm / z > , _0 O M 0 A 0 D r -'r7 / / s = � , � !`1" � D o Ln QD r, C _0 aD o� / AQ C7 o� / w ' C �7 r- 0 o �' > / > C) + r� o rr C O v� I wo�Co0) rr7 c� j' � 1� r l0) , U 1rri> C)/ c) Ch o) G4 �03 o i i' n NUAz / ii ,-4 00 M 0 rn 0440 10, 00, CD CD CD CD /Aio a�yOO�a "'000z .--� j (/) C 04/ Cg -0C>0>--I > M GAO C -=Z COZ -0 ;U(nZ::iC7= Z Z» CCO > -TIM M =�0�00 O MM �?ZM ADO -0 OOOO-or- > m >-O Nm> >Z� -4�Z�>> n O (/) r- cn-<K =0> 0>ZZZZ m =0Z � -0C—� • ZG�;�= mcg— (0�OM ZO �O=>> 0 z >� viz IoM O 0>��O � � (nom >D � o0 ��nlTt D r" K (nl � K > -� ITI r > (n C > X00 Z 3 -0 C7� 000;�-U -< m� CTtZO- > : Z D� �Z > n0 ���Zm ? 0 -�— r 0 o zoo > -0 �-0 MZ OZf*1 OMZO> >� " (7 Zr - +m rn>Z nM �S Z" 0 o �Z00 m �0 n0 r �z OrnO Z0 0 N 0 Mr- bO Mr- m� �D� Or'� > �� �rn M > r M 0 c.r 0 z z 0 -U0 C) �y� 0>K--I>0w wipl go -0 I mo>Orrmm fT1r0 O ;U I Z > >w--1rZ= > -0 <Z=w I >_� 0 r–>Mzm m I >Z0rrlO>Z M=JC7 Z7 ;:o 00M AO n cn I I I MMcM*0 (n --Io I I I r- �C_LOC) C) 0 KO 1 z �mZZfT M O�DCO �> -� rrl -� r� 1 0 0 Z M X 0 ri0 ox Ox m En -0 >�W�00 m 0 M o 0z0CK� � �Z9 M - m- O �0-nc�- m z >0 0 m > m 0� �r >-.OG) 2 Zm m Z� 'Po Co ZOM 00-00Z C oC 0m" I< r–cn z mvZ m M >0 5 Z ��z0r� G7 G7 m Z � O _ N > r- -n Z 00 Opo Z O O> M �Z ;Z � O Z0 0 0 0 -y Z M r 0 CIV 0 0 a © N s. _ 0 • z u a rrl a o Z i= Ca Ca 0 " 3• ' as M z M Q v 4 Ca D 16- NC:C =N 1 • 1-�� W > Q . J N -< n X a a 0 --i Z D vo= 111 vv o M >J94 '000 v o m m Q M 40 $ 00-� 1 Z D < z Z Q ov �� 0 _ Z� O Y' Z Za C z v p IN fn q"" y 0 Zm Q Q 07O �r o Z:3 0--j v z Aio 0v -0C>0>--I > M GAO C -=Z COZ -0 ;U(nZ::iC7= Z Z» CCO > -TIM M =�0�00 O MM �?ZM ADO -0 OOOO-or- > m >-O Nm> >Z� -4�Z�>> n O (/) r- cn-<K =0> 0>ZZZZ m =0Z � -0C—� • ZG�;�= mcg— (0�OM ZO �O=>> 0 z >� viz IoM O 0>��O � � (nom >D � o0 ��nlTt D r" K (nl � K > -� ITI r > (n C > X00 Z 3 -0 C7� 000;�-U -< m� CTtZO- > : Z D� �Z > n0 ���Zm ? 0 -�— r 0 o zoo > -0 �-0 MZ OZf*1 OMZO> >� " (7 Zr - +m rn>Z nM �S Z" 0 o �Z00 m �0 n0 r �z OrnO Z0 0 N 0 Mr- bO Mr- m� �D� Or'� > �� �rn M > r M 0 c.r 0 z z 0 -U0 C) �y� 0>K--I>0w wipl go -0 I mo>Orrmm fT1r0 O ;U I Z > >w--1rZ= > -0 <Z=w I >_� 0 r–>Mzm m I >Z0rrlO>Z M=JC7 Z7 ;:o 00M AO n cn I I I MMcM*0 (n --Io I I I r- �C_LOC) C) 0 KO 1 z �mZZfT M O�DCO �> -� rrl -� r� 1 0 0 Z M X 0 ri0 ox Ox m En -0 >�W�00 m 0 M o 0z0CK� � �Z9 M - m- O �0-nc�- m z >0 0 m > m 0� �r >-.OG) 2 Zm m Z� 'Po Co ZOM 00-00Z C oC 0m" I< r–cn z mvZ m M >0 5 Z ��z0r� G7 G7 m Z � O _ N > r- -n Z 00 Opo Z O O> M �Z ;Z � O Z0 0 0 0 -y Z M r 0 CIV 0 0 a © N _ 0 • a u a a v N > vo= o M o o '000 v o Ma p 1 W fn ov 0 M o �o� 07O v Aio 0v C i C) 0. C. C. C. C AutoCAD File: P:\14AUTCAO\14ACADWN\04-0418 NOHO Airport\PLANNING BOARD OWGS\PROPOSED!-REV2.dwg Plotted at: Tue Jun 21 19:08:28 2005 BEC, Inc. - NORTH MIPTON-A-IRPQRT 413584-5614 02/04 '10-1-1:20 NO.931 01 1/4199 Northampton Planning Board Northampton City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Dear L,auta; Please continue the 'Zoning Board of Appeals hearing set for Feb I Ph 1999 in reference to the Northampton Airports request to be grandfathered for entertainment to Feb. 25'h 1999. If there are anystions please contflat me at 584-7980 x 12. Yoyr� L__ om MEMORANDUM TO: Mark NeJame, Chair, Zoning Board of Appeals FR Samuel B. Brindis, P.E., Director, Department of Public Works A*) DA: January 11, 1999 RE: File: # - Appeal of Building Inspector's Decision – Northampton Airport CC: file The Department of public Works has reviewed the above referenced application for the following items: Traffic: Utilities: x Volume & Impact on City Street Drainage Into City Stormwater System x– Roadway Capacity — Capacity of Stormwater Line x Adequacy of City Road Construction Sanitary Sewer Site Distances Water Parking Other: Driveway Openings The Department of Public Works has the following comments: x No Concerns, project will not have an impact on any items reviewed Traffic Study is required Roadway does not have adequate capacity to handle the additional traffic Roadway is not adequately constructed to handle proposed increase in traffic Site Distances are not adequate for proposed project Parking spaces do not meet minimum requirements Parking spaces are too close to driveway opening Driveway openings are not adequate for proposed use City stormwater system is not adequate to handle increase in drainage _ Stormwater system does not meet minimum requirements for reduction of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Sanitary Sewer line is not adequately sized for proposed use Sewer line connection is not properly shown Water line is not adequately sized for proposed use Water line connection is not properly shown Other Comments: Jan 12 99 03:58p NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT Jan It I E; 48p 445614 01/11 '10 13:10.888 JAM KFniA045i 1 154 Of 'Worthanivion •lllaxriel mclis offic; at tht .31%sperfor at Istti,Dings 217 Main Straat • m.w0ci►wl ftuddeng Nartkneegi'run. Alass.01060 01 p.1 F. I C011J1R.iAS#E>YT NOw r@(:ftvr,.i1: i elet�f►nnn ( )r dCorr,plaint No- u JAN I I l.9 -- Letter ( ? DEPT OF r r. r'r�te: A. M. F.t�•.- h::; rJiGS� S=t)iD[tfttRtr;is :t's ht�str;�: 6�( U-��� V1 CA A I )ON") OF C fwww 44 Mutiny ordimiwen, City of Northtuxtpinct L Cnuptr.:r 802 As Arnmended Maxi: Stain Bustoinv, C�LCe t !f:tt:ttFtry Cod(!, Aa 2 Compla:nl repay ti)a against Nang:... r �. t.(x:.rtrnn „f ct►r:spr �rf;S 7 Mal) q `��- t.ot p Na+lur(e !�^/__� t.•S/fie::! J(jr t pf.^.. ...' -- *�jJ.�-� �• --__. f—�..q/��/j—/'�y-�.� ..._T .._.--..�. _— 3cls ��05' 7Vcvv (S-Awwk- r v'1 Aj 0 Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall * 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 * (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 • EMAIL planning®city.northampton.ma.us *Conservation Commission •Historical Commission •Planning Board • Housing Partnership *zoning Board of Appeals December 30, 1998 Northampton Airport, Inc. Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. Guisto: The Appeal Application of the decision of the Building Inspector determining that the Northampton Airport is not "grandfathered" for outdoor entertainment uses has been accepted by the Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals, and a public hearing will be conducted at the Board's meeting scheduled for January 14, 1999 at 6:00 P.M. in Hearing Room 18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton. You and/or your representative(s) are required to attend this meeting to explain the application and discuss the merits of the application. Approximately two weeks before the Public Hearing is scheduled before the Zoning Board, a legal notice announcing the meeting will be published in the Daily Hampshire Gazette (copy attached). All the abutters listed in the application will receive a copy of this Notice in the mail. If you have any questions, please contact the Office of Planning and Development, City Hall, Telephone 587-1262. Sincerely, Laura H. Krutzler Board Secretary enclosure ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 12/21/98 09:32 e9413°871264 NORTHAMPTON, MA ^ �I 01 t� DEC 2 1 1c-98 APPEAL APPLICATION CITY CLERKS OFFICE (Chapter 40A, Section 8, M.G.L.) NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 1. 4 Address: _ i eiepnone: 3. Status of Applicant: ,Owner, Abutter Other (explain: ) 4. Parcel Identification: Zoning Map Sheet # c25 Parcel Zoning Districts }(; Street Address: 5. Sections of Zoning Ordinance under which Alleged Zoning Violation is occurring and/or Appeal is being filed: Section --—, Page - 6. Narrative Description Alleged ZoQi>ag Violation and/or reason f ich Appe has been filed: ICkAktZW Date:I,--)/ I �C Applicant's - ;F�2.1 t , - OFFICE USE ONLY: Date Filed: File # E (Gtr of Wort4ampt n Jlsssachilsetts DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTIONS INSPECTOR 212 Main Street • Municipal Building December 4, 1998 Northampton, MA 01060 Leon Malinofsky Attorney at Law Northampton Airport 152 Cross Path Rd. Map 25- Parcel 105 SC Subject: Zoning Application MP 1999 0054 - Grandfathered Status for Entertainment Mr. Malinofsky, Your client Northampton Airport re -submitted a Zoning Application on November 24 requesting a determination that the Airport be "Grand -fathered " for entertainment uses based on information presented at Zoning Board hearings on May 6, 1998, May 2&, and June 17u' . I have denied that request based on the information presented. Sincerely, Anthony Patillo Building Commissioner City of Northampton 1998 CITY CLERKS OFFICE — NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 File # MP -1999-0054 APPLICANT/CONTACT PERSON NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT ADDRESS/PHONE 584-7980 PROPERTY LOCATION 152 CROSS PATH RD MAP 25 PARCEL 015 ZONE SC THIS SECTION FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY: PERMIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST Building Permit Filled out Type of Construction: New Construction Non Structural interior renovations Addition to Existing Accessory Structure Buil din Plans Included: Owner/Occupant Statement or License # 3 sets of Plans / Plot Plan THE FOLLOWING ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN ON THIS APPLICATION: Approved as presented/based on information presented. enied as presented: _Special Permit and/or Site Plan Required under: § PLANNING BOARD ZONING BOARD Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed Finding Required under: § w/ZONING BOARD OF TLDEC E1998 CITY CLERKS OFFICE NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed Variance Required under: § w/ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed Other Permits Required: Curb Cut from DPW Water Availability Sewer Availability Septic Approval Board of Health Well Water Potability Board of Health Permit from Conservation Commission 12- Signature 8 Signature of Building cial Date Note: Issuance of a Zoning permit does not relieve a applicant's burden to comply with all zoning requirements and obtain all required permits from Board of Health, Conservation Commission, Department of public works and other applicable permit granting authorities. nor ,24 98 03:27a i�t NOV 2 41996 r` � ��►�t� tom, -��-fir/+ File No. DEC 2 1 1998 CITY CLERKS OFFICE NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 PERMXT APPLICATXON (§10.2) PLEASE TYPE OR PP.TNT ALL FORMA.TSON 1. Name of Applicant: 0'x" Ips/ .1��k) rcf I' Address: �C' Teleptine.- 2. Owner of Property: Address: �2t l�A �E Telephone: Y - 2 MO 3. Status of Applicant: Owner Contract Purchaser Lessee _Other (explain):TL&�a�- 4. Job Location_ n N' )b �y Parcel Id: Zoning Map# Parcel#� District(s): S.�C= (TO BE FILLED IN BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT) 5. Existing Use of Structure/Property \", IdIJCk I R 7 Description of Proposed Use/Work/Project/Occupation: (Use additional sheets if necessary): P.1 r L&Qk,jIK;U r1a11Z1. 1-I1Ititt.+1 r -1a11 xLe rian Cngineerecliourveyea flans Answers to the following 2 questions may be obtained by Checking with the Building Dept or Planning Department Files. 8. Has a Special PermitfVariance/Finding ever been issued for/on the site? NO DON'T KNOW— YES_ IF YES, date issued: IF YES: Was the permit recorded at the ,Registry of Deeds? NO _ DON'T KNOW 7L YES IF YES: enter Book page and/or Document # 9. Does the site contain a brook, body of water or wetlands? NoJ(— DON'T KNOW YES IF YES, has a permit been or need to be obtained from the Conservation Commission? Needs to be obtained Obtained , date issued: ARAI (FORM CONTINUES ON OTHER SIDE) ryo`v.% 24 98 03:27a � V DEC 2 1 1998 10. Do any signs exist on the property? YES_-- ,k' NO and location: CITY CLERKS OFFICE IF YES, describe size, type� a NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 Are there any proposed changes to or additions of signs intended for the property? YES NU� IF YES, describe size, type and location: 1�. ALL INFORMATION MUST BE COMPLETED, or PERMIT CAN BE DENIED DUE To LACK OF INFO,RM.ATION. Thio c I -W= co ba ir121ed io by the Pu12dina rr is true and accurateeto thetbesttoftmyhkl2onfodgetio ein DATE: APPLICANT's SIGNATURE NOTE: Is an o a Xoning Permit does not retieve en a zoning uir cants 'and obtain all required PPIi cant's bur n to oo ly With -4111 Comm Rusion , DBPnrttnent of Putalto Wor Portnits from the Hoasrd of "0011th. Conservution ks and other apptioeble permit S7rontin9 Authoritio8. FTLs # Required Existing Proposed r By ,Zoning Lot size SIG �O cv*5 Frontage Setbacks - side L: R: L: R: - rear - Building height Bldg Square footage %Open Space: (Lot area minus bldg &paced parking1 -- # �f 'Parking spaces r V V 1 - .� i 'of Loading Docxs ?ill: =(vol-ume -& Zocation) �% f 3. Certification: I he rr is true and accurateeto thetbesttoftmyhkl2onfodgetio ein DATE: APPLICANT's SIGNATURE NOTE: Is an o a Xoning Permit does not retieve en a zoning uir cants 'and obtain all required PPIi cant's bur n to oo ly With -4111 Comm Rusion , DBPnrttnent of Putalto Wor Portnits from the Hoasrd of "0011th. Conservution ks and other apptioeble permit S7rontin9 Authoritio8. FTLs # LEON W. MALINOFSKY, JR. ATTORNEY AT LAW 182 MAIN STREET NORTHAMPTON, MA O 1 060 - 3 104 TELEPHONE (4 1 3) 584-7950 FAX (41 3) 582-1 855 Mr. Anthony Patillo Building Inspector City Hall Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 Fs ; EMAIL LWM @ MAP.COM 24 September, 1998 Re: Northampton Airport Grandfathered Entertainment Uses Issue Dear Tony, As you know, the Zoning Board of Appeals' decision in the matter of the Northampton Airport's request to be grandfathered for outdoor entertainment uses is now under appeal in the courts. However, we also need to appeal to the Board any adverse decision you might enter on a reapplication to your office, based upon the evidence you heard at the first hearing. Please consider this letter a reapplication for a determination the Airport is grandfathered for outdoor entertainment uses, based upon the evidence and testimony you heard before the Board. Since you have already indicated your decision would be negative even based upon that testimony, I hope you can give us a quick denial which we can also appeal to the ZBA. Then, we must file a court appeal of that decision and seek to have a consolidated with the first appeal. I regret this is so procedurally complex, but it's what we have to do to get this matter properly before the Courts. Hope it will be easy for you to simply send us a rejection or denial of our reapplication based on the testimony you heard. If there's going to be more involved or if you need a more formal application, please let my office know as soon as you conveniently can. , you sincerely, Malinofsky, Jr. ONS c to PO z a nnnnnnnn��� b G0 0 w N 70 70 O O O O O O n 0 0 0 b b b b b b a Ae• y y d tz tin y twTJ tzcntz oty�� to to C) tz 00 z o0 r 9 o g g d d t- tz z bbbr o o r o dd tz T � O A a a y 0 N N N N N N N zzz0000 b G0 0 w N 70 70 O O O O O O n 0 0 0 b b b b b b a Ae• y y d tz tin y twTJ tzcntz oty�� to to C) tz 00 z o0 r 9 o g g d d t- tz z bbbr o o r o dd tz T � O A a a y SAIM NI O O O O O C J v J J -_4 J J .- SAIM NI �1/ COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS HAMPSHIRE, SS MASSACHUSETTS TRIAL COURT SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT CIVIL ACTION NO. 98-213 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC., Plaintiff o ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF NORTHAMPTON, and its members MARK NEJAME, RICHARD GHISELIN, LARRY SNYDER; and ANTHONY PATILLO, Building Commissioner of the City of Northampton, Defendants DEFENDANT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF NORTHAMPTON ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Now comes the Defendant Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton and answers the Plaintiff's Complaint as follows: fl. The Defendant admits the averments contained in paragraph V2. The Defendant is without knowledge as to the averments contained in paragraph #2.: �. The Defendant is without knowledge as to the averments contained in paragraph #3. The Defendant admits the averments contained in paragraph #4. The Defendant admits the averments contained in paragraph #5. . Vi6. The Defendant admits the averments contained in paragraph #6. The Defendant admits the averments contained in paragraph #7. The Defendant denies the averments contained in paragraph #8. D V V 1 { 9. The Defendant admits that Plaintiff's application was denied andcalls union_ the p� air�t�_r� n_�_o_rov�e_ t,e rema� r� ng averments contained W r ,,"gx p 1 A# . Vf0. The Defendant admits the averments contained in paragraph #10. V,!(1. The Defendant denies the averments contained in paragraph #11 - zA 4 v,l-'2. The Defendant denies the averments contained in paragraph # 12 . A� ,.cVU.c� Z r X3. The Defendant denies the averments contained in paragraph #13. GQela r {-�cuY ; c r.Y taw i As to Plaintiff's Complaint the Defendant says as follows: First Defense The Plaintiff is not entitled to recover as the complaint does not set forth avclaim upon which relief can be granted. Second Defense In further answering, the Defendants say that the Plaintiff's claim is frivolous and not made in good faith, and the Defendants, therefore, demand their costs and attorneys' fees pursuant to G.L. ch. 231 §6F. Third Defense The Defendant, Building Inspector of the City of Northampton, at all times acted within the scope of his authority'in reaching his decision and issuing his finding and his actions should be upheld. Fourth Defense �J The Defendants say that the Plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed on the grounds that the service of process „againdtWthec�► was insufficient. Fifth Defense -� Plaintiff has waived or should be estopped from asserting some or all of the claims set forth in the complaint. Sixth Defense The Defendant, Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton, at all times acted within the scope of its authority in reaching its decision and issuing its findings. 2 Seventh Defense The Defendant, Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton, complied with all of the Laws of the Commonwealth and Ordinances of the City of Northampton. Eighth Defense The Plaintiff is not aggrieved by the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ninth Defense Plaintiff's cause of action is barred by the statute of limitations. Tenth Defense The statutory cause of action does not provide for a trial by jury. WHEREFORE, Defendants pray that this Court 1.Dismiss the Plaintiff's Complaint; 2. Order that the Plaintiff pay to the Defendants costs, expenses and attorneys fees pursuant to M.G.L. ch. 231 §6F; 3. Order such other further relief as this Court deems necessary. Respectfully submitted, The Defendants, ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS of the CITY OF NORTHAMPTON and its members Mark Nejame, Richard Ghiselin and Larry Snyder; and Anthony Patill Building Commi .i 1Rner of e; City_,f`Northa -t Dated August 21, 1998 1 WVv\ ` BT -Janet M. Sheppa3V,V E q. City Solicitor for the City of Northampton 76 Masonic Street Northampton, MA 01060 (413) 585-5889 BBO #: 457820 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Janet M. Sheppard, Esq., certify that on this 21st day of August, 1998, I served the foregoing by postage pre -paid o Attorney Leon W. Malinofsky, Jr., Attorney for tie Plai ff at his address 182 Main Street, Northam 0 0 c:\text\city98\airport.an9.doc i 4 M. 5hej5PAr9i, Esq. a CITY`­bF NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS OFFICE OF THE CITY SOLICITOR Sheppard, I Solicitor August 21, 1998 Harry ,kekanowski, Esq., Clerk Hampshire Superior Court 15 Gothic Street PO Box 1119 Northampton, MA 01060 RE: Northampton Airport, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals, et al Civil Action No.: 98-213 Dear Attorney Jekanowski: Enclosed for filing please find Defendant's Answer in the above captioned matter. If you have any questions please let me know. Very Janet M. Sheppard, Esq. JMS:msg Enclosure cc: Mayor Mary Ford Leon Malinofsky, Jr., Esq. 76 Masonic Street, Northampton MA 01060 (413) 585-5889 PAX: (413) 586-2937 r -71 "vt�_ ctr LLk-, - 4- LAW- -CA AW-CI r_.. CIA_ aAf �� ve-co TYPE OF ACTION AND ,TRACK DESIGNATION (See Reverse Side) COBE NO. TYPE OF ACTION (specify) TRACK IS TTArURY CASE? C'102- 7oN In1c; WSrauI"� t i. I ( H ®Yes ❑ ND 1. PLEASE GIVE A CONCISE STATEMENT OF THE FACTS: (Required in ALL Types of Actions) 10 rJ o f E-oN )IV c1 SOA R 0 or A PPzA L -S CH - 4 0 A $ (- 2. IN A CONTRACT ACTION (CODE A) OR A TORT ACTION (CODE B) STATE, WITH PARTICULFRITY, Trial Court of Massachusetts ------------------ - CIVIL ACTION COVER SHEF" SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMEF'T i Divisra, r% 'V PLAINTIFF(S) pT T'a tom► , (UDI\Tff/�1Vi IV ff1�1�;e7 /�JC� DEFENDANT(S) irv.v� N Bu c) 4 M� �F �iz FT,* G+Ti oP NeILT?rA,M/ l+aN I►ARK �.f� c ,1 i4►ttcJ,✓, caRPi s efrrvi, ja" /l.vp A'%J7W. Nr /��►'r11Lii , Q Y I� O /N S G M M I f f%v =� ATTORNEY(S) FIRM NAME, ADDRESS AND TEL M� t_c t�o FS I`7' ATTORNEY(S) (it known) 182—VN J`.iS-1-- T"Fr S14�rP/�rZD NC(-TWAMf"TO1hJr /-iA p106o O/Tl NAtt- Board of Bar Overseers # (Required) g 14;--7 yp NOATIRAAfTanj MA o�obo ORIGIN CODE AND TRACK DESIGNATION Place an ® in one box only: 1. F01 Original Complaint ❑ 4. F04 District Ct. Appeal c231, s. 97 (X) 2. F02 Removal to Sup. Ct. c231, s. 104 (F) ❑ 3. F03 Retransfer ❑ 5. F05 Reactivated after Rescript; Relief from to Sup. Ct. c 231, s. 102C (X) judgment/order (Mass: R Civ. P. 60 (X) ❑ 6. E10 Summary process appeal (X) TYPE OF ACTION AND ,TRACK DESIGNATION (See Reverse Side) COBE NO. TYPE OF ACTION (specify) TRACK IS TTArURY CASE? C'102- 7oN In1c; WSrauI"� t i. I ( H ®Yes ❑ ND 1. PLEASE GIVE A CONCISE STATEMENT OF THE FACTS: (Required in ALL Types of Actions) 10 rJ o f E-oN )IV c1 SOA R 0 or A PPzA L -S CH - 4 0 A $ (- 2. IN A CONTRACT ACTION (CODE A) OR A TORT ACTION (CODE B) STATE, WITH PARTICULFRITY, MONEY DAMAGES WHICH WOULD WARRANT A REASONABLE LIKELIHOOD THAT RECOVER t WOULD EXCEED $25,000: ; C �C.X 3. PLEASE IDENTIFY, BY CASE NUMBER, NAME AND DIVISION, ANY RELATED ACTION PENDING IN THE SUPERIORICOURT DEPARTMENT. OF ATTORNEY OF A. Judgment Entered ❑ 1. Before jury trial or non jury hearing ❑ 2. During jury trial or non jury hearing ❑ 3. After jury verdict ❑ 4. After court finding ❑ 5. After Dost trial motion B. No Judgment Entered ❑ 6. Transferred to District Court under G.L. c.231, s.102C. Disposition Date ocA.r spa 005-W 81 CLERK MAGISTRATE'S COPY /DA,TE `�/ RECEIVED BY: DATE DISPOSITION ENTERED BY: DATE: U THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT (� HAMPSHIRE, ss. Civil No. 12; -?- k3 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, Inc., Plaintiff, v. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF NORTHAMPTON, and its members MARK NEJAME, RICHARD GHISELIN, LARRY SNYDER; and ANTHONY PATILLO, Building Commissioner of the City of Northampton, Defendants NOTICE OF ACTION Pursuant to M.G.L. c. 40A, sec. 17, Plaintiff Northampton Airport, Inc. hereby provides notice that an action has been commenced appealing the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals denying Plaintiff "grandfather" or nonconforming use status of its property situs, by the attached Complaint. By: 4 August, 1998 THE PLAINTIFF Leon W. Malinofsky, Jr. Its Attorney 182 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 (413) 584-7950 BBO #315740 D 9@ 9 0 d ff AUG - 4 1998 CITY CLERKS OFFICE NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 M THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT HAMPSHIRE, ss. Civil No. is - 2%3 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, Inc., Plaintiff, v. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF NORTHAMPTON, and its members MARK NEJAME, RICHARD GHISELIN, LARRY SNYDER; and ANTHONY PATILLO, Building Commissioner of the City of Northampton, Defendants AFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND SERVICE Then personally appeared Leon W. Malinofsky, Jr. and on oath duly sworn, stated: 1. I am an attorney admitted to practice in the courts of the Commonwealth and maintain an office at 182 Main Street, Northampton, MA 01060. 2. That on Tuesday, August 4, 1998 I filed with this Court the Complaint attached hereto as "Attachment A" to this affidavit, and gave notice of this action to the City Clerk by delivering a copy of the Complaint and a copy of the Notice of Action, the original of which is attached hereto as "Attachment B" to this affidavit; and 3. That on Tuesday, August 4, 1998 I caused to be served by certified mail to each of the following named Defendants at the address here stated a copy of the Summons and Complaint with its attachments: Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton, c/o City Clerk Christine Skorupski, City Hall, Main Street Northampton, MA 01060; AUG - 4 1998 CITY CLERKS OFFICE NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 Mark Nejame 47 High Street Florence, MA 01062 Alex Ghiselin 164 Riverside Drive Northampton, MA 01062 Larry Snyder 196 Overlook Drive Florence, MA 01062 Anthony Patillo 14 Autumn Drive Northampton, MA 01060 Signed under the pains and penalties of perjury this 4`h day of August, 1998. Leon W. Malinofsky, Jr. Its Attorney 182 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 (413) 584-7950 BBO #315740 4 August, 1998 kuJ - 4 19g8 !NORCTHAMPTON,SMAFIO 060 COMMONWEALTH �.vIASSACHUSETTS HAMPSHIRE, SS. NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC., , Plaintiff (s) v. Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton; its members Mark Nejame, Alex Ghiselin, and Larry Snyder; and Anthony Patillo, Building Commissioner of the City of Northampton, , Defendant (s) Superior Court Department of the '---trial Court of the Commonwealth Civil Action No. l$ -tt3 SUMMONS Zoning Board of Appeals c/o City Clerk; Mark Nejame 47 High Street, To the above-named Defendant s . Florence; Alex Ghiselin 164 Riverside Drive, Northampton; Larry Snyder 196 Overlook Drive, Florence; Anthony Patillo 14 Autumn Drive, Northampton: You are hereby summoned and required to serve upon Leon W. Malinofsky, Jr. plaintiff 's attorney, whose address is 182 Main Street, Northampton, MA 01060 an answer to the complaint which is herewith served upon you, within 20 days after service of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You are also required to file your answer to the complaint in the office of the Clerk of this court at Northampton, either before service upon plaintiff 's attorney or within a reasonable time thereafter. Unless otherwise provided by Rule 13(a), your answer must state as a counterclaim any claim which you may have against the plaintiff 's which arises out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the plaintiff ,s claim or you will thereafter be barred from making such claim in any other action. Witness, ROBERT A. MULLIGAN, Esquire at Northampton, the FOURTH day of AUGUST in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and NINETY-EIGHT. CLERK -MAGISTRATE NOTES: I. This summons is issued pursuant to Rule 4 of the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure. 2. When more than one defendant is involved, the names of all defendants should appear in the caption. If a separate summons is used for each defendant. each should be addressed to the particular defendant. 3. Circle type of action involved. Tort —Motor Vehicle Tort — Contract — Equitable relief. U THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT HAMPSHIRE, ss. Civil No. 113-Z(3 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, Inc., Plaintiff, v. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF NORTHAMPTON, and its members MARK NEJAME, RICHARD GHISELIN, LARRY SNYDER; and COMPLAINT UNDER G.L. Ch. 40A, S 17 ANTHONY PATILLO, Building Commissioner of the City of Northampton, Defendants ✓f. This is an action pursuant to G. L. Chapter 40A Section 17 to appeal the refusal of the Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals to overrule the decision of the Building Commissioner which denied an application by Plaintiff to determine outdoor entertainment uses as valid nonconforming uses of Plaintiff's property. -'f. The plaintiff, Northampton Airport Inc., is a Massachusetts corporation with its usual place of business at Old Ferry Road, Northampton, Massachusetts. A. In connection with its business, plaintiff owns the land set forth in the official town records as comprising the airport parcel, which is the situs in question in this controversy. ✓4 The defendant, the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton, is the authority charged with reviewing any decision of the Building Commissioner determining plaintiffs entitlement to a so-called "grandfather" exemption for a nonconforming use; the individual defendants are the members of the said Board and residents of Hampshire County. The defendant, Anthony Patillo, is the Building Commissioner for the City of Northampton, charged with making an initial determination of whether a particular use is "grandfathered". . On a date prior to June 17, 1998, plaintiffs received from defendant Patillo an adverse determination of their application for "grandfather" status for outdoor entertainment uses of the Airport property. The said denial was duly appealed to the defendant, the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton. y7" On June 17, 1998, the Zoning Board of Appeals held a hearing at which it was determined to uphold the decision of the Building Commissioner, denying plaintiff "grandfather" status for outdoor entertainment uses. ve The Zoning Board of Appeals was presented with evidence justifying and requiring a finding that the plaintiffs were grandfathered for outdoor entertainment uses. Nevertheless, the Zoning Board of Appeals by its members denied plaintiffs application to overrule the Building Commissioner. ✓1'0. A decision with denial of plaintiffs application was filed with the Northampton City Clerk on July 16th, 1998 (see attached as Exhibit A a certified copy of the minutes of the relevant public hearings and the decsion as filed). L,,'f �1. The decision of the defendant, the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton, was incorrect and contrary to law and has denied plaintiff relief to which plaintiff is entitled under the laws of the Commonwealth. u -T2. For the said reason, the decision denying the plaintiff the relief sought exceeds the authority of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Further, in light of the evidence presented to the Zoning Board of Appeals, its decision is arbitrary and capricious. Wherefore, plaintiff prays this Honorable Court as follows: 1. To annul the decision of the defendant Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton. 2. To order the said defendant to grant plaintiff "grandfather" status for appropriate outdoor entertainment uses; and zm- — 3. To make such other decrees as justice and equity may require. J u by TR ►AL- R�QatST� D THE PLAINTIFF /1' By: Leon W. Malinofsky, Jr. Its Attorney 182 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 (413) 584-7950 BBO #315740 4 August, 1998 D ZUG 1998 CITY CLERKS OFFICE I NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 DECISION FOR AN APPEAL OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR'S DECISION UNDER MGL CH. 40A, SECTIONS 8 AND 15 unanimously On June 17, 1998 the Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals voted: 3:0 :0 To goaWrnpton verse the determination of the Northampton Building Commissioner that the Airport is not entitled to a so-called "grandfather" exemption from zoning regulations allegedly prohibiting outdoor entertainment uses such as band concerts, car shows, games, festivals, etc. Decision Made: June 17, 1998 Decision Filed With the City Clerk's Office on: July 16, 1998 Anyone aggrieved of the decision may file an appeal in accordance with MGL Ch 40A, Section 17, with the Hampshire County Superior Court or the Hampshire County District Court and file notice of said appeal with the City Clerk within twenty (20) days of the date that this decision was filed with the City Clerk. This decision shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that twenty days have elapsed after the decision has been filed, or if such an appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds or Land Court, as applicable, and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is noted on the owner's certificate of title. The fee for such recording or registering shall be paid by the owner or applicant. It is the owner or applicant's responsibility to pick up the certified decision from the City Clerk and record it at the Registry of Deeds. In Upholding the Decision of the Building Inspector, the Zoning Board made the following determinations: I. The first Zoning Ordinance took effect September 26, 1927. II. Under the 1927 Zoning Ordinance, the area of the airport was designated as a Residence zone. III. The airport became a commercial entity in April of 1929; therefore, the commercial airport use of the property did not predate zoning. IV. The appellant failed to show that non air -related outdoor entertainment events (i.e. - entertainment other than flying circuses, barnstorming, etc.) were taking place prior to the introduction of the first zoning ordinance and continuing to the present and, therefore, legally pre- existing nonconforming. V. From 1927 to the present, the zoning of the airport has remained residential, so any additional commercial uses introduced after 1927 (such as entertainment) would not be protected under "grandfathering" provisions. VI. Although the airport has had a history of hosting entertainment events on a continuous basis since at least the 1970's, such uses were not legally protected under zoning. This is supported by the fact that the airport began obtaining permits for entertainment uses beginning in the 1980's. VII. The applicant requested a ruling from the Building Inspector on whether all outdoor entertainment uses on the airport property were legal as pre-existing nonconforming uses. The Building Inspector acted correctly in ruling that outdoor entertainment uses at the airport are not entitled to "grandfathered" status. In order to legally hold outdoor entertainment under current zoning, the appellant must apply for a Special Permit to allow an Outdoor Commercial Recreation Use. Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall - 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 - (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 - EMAIL planning@city.northampton.ma.us -Conservation Commission -Historical Commission -Planning Board - Housing Partnership -Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of Meeting June 17, 1998 The Zoning Board of Appeals held a meeting on Wednesday, June 17, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, MA. Present were Members: Chair Mark NeJame, Alex Ghiselin and Larry Snyder. Staff Senior Planner John Bennett and Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. At 7:03 p.m., NeJame opened the meeting and introduced fellow Board members. NeJame read the legal notices advertising the Public Hearings. At 7:59 p.m., NeJame opened the Continuation of the Public Hearing on an Appeal of the Building Inspector's decision determining that the Northampton Airport is not "grandfathered" for outdoor entertainment uses filed by Northampton Airport, Inc. for property located at Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Northampton Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1,15 -19, 53 & 71. Leon Malinofsky began by raising a procedural point, saying that he had been under the impression that, since he was told last time that he need not return with witnesses, the Public Hearing was closed. He said that if that were not the case and if the Board was going to take additional public testimony, he may want the opportunity to rebut. He pointed out that there were people present [in the audience] in opposition. NeJame clarified that the hearing had been continued and said that members would have to decide whether bringing witnesses back was appropriate. Malinofsky confirmed that members had received a copy of his brief. He then stated that all the Northampton Airport is seeking is to continue to operate the same sort of outdoor events as have been going on there since the late 1800's, certainly before the time of the first Zoning Ordinance. He said he understood that people who lived in the immediate vicinity of the airport may wish to speak in opposition, but he said he hoped the Zoning Board would ultimately decide [the appeal] based on chronology. 1 ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER NeJame briefly summarized Malinofsky's position as set forth in his letter and asked if Malinofsky had had the opportunity to see the City's letter? Malinofsky said that he had not and that, for that reason, he had addressed copies of his letters in sealed envelopes to Board members. He said he felt it put him at a disadvantage that they had had the opportunity to see his brief, but he had not had the opportunity to see the City's. Bennett summarized the City's position as set forth in a memo from OPD staff dated June 10, 1998. After Bennett had summarized the information from Section H ofhis memo, Ghiselin asked whether it followed from the City's argument that the airport was now operating illegally? He said that this seemed logical from what Bennett was saying. Bennett responded that that was a question he did not explore. In the course of his comments, Bennett also presented the suggestion that, because of the potential implications of a decision in favor of the airport, the Zoning Board should require "hard" evidence such as ticket stubs or something in writing to document the entertainment events. However, NeJame pointed out that a problem with this was that the City Solicitor had previously stated that the Zoning Board could take verbal testimony or written statements [as evidence]. He said he did not think members could now question the sufficiency of the evidence when they previously had said [the evidence] was sufficient. Bennett continued with his presentation, concluding that if the Board were to overturn the Building Inspector's determination, the applicant would still need to submit a Finding application to determine exactly what specific [entertainment] uses have pre-existing nonconforming status. He suggested that it would be incumbent upon the Board to define specifically which uses are grandfathered to avoid an "unfettered free-for-all" of entertainment. At the very minimum, the Board would be well - served to proscribe the grandfathered uses to those that appeared on the list submitted by Guisto, he advised. A decision on what is a grandfathered use should be based on the Board's consideration of credible evidence of what had been carried at the airport prior to 1927 without interruption, he continued. In response to a question from Snyder, Bennett clarified that he was not suggesting that Guisto file a Finding application for every individual entertainment event, but that he file one application defining proposed uses. Bennett commented that he did not recall seeing demolition derbies or motocross events on the list [of events held in the past], and Ghiselin facetiously added that he had not seen "Lions and Christians." Bennett said he thought it would be in the City's interest to have a list of [specific] activities considered to be grandfathered. NeJame said he did not understand how the airport could be asked to submit an application for a Finding for a change, extension or alteration of a pre-existing nonconforming use, since he did not think the owners were changing or altering the use? If the owners were going to have a circus, according to the testimony, this was something which has been going on at least since 1925, he 2 u elaborated. Bennett responded that it seemed unlikely that what would be proposed as a modern-day event would be a Wave dance or barnstorming, commenting that it would much more likely be a rock concert. He continued that, if the owners were going to do something which was not demonstrated to be identical to something which went on in the past, then it seemed that a Finding at the minimum would be necessary in order to go forward as a nonconforming use. NeJame clarified that if Guisto were proposing to do something which was not equivalent to what was outlined - i.e., if he were going to expand, extend or alter [previously held events], he would have to come in for a Finding. Referring to the "long history of hostile relationship between the City and the Northampton Airport," Malinofsky expressed relief to have an impartial body to consider the appeal. However, he pointed out that it was obvious from Page 2 of the City's brief that the City had taken much trouble to read his brief before the meeting tonight. He noted that, despite the fact that he asked for [the City's] brief, he was not given it. Also, saying he wanted to assuage some of the concerns, Malinofsky stated that the Northampton Airport was not looking to bring in "Lollapalooza" under the aegis of any grandfathering which would be extended to them. That was a major event of a character unlike anything which had gone on at the airport before, he acknowledged. He suggested a way of "compartmentalizing" events as defining entertainment as anything which invites spectators or participants and then putting a limit on attendance consonant with what had taken place in the past. He maintained that this would not be "anything qualitatively different" from what had gone on in the past under Guisto's stewardship. He cited the enmity between the City and the airport as a reason for this suggested approach, pointing out that the permit process for holding an event at the airport today has become such that some of the airport's former participants are no longer interested in holding their events at the airport. Response to City Position. Responding to points in the City's memo, Malinofsky said he did not think it was necessary for [the outdoor entertainment uses] to be appurtenant to an existing airport. He said the question was not what the airport had done, but what had been done on the situs. With regard to concerns that [grandfathering outdoor entertainment] would allow a "free -for all," Mahnofsky pointed out that only the owner of the situs could permit that, so this action would not allow "anyone in Christendom" to set up a Lion and Christian show somewhere on the airport. And, the fact that the property has changed hands and has not been a commercial airport since 1925 is of no moment, Malinofsky maintained. "We are talking about the use of the situs," he emphasized, saying that, even if there were a different building and if the situs had a different owner, this wouldn't matter under their analysis because the use pre-existed. Malinofsky also pointed out that the fairgrounds in the area has been carrying on this use for an 3 extended period and that [entertainment] uses are still going on at the fairgrounds, which literally abuts the airport. The fairgrounds received a similar grandfathering exemption two years ago, and [the airport] is simply looking for the same treatment, he said. The fairgrounds has no restrictions, he commented, saying the airport would be happy to accept restrictions if all their clients weren't being driven away by the one-week application procedure. Addressing himself to the argument that entertainment events couldn't revert to nonconforming status, Malinofsky asserted that this was a disingenuous argument, assuming that in order to keep grandfathering status, you have to break the law. He commented that this was an extraordinary construction which he didn't think should be allowed to stand. Regarding the last paragraph of the City's brief, Malinofsky agreed on the need "to find some commonality between events." He suggested again putting a size limit on the events to accomplish this. He also respectfully suggested that what the City is asking them to do in V "is exactly what we have done." "We have tried to show commonality in these events which could be grasped and acted upon," he commented. He also remarked that he had known Guisto and Benjamin for sixteen years and seen the types of events they had put on and enjoyed them with his family. He respectfully submitted that the airport was interested in being a good neighbor and would be a good neighbor and that the City would not have to fear that "Lollapolooza" would take place. He observed that the airport had practically been driven out of business specifically because there is animosity between a City Councilor and Guisto, and they would respectfully request some sort of relief, even if it contains restrictions. Discussion. Referring to Malinofsky's letter, NeJame commented that the appellant initially began talking about uses appurtenant to the airport, then switched his argument. By talking about use and not talking about the airport, the appellant sidestepped the City's arguments 1 and 2, he noted. - Regarding Section IV in the City's brief, NeJame clarified that this simply indicated [staff] thought that, by securing permits for outdoor entertainment in the past, the airport was not acting consistently with its argument that such activities were protected under grandfathering provisions. However, Malinofsky contended that the airport started asking permission because, when they didn't, they were getting City Councillors calling customers and telling them the airport was breaking the law and not to deal with them. That is why the airport started asking for permits, he said. He indicated that there was litigation pending regarding the City Councilor's actions. Guisto added that he was previously unaware that he could go back and claim grandfathered status and only found out two years ago when the fairgrounds received grandfathered -status. 4 u Guisto also said he would be willing to follow the conditions that there be no rock concerts, no heavy equipment, and that attendance be limited to fifteen thousand people without having to get a Special Permit. He clarified that he was talking about such functions as craft shows, Italian Fest, fairs, SpringFest, Springfield Orchestra and carnivals. He said he was not looking to change the nature of what the airport does, but the events help pay City taxes and the mortgage. forty added that he did not want to impose on the neighborhood with heavy equipment and thirty rty and people. Insp NeJame noted that he had a problem withhave heard, Pah' lloion �s decision t the Building correct becaus he did not tor's decision was incorrect because, from what members h have this information to make a decision. Guisto responded that he had provided what he was asked to provide. He said that, at one point, Patillo had said that if he had to give an answer, the answer would be no at that time, and Guisto said, "Then, don't give an answer." He said week K� ba later he received atold him �turn down t she would and he was never back he had to provide information, but asked to provide information. Public Comment. NeJame opened the floor to public comments. Patricia Stone, who identified herself as a resident of 129 Riverbank Road for most of her seventy-one years, said that the first circus she remembered was after Guisto purchased the airport. Other than that, she said she did not ever remember any activities when Mr. LaFleur owned the property. She said she had never objected to airport o see activities roof of what thwanted appellant wasto preserve our saying h�� and our neighborhood." She said she would p gone on. John Bobala of 25 Old Ferry Road, who said he had lived at that address for forty-seven years, said that when LaFleur airport was there and the LaFleur family was living on the premises, there were events held there. He said that one of LaFleur's favorites was the airshow, and there was acar show every once in a while. However, the airport never encroached on anybody's property - blocked the road or kept farmers from farming or residents from getting to their homes, he stressed. In contrast, Bobala related that the Warped Tour (a large concert held in the summer of 1996) "took over the entire neighborhood," blocking Old Ferry Road and preventing residents and farmers from reaching their homes and fields. Bobala emphasized that no one had a problemwith car shows and o bow sides o the carnivals as long as sufficient parking was provided to keep cars from parking road, blocking passage for farm equipment. He commented that having abig band like the Warped Tour blocking the road for twenty-four hours "doesn't work." In contrast, Bobala reported that when the Warped Tour was held at the fairgrounds the next year, the fairgrounds pulled everybody into their own parking and did not block the road, although there was heavy traffic for about three hours coming in and for two hours leaving. Bobala concluded that he did not think anybody had a problem with the airport having smaller events as long as the road 5 was left open, but people do not want larger events which block the road. Guisto acknowledged that there were problems with the Warped Tour the first year, assuring those present that this would not happen again. However, he said he had more parking at the airport than three fairgrounds, since the airport canhold six hundred cars. He also said he would not apply for permission for a rock concert ever again. Patillo repeated that the fairgrounds is grandfathered for entertainment, having had continuous entertainment since before the 19001s. He confirmed that they do have to contact the Department of Public Works, Police Department, Board of Health and Fire Department when they hold events, however. He also repeated that comparison of the airport to the fairgrrounds was fenced inmand s aamuch pples and oranges." The fairgrounds has sanitation facilities and parking that is more controlled situation where [owners] can control crowds and cars, he observed. Maria Tymoczko of 28 Pomeroy Terrace, notingatshe had lived in her and off the runway, said she could no was close enough to be able to see airplanes coin g o remember a continuous series of airport eventsort t 0her constituents (of the appeal] 's. She said she was here as a C Councilor because of the tremendous interest and import On June 3rd, Zoning Board members heard evidence that there have been continuous tha beforefinding events,but tonight they have heard that there have not, she pointed d out. She requested positively for the airport, the Zoning Board seek a sufficiency of evidence indicating that there has not been atwo-year abandonment of this usage. (She ted that � thought eglievidence Zoning Board members Hampshire Gazette as an example.) Tymoczko comm would do the City a disservice if they relied on the memory of men who were young boys at the time. Regarding the Special Events permit process, she defended the current application, noting that there is "lots of room for answers and not a lot of questions" and that somebody could probably fill not beth form out in two or three hours. She also remarked that the airport is really flourishing g driven out of business, with all sorts of interesting eventsgrandfather certain events se parameg and ters, they She requested that, if Zoning Board members did gran Tour, with limit attendance to something in the range of three thousand. She noted that the Warped five thousand people, created considerable congestion. The following year, when attendance was up, there were more serious problems, including n encroacluded that the size of event ent on Sheldon which had and no eld caused ers not having access to their fields, she related. She co problems was more in the range of three thousand. Tymoczko also stated that the revision of the Special Event permit application "had nothing to do with the airport." She said City Councillors realized with the r -miss fhaving ly ing lthe bridge and lapalooza. that [such a large event] could have created a dangerous situ , p leaving residents no way to the hospital. Councillors realized i�that that one reasonion thethe City Coungil questions, such as the maximum size of the event. S pointed such events have donated has historically been willing to suspend zoning for non-profitrhe questionents is t[about-distribution of the some profits to charity, and this was why Council . q eigh the amount of money going Into profits] was reasonable. The answer allows Councillors "to w 6 the common weal against the potential disruption to the neighborhood of the event," she explained. In response to a question from Snyder, Patricia Stone confirmed that the airport property had been a dairy farm with a slaughterhouse and that Mr. LaFleur started the airport in 1929. She said that there was a farm across the street [at that time]. Stone added that she didn't remember a string of circuses going back, and the first event she remembered was a heavy equipment auction W. Guisto had. She said that, if there were circuses in the 1930's or 1940's and she was living there, "I would have been at the circus." If there were circuses,remembered Stone said swas at the fairgroundswas sure they were not a series of continuous events. She said the only circus she Ann Blizniak of 139 East Street in Hadley, until this spring a resident of 122 Prospect Road, said she lived [on Prospect Road] for forty-four years and used to ride horses with Patricia Stone's daughter starting in 1956 until the 1970's. Blizniak said she enjoyed riding in the airport. She said she did not remember continuous events at the airport, but whenever events were there, she did attend them, including circuses and fireworks. Blizniak said her only concern was that she runs a lot of horse shows at the fairgrounds, and one time there were fireworks at the airport while she had horses at the fairgrounds and three horses were badly injured. She also said she had trouble with cars parking on Old Ferry Road because the tractor trailer units which haul horses can not make the swing to get out onto Old Ferry Road [when parked cars are in the way]. She said that, in the past, she had used Fair Street as an alternative exit, but Fair Street is very steep, and it is very hard for livestock to steady themselves going up a steep hill. Blizniak she had a letter on file with the Mayor's office and the Fire Department requesting to be notified if there are fireworks this year during the 4-H show, since this will be held the weekend of July e. Blizniak also commented that, if Guisto charges people for parking, she would like to see him charging people on his own land rather than stopping them in the road. She said she observed workers charging people under the highway, which is a public road, to go to one event. NeJame explained that when the appellant referred to "continuous" events, he meant at least once every two years. In response, Blizniak said she did not remember attending an event every y until the 1970's. Guisto acknowledged that he had stopped people under the bridge one but had learned ed them o his a mistake. After that, workers never stopped cars m the road aagainbut instead stopped property, he said. Ghiselin asked what sort of rules and regulations would govern events at the airport if the Board does find that entertainment is grandfathered. Patillo said that there are no [zoning] limits on attendance at the fairgrounds. Patillo referred members to the Police Department regarding their criteria for crowd control. Ghiselin pointed out that grandfathering would thus not lead to a "free-for-all,"since there are still 7 rules and regulations which govern any outdoor event. However, NeJame pointed out that while the owners would have to run plans by various authorities, there would be no limitations on the number of people or types of events. He noted that the request for grandfathering before the Board is not limited to certain events and a certain number of people. Guisto asked if he could amend [the appeal application] to request grandfathering with restrictions? NeJame articulated some of the issues he was struggling with. Particularly, he said he had a real question as to how to limit [the size and types of events protected under grandfathering provisions]. Malinofsky stressed that, even if the airport received grandfathering, owners would still be subject to the same requirements to notify the Department of Public Works (DPW), the Fire Department, the Board of Health, and the police aat se aeencie�would have thunds are eab ability toeturn down an evet that snotrne veto power would still exist, since the g Patillo reminded members that the issue was whether to uphold his decision or not. He pointed out that if the decision is upheld, there is an alternative - a Special Permit for outdoor entertainment - under which events could be spelled out so there is no question. Members continued discussion, with Ghiselin commenting that it was common sense that [airport owners] have had a long history of using the airport for events other than strictly air shows, with "pretty concrete evidence back through the 1970's." However, he commented that the further back you get, the vaguer the evidence. Ghiselin said he thought it possible to come to a reasonable compromise. In response to a question from Stone, Guisto said that he purchased the airport in1982, and the airport had been purchased in 1978 from Larry LaFleur by four other men. Discussion continued, with Malinofsky commenting that there is precedent in Massachusetts for an appellate panel reconsidering the evidence before it and not restricting itself to information which was available to the body deciding the matter under it. He said the Board would create a "procedural boondoggle" if they booted the decision back down [to the Building Inspector], and he thought the simplest thing was for the Board to make the decision that the Building Inspector's decision was incorrect not because the Building Inspector made a mistake, but because he did not have all the evidence before him. He observed that this action would not slight Anthony Patillo or imply that he dropped the ball... Patillo commented that, after sitting through three hearings and hearing all the evidence that has been presented, "My decision would still be the same, and I would deny it, and the ball would be back in your court." Regarding the opinion of the City Solicitor that verbal testimony was acceptable evidence, Bennett commented that he had not understood this to mean that evidence should be limited to that. He noted that, especially in light of Malinofsky's comments about an appellate courts having the ability to consider all the evidence, if the Board were interested in looking further into the merits of the E3 grandfathering argument, it would seem prudent for them to look for harder documentation elsewhere. NeJame said he thought that asking Guisto to provide harder evidence now would be inconsistent with what the Board told him before. He also said he thought it would involve saying that members don't believe the two gentlemen... However, Bennett pointed out that members could say they have conflicting testimony. NeJame asked Snyder and Ghiselin if they felt they had enough information to close the hearing? They said yes. NeJame suggested holding deliberations while in Public Hearing so that members could accept additional information if needed. Snyder stated that he agreed with Tony's decision, supporting his position by saying that it was his belief that, under City Ordinance Chapter 26 enacted in 1927, the airport was zoned residential, based on the definition of business from the ordinance and testimony from Atwood, Raymond and tonight that the airport was a dairy farm with a potato farm across the street. He said there was no permit for aviation use recorded, so [evidence of entertainment use] had to go back to 1927, and Guisto also had to prove that events were non -air related. Snyder noted that Guisto had said that from 1973 to present, events were all permitted, so this represented a two-year break [in the nonconforming entertainment use]. He concluded that, therefore, the airport was never zoned for business, and there was a two-year discontinuance. Snyder clarified that he saw a break [in the pre-existing nonconforming entertainment use] between 1973 and the present because events were permitted in that time period. He said his contention would be that if the events got permits, they were not grandfathered. Ghiselin expressed the opinion that, by allowing the airport to operate openly, the City had endowed the airport with some legitimacy, whether commercial or not. He said that the airport was not operating illegally in his mind, since, whether there was a record of it or not, the City had made an agreement that the airport could exist there. He said he also thought Guisto had produced evidence of other events but said that what he had a problem with was how much is grandfathered. Ghiselin continued that clearly the airport was grandfathered, and ballooning, skydiving, etc., were grandfathered, because the airport has been operating openly and without a problem. He also commented that it seemed to him that Guisto had met the criteria that Zoning Board members had set, because he had produced people willing to swear that these events had occurred and that there was a continual history of peripheral events. He said he could picture small carnivals and thought that these small events had always occurred. (He noted that there was a period of more intensive use during the war, and he thought that this was when Mr. Atwood said there was an event with up to five thousand people.) Ghiselin stated that he thought the appellants had made their case and that he would be willing to 01 overturn [the Building Inspector's decision]. He said that disagreement would be as to exactly what would be grandfathered. NeJame expressed the opinion that both the City and the airport had some merits in their arguments, and he did not see where any authority would rule one way or the other definitively. He said he kept going back to the question before the Building Inspector, which was whether the airport was grandfathered for outdoor entertainment uses. Referring to the definition of such uses given in the letter from Malinofsky dated June 5, 1998, specifically, "activities or spectacles of general interest which may be expected to draw participants or spectators" NeJame commented that he was interested in seeing how procedurally members could modify that [definition]. He said that if that were the question the Board had to rule on, he did not think that general definition was something that had been grandfathered. He said he thought this was way too broad, asserting that what might have been grandfathered was "something much more specific than outdoor entertainment uses." Malinofsky expressed a willingness to modify the definition now. However, NeJame said he did not know how to do that, asking rhetorically, "How do you conditionally determine to uphold or deny the Building Inspector's decision?" Malinofsky said he thought NeJame's view of how to proceed was "overly legalistic for this type of proceeding," commenting that he thought the Board could think of itself as a body here to do equity, not as a Court. However, NeJame countered that Malinofsky was essentially asking members to set up a Special Permit of some sort in the guise of grandfathering. He said he thought Zoning Board members were being asked to figure out limits on what the airport can and can not do, and he did not think they were the appropriate Board [for this decision]. Dialogue continued between the appellant and the Board, with NeJame maintaining that he would have to vote against a general grandfathering of outdoor activities, and Malinofsky offering more than once to define more specifically the types of events to be grandfathered. NeJame commented that, other than airport -related uses, the only entertainment events which extended back to 1927 were circuses and dances, so that, if a narrow definition were created, it would have to be really narrow. Patillo reminded members that the issue before them was still whether or not to overrule his decision. He observed that Guisto had stated that he was looking for stipulations and said he thought [including stipulations] was beyond the Board's authority. He expressed the opinion that the appropriate procedure [for allowing outdoor entertainment] would be a Special Permit listing the exact things Guisto is proposing. At that point, the Police and Fire Departments could be brought in to try to determine the size of events, he said. Bennett confirmed that there was a provision under zoning for a Planning Board Special Permit for outdoor entertainment use. He also commented that it was clear to him that discussion was no longer about an accessory use but about a principal use, and the venue for [allowing] that would be Out OR the Planning Board. Maria Tymoczko commented that she thought that abutters were entitled to have input if the Board would be talking about restrictions. She pointed out that the hearing was not advertised as a forum for discussing what sort of events would be appropriate. Tymoczko said she agreed with NeJame that it was an "all or nothing situation," not a situation for setting parameters for events. However, Malinofsky responded that, "We don't need limits, we need a definition." He again urged members to define the grandfathered use now, suggesting a maximum attendance of fifteen thousand. Ghiselin commented that he thought he was beginning to change his mind. He said he saw Patillo' point and thought [the decision] was "all or nothing." He stated that he would not be able to vote for comprehensive outdoor entertainment grandfathering, saying he did not think the evidence supported that. However, he agreed that the airport "was grandfathered for something," saying he thought Guisto had a nonconforming use which could be extended or altered. NeJame said he thought that if he were a judge he would tell the appellants to go back and settle. However, if forced to make a decision, NeJame said he would have to say that the Building Inspector made the right decision because he did not think the Zoning Board was the appropriate Board to set parameters on what type of events should be held. Guisto asked if this was even though members had been shown that there were continuous events back to the early 1920's? NeJame said he did not think circuses went back to the 1920's, and Snyder agreed the appellant did not show that. Snyder moved to close the Public Hearing. Ghiselin seconded. The motion passed unanimously 3:0. Snyder moved to uphold the [Building Inspector's] decision not to grandfather the Northampton Airport based on the evidence heard. Ghiselin seconded, commenting that he did not think the evidence supported general outdoor entertainment grandfathering. Ghiselin added that he thought the airport was entitled to have some outdoor entertainment, but he thought the Planning Board was the appropriate Board to determine that. NeJame said he agreed with the motion, although he did not agree with the reasons. He agreed he thought something was grandfathered, but he did not know what it was. He said he did not think the Zoning Board was the appropriate Board to consider what was grandfathered and that, as framed, he did not think [the Building Inspector's] decision was incorrect. The motion passed unanimously 3:0. 11 tU Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 • EMAIL planning®city.northampton.ma.us *Conservation Commission -Historical Commission *Planning Board • Housing Partnership *Zoning Board of Appeals To: ZBA From: OPD Staff Date: 6/10/98 RE: Northampton Airport, Inc. Appeal of Building inspector's determination denying the appellant's property grandfathered exemption from zoning ordinances status for outdoor entertainment uses. Old Ferry Road, Map 25, Parcelsl5-19, 53, & 71. The Board is asked to decide whether the Building inspector's determination was correct. The Board, Building inspector and OPD staff had been working to evaluate and rule upon the premise advanced by the Airport that the issue to be decided was whether commercial use of the airport and, by extension, appurtenant use for outdoor entertainment uses other than airport related activities such as flying, skydiving, and viewing old planes, was legally grandfathered (e.g. protected from the effect of City Zoning, by virtue of being legally pre-existing, nonconforming, at the time of adoption of the Ordinance). For a number of reasons, the answer to that question appears to be no. A) The area of the airport was defined by City Ordinance as a Residence district in 1927 (this is confirmed by a close reading of the 1927 adopted ordinance) and B) There has been presented unclear or conflicting testimony, but according to the applicant's own statement, the airport did not become a commercial entity until 1929. Available evidence indicates that the commercial use of the airport was NOT a legally pre- existing, nonconforming use, therefore no ancillary uses (of a commercial nature) could be considered grandfathered as appurtenant to a legal use. II The applicant had stated that he could and would provide documentation that there have been non -airport outdoor entertainment uses such as band concerts, car shows, festivals, etc. without any two year gap since 1948 in order to demonstrate continuity of such uses (proving such uses were neither discontinued nor abandoned). A) The 1948 Zoning Ordinance and Map indicate that the airport location is neither a Business nor an Industry District; ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER B) Therefore, the relevant time frame to document grandfathered status would have extended back to 1927 or earlier, not 1948 (in light of I, above, this issue is moot); and C) Even the use "aviation field" was allowed under the 1948 Ordinance "only if authorized by permit issued by the Board of Appeals after a public hearing." There is no record of such a permit. III At the last ZBA meeting (June 3, 1998) the applicant's attorney introduced testimony from two individuals who recalled numerous outdoor entertainment events extending in an allegedly uninterrupted series since an imprecise date in the late 1920's at the "situs" of what is now the Northampton Airport, Inc. That testimony and the present "brief' submitted to members of the ZBA have shifted the focus from uses accessory to the airport to entertainment events unto themselves as the basis for seeking "grandfathered' status for such activity at the "situs" of the airport. There are a number of issues regarding this testimony and potential ramifications, including the following: - Whether activities at an imprecisely defined "situs" in the vicinity of the airport would provide the grandfathered status for the entertainment activities the airport is seeking; - Whether grandfathered status for entertainment at the "situs" would apply not only to the airport but to any person or entity proposing to stage or host an entertainment event at that general location, perhaps leading to anunfettered entertainment free-for-all in the vicinity of the airport; and - Whether the recollections and other "evidence" presented to the ZBA to -date have established sufficiently definitively that there has been a continuous series of qualifying events, without any two year interruption, since before the adoption of zoning. The "documentation" to -date appears to be solely the recollections of two individuals with little, if any, substantial connection with the airport with the exception of war -related service in the mid -1940's. Conspicuously lacking is either a line of hard (printed or photographic) evidence or testimony from the former owner of the airport property, let alone both. It would seem reasonable, especially in light of the potential implications of a decision in favor of the requested grandfathered status, that both would be in order. IV For approximately the past 9 to 10 years the Airport has been securing City permits for outdoor entertainment events. Doing so has brought these previously nonconforming events into compliance; there is a strong line of legal theory/precedent that once brought into compliance, previously a "pre-existing, nonconforming" use can not legally revert to pre-existing, nonconforming status. V If, despite the above, the Board should decide to deny the Building Inspector's determination, then the applicant would have to submit an application for a finding that a proposed outdoor entertainment use is a pre-existing, nonconforming use. The Board then would need to decide exactly what specific uses have that status and could continue without need for permits. LEON W. MALINOFSKY, JR. ATTORNEY AT LAW 1 82 MAIN STREET NORTHAMPTON, MA O 1 060 - 3104 TELEPHONE (41 3) 584-7950 FAX (4 1 3) 582-1865 EMAIL LWM @ MAP.COM S June, 1998 TO: The Honorable Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals RE: Application of Northampton AirportInc for grandfather exemption Sirs: This letter summarizes Northampton Airport, Inc.'s arguments of fact and law in the matter taken up for hearing last June 3`d. No attempt is made to summarize or recreate the testimony offered in hearing. It is t e situs o the present Northampton Airport for which the applicants seek grandfathering, an not their business. The Board may find the situs has been in continuous use for entertainment activities for every year since minimally 1925. For the present purposes, entertainment activities should be considered events or spectacles of public interest which draw or may be expected to draw participants or spectators. In the following diagram, the shaded boxes track the lawful right to outdoor activities of the type and manner claimed. Year Situs Uses Situs Ownership notes 1925 Fig Circuses Barnstorming Carnivals Dances Auctions; Flea Markets PPo�Bands car shows Enter inment IF LaFleur commercial dairy and bottling facility. 1926 1927 Fast Zoning Law --Pe date. Activities are alreadv onooina on situs. 1928 1929 First Zoning Law—possible date. Activities are already onaoina on situs. 1930 1931 1932 33-`97 Northampton Airport incorporates, establishes a business at situs. Today this situs is owned by the Northampton Airport, Inc. ,N�' I—.: G.L. Ch. 40A, section 6 provides in part that "Except as hereinafter provided, a zoning ordinance or by-law shall not apply to structures or uses lawfully in existence or lawfully begun, or to a building or special permit issued before the first publication of notice of the public hearing on such ordinance or by-law required by section five..." The shaded box above shows entertainment uses ongoing at the situs since 1925, as may be found from evidence offered at hearing. The applicants observe that such activities are "uses... lawfully in existence or lawfully begun" within the said section, conferring nonconforming use status for such activities on the situs, currently owned by the Northampton Airport, Inc. The right to such uses logically, and in law, follows the shaded boxes. The current owners of the situs (applicants) seek the following determination: That the situs may be used by its owners for events of the general kind set forth in the "Events List" presented at the June 3`d hearing. Such uses are, by their nature, activities or spectacles of general interest which may be expected to draw participants or spectators. Please contact this office for any further desired information. Yours sincerely,' Leon W. Malinofsky, Jr. 3 EXHIBIT A EVENTS AT NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT 1974-1997 1989-1991 Hot Food and Hot Jazz... Northampton Center for the Arts 1994 The Northampton Lions Club Springfest 1991-1993 Itale Great gacUnited Cerebral Palsy Fest. -UNICO of Northampton 1983-1987 1995-1996 The warped Tour 1996 The Highland Games 1987-1997 Lions Club Auto Show 1983-1988 Heavy Equipment Auction, two per year 1986-1989 Circus... Habitat for Humanity 1974-1975 Heavy Equipment Auctions 1976-1978 Polka Bands and Fireworks 1986 Fireworks for the Gazettes 20e birthday celebration 1987-1989 DARE car shows 1984-1985 Fireworks for the Chamber of Commerce 1973,1975,1986,1988,1994 Air shows for = the Lions Club, Fire Dept. and Police Department 1982-1996 Kids Day and Craft fairs 1986 Drunk driving show for Cooley Dickenson Hospital The Bands that have played at the Northampton Airport over the years have been as follows. 8 times... Bear Mountain of food hot jazz) 18 different culture and jazz bands (H 1 time Springfield Symphony Orchestra 1 time A Ray Of Elvis A large Group of singers from Naples Italy 18 different rock bands 1 group from New York The Philadelphia Mummers 5 Carnival 8 fireworks shows Many local bands Other and barnstorming at t FVBM ®Eliz. hvy equip sales .. polka St. + accordian Vim■■■ ■■ ■■ Shows, Anfique Car Shows, Fundr= o =- ■i - - �.�.,rr� �� ►� �■ gym■■ �■ ■■ ■�■■� EVENT LIST 1973 = Air show, for Spfld. Police dept. / Bear Mountain Band �t 1974 = Bear mountain band / heavy equipment auctions �. 1975 = Air show for Spud. PD / Bear Mountain / heavy equipment auctions 1976 = Bear Mountain, twice. / Polka Band,/ Fireworks ' 1977 = Church group craft fair / Polka Band / fire works ;. ' ✓� 1978 = Church fund raiser with polka band 1979 = Circus / craft fair 1980 = Concert / carnival with rides / crafts 1981= Kids Day event / craft show / circus. (kids and craft till 1996) 1982 = Great Race / Bear Mountain 1983 = Great Race / Bear Mountain / chamber fireworks 1984 = Same as above 1985 = Great Race / craft fair 1986 = City Drunk Driving test with the mayor / Gazette fireworks show 1987 = Circus / DARE car show / lions car show / Mustang & Ford show 1988 = same as above 1989 = Hot food Hot Jazz / DARE car show Lions car show / Mustang & Ford show 1990 = same as above aiGO 1991= Circus / Italian Fest / Lions & Ford car shows 1992 = same as above 1993 = lions & Ford car shows / carnival 1994 = Spring Feast / Lions & Ford Car Show 1995 = Warped Tour / Lions & Ford Car Show 1996 = Warped Tour / Lions & Ford Car Shows / Scottish Games 1997 = Scottish Games / Lions and Ford car Shows * Air shows in 1973, 75, 86,94 / Heavy Equipment Auctions in 1936,1955,1957, 1974,1975,1983,84,85,86,87,88. PETER A. PAYNE COMPANY 8 EASTHAMPTON ROAD, NORTHAMTON, lei 01060 PHONE: (413) 584-5084 June 3, 1998 Mr. Richard Giusto Northampton Airport Northampton, MA 01060 Re: Mustang Car Club of New England One -day Event —August 11, 1998 After completing the requisite eight -page Application for a One -day Temporary Event Permit for the above -referenced non-profit club, I felt compelled to notify you that, because of the many time constraints involved in the collection, compilation, completion and submission of this application, it may be that too many man hours are now being expended in the preparation of this package. With all the time involved for approval of the various committees, it may not be feasible for our club to continue with your venue as a site for our yearly event. It is estimated that a total of approximately one-week is required to assemble this package. This amount of time takes away from my work schedule and it is creating a hardship for me. Therefore, unless this situation changes in the future, we will have no recourse but to look elsewhere to stage this event. This is regrettable as we have enjoyed our relationship with you and your generosity in allowing our club to hold this event at the Northampton Airport. Very trul y. s, Peter A. Payne State Director Mustang Car Club of England Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall - 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 - (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 -EMAIL planning®city.northampton.ma.us *Conservation Commission •Historical Commission *Planning Board - Housing Partnership *Zoning Board of Appeals MEMO To: ZBA From: Staff Date: 6/3/98 RE: Agenda Items Walter Bak, Finding for change in conforming use on a nonconforming lot (9.3.2); 7-9 Conz St., 31D, 236. - proposed use is acceptable; in fact it is encouraged in the Downtown Plan; - the Planning Board has issued a Special Permit and Site Plan Approval is in process. 2. Jason Mark, Finding for a change in use of a nonconforming use (9.3.1); 89 Market St., 32A, 20. - proposed use is acceptable; in fact, it is encouraged in Downtown Plan; - the Planning Board has issued a Special Permit and Site Plan Approval. 3. Wright Builders, Finding to extend a pre-existing nonconforming structure (9.3.1); 57 Prospect St., 31B, 129. - proposed extension is permissible, it creates no new violations. 4. Northampton Airport, Appeal of Building Inspector's determination denying grandfathered status for outdoor entertainment uses. Old Ferry Road, 25,15-19,53, & 71. The board is asked to adjudicate only upon whether the Building Inspector's determination was correct. Issues for consideration include: - Is commercial use of the airport and, by extension, appurtenant use for outdoor entertainment uses other than airport related activities such as flying, jumping out of planes, viewing old planes, etc., grandfathered? For a number of reasons the answer is no; A) The area of the airport was defined by City Ordinance as a Residence district in 1927 (this can be confirmed by a close reading of the 1927 adopted ordinance) and B) According to the applicant's statement, the airport did not become a commercial entity ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER until 1929. At this point, available evidence indicates that the commercial use of the airport was NOT a legally pre-existing, nonconforming use, therefore no non -airport ancillary uses (of a commercial nature) could be considered grandfathered as appurtenant to a legal use. II The applicant stated that he could and would provide documentation that there have been non -airport outdoor entertainment uses such as band concerts, car shows, festivals, etc. without any two year gap since 1948 in order to demonstrate continuity of such uses (proving such uses were neither discontinued nor abandoned). A) The 1948 zoning Ordinance and map indicate that the airport location is neither a Business nor an Industry District; B) Therefore the relevant time frame to document grandfathered status would have extended back to 1927 or earlier, not 1948 (in light of I, above, this issue is moot); C) In information filed with this office to date, the applicant has not met this burden, not even to 1948, let alone back to 1927; D) Even the use "aviation field" was allowed under the 1948 Ordinance "only if authorized by permit issued by the Board of Appeals after a public hearing." There is no record of such a permit. III For the past 9.5+ years the Airport has been securing City permits for outdoor entertainment events. Doing so has brought these events into compliance; once in compliance, previously "pre-existing, nonconforming" uses can not legally revert to pre- existing, nonconforming status. IV If, despite the above, the Board should decide to deny the Building Inspector's determination, then the applicant would have to submit an application for a finding that outdoor entertainment uses are grandfathered. The Board then would need to decide exactly what specific uses have that status and could continue without need for permits. Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 • EMAIL planningocity.northampton.ma.us •Conservation Commission •Historical Commission •Planning Board • Housing Partnership *Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals Appeal of Building Inspector's Decision Minutes of Meeting June 3, 1998 The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals held a meeting on Wednesday, June 3,1998 at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Mark NeJame, Alex Ghiselin and Larry Snyder. Staff Senior Planner John Bennett and Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. At 7:13 p.m., NeJame opened the meeting and introduced fellow board members. He read the legal notices and explained the procedure he would use in conducting the hearing. and the Board's procedure in reaching a decision. At 8:00 p.m., NeJame opened the Continuation of the Public Hearing on an Appeal of the Building Inspector's decision determining that the Northampton Airport is not "grandfathered" for outdoor entertainment uses filed by Northampton Airport, Inc. for property located at Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also Mown as Northampton Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1,15 -19, 53 & 71. Richard Guisto was present, accompaiued by Leon Malinofsky, an attorney with offices at 182 Main Street, Northampton. NeJame disclosed for the record that, in the past, unbeknownst to him, his firm had represented the Northampton Airport. He said they do not currently represent the airport in anything, but, within the past week, the possibility has arisen that the airport may retain his firm in the future. NeJame said that ordinarily he would not sit [under such circumstances], but since everybody was present and the Board did not have an alternate, he thought the hearing should go forward. A man in the audience who did not identify himself for the record interjected that the State Ethics Commission has consistently ruled that, at the stake of a quorum, they would allow someone with ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER a potential conflict of interest to sit on a hearing. NeJame commented that the Zoning Board had received some documents tonight and asked Bennett to review them. Bennett referred to a copy of the 1948 zoning map, saying that this showed the area of the airport and indicated that the airport is in neither a business or an industrial district, leaving it as either residential A, B or C. He said he also had a copy of the 1948 ordinance. Bennett reviewed his memo to the Board dated June 3, 1998. Regarding the zoning of the airport in 1927, he said that a close reading of the 1927 ordinance indicated that the area where the airport is located was a Residence district [at that time]. Bennett read the following definition of Non - Residence Districts from the 1927 Zoning Ordinance: "Non -Residence Districts shall comprise (1) all lands which at the time this ordinance becomes effective are used for any business or industry other than farming, truck gardening, the growing of trees, shrubs, vines or plants, the raising of animals or the conduct of a boarding or lodging house; and 2) all lands located and fronting upon any section of any street or way which lies between two successive intersecting streets and in which section not less than one-half of the lot frontage on the same side of the street as the said intersecting streets, and also not less than one-half of the lot frontage on the other side of said street directly opposite said lot frontage is at said time devoted to business or industry or is manifestly intended to be so used. Bennett noted that the airport's frontage is listed as Old Ferry Road, and the two intersecting streets are Cross Path Road and Strongs Road. Guisto pointed out that the streets have all changed and that Strongs Road has been moved so that it is not even in the same place anymore. He said he thought members should be looking at a map from the same time as the ordinance. Continuing with his presentation, Bennett explained that the airport did not meet the second part of the Non -Residence definition, because he had not seen any evidence that there was a business [across the street] or that the property [opposite the airport] was intended to be so used. He explained that, in order to qualify as a Non -Residence District, not only did the subject property have to be used for business, but the lot across the street as well. He acknowledged that it had taken him quite a while to understand the wording of the ordinance. Guisto said his understanding was that in 1927, there were only three possible districts, and one was business. He said that, according to the map he had, it appeared that what is now the airport was business at the time. He also said he had testimony tonight that the LaFleur property back to 1926 was a dairy firm, selling bottled milk. Malinofsky said that he had never had a complete copy of the 1927 ordinance and had not analyzed it from that standpoint. 2 Discussion continued as to whether the airport's location met the definition of a Non -Residence District as set forth in the 1927 ordinance. Ghiselin expressed the opinion that the property seemed to be specifically exempted by the first part of the definition, because this specifies that [in order to be considered a Non -Residence District] the land must be used for a business other than farming. Malinofsky said he was not sure the property had to meet all three (sic) criteria to qualify as a Non - Residence District. He said it looked as if the ordinance was saying that if any of [the criteria] are met, [the property] is a Non -Residence District. Malinofsky maintained that the property met the first part of the definition, since there was testimony that the use was a commercial milk operation which sold bottled milk off the premises. He said there was a question in his mind as to whether they met the second part of the definition, but he could not say without further analysis that they definitely did not. He read the second part of the definition aloud, commenting afterward that he had not gone over this specific point with witnesses, so he did not know if he could develop and demonstrate that. However, he said he thought he could demonstrate [the first criteria], and he also could provide the Board with sufficient information to conclude that there was outdoor entertainment use at the parcel now known as the Northampton Airport prior to the enactment of the earlier zoning ordinance. Malinofsky submitted a document to the Board setting forth in table form items to which various witnesses could testify. Malinofsky also said there was a question in his mind as to when the Zoning Ordinance went into effect. The Board of Alderman seal was dated November 7, 1929 but the ordinance said it was enacted September 26,1927. Malinofsky said he assumed [the zoning] was approved on September 2& and went into effect November 7, 1929. NeJame said it was apparently the 1929 ordinance [found in City records], but he noted that it contained a handwritten note saying that the ordinance was originally enacted September 26, 1927. Patillo said he understood the zoning was originally approved in 1927 but was amended in 1929. NeJame advised the appellant that the City's position is that the original ordinance was enacted September 26, 1927. Malinofsky commented that he didn't know if the City's position was adequately supported by any sort of evidence before this panel. He said he did not know what kind of weight could be given to pencilled interlineations, observing that the only thing seen in print was that the ordinance was enacted in 1929. He respectfully suggested that, to be given any weight, [the City's position] should have some sort of evidence. He commented that [the City's conclusion that the ordinance was enacted in 1927] was "nothing more than supposition put forward in an unsupported manner," so he did not think the Board could take any sort of judicial notice that [such conclusion] was true. He stated that he only saw in print that the ordinance was in effect November 7, 1929 and, absent anything showing otherwise, he did not think [members] could assume otherwise. NeJame asked if Malinofsky was saying that, because the property was a commercial dairy, this somehow made the zone commercial? A] Malinofsky responded that he was saying that, from time prior to the enactment of the zoning ordinance, there were outdoor entertainment uses at the site now known as the Northampton Airport, and, for that reason, said uses were valid nonconforming uses at the time the zoning ordinance went into effect. He clarified that, at the time the first zoning law came into effect which would have made the airport a residence area or district, there was something other than a residence area or district there, meaning [the use] was nonconforming at the time the first zoning ordinance came into existence. NeJame asked how the fact that a dairy was at the property at the time the property was rezoned residential resulted in the airport being grandfathered as a pre-existing nonconforming use when the property changed over to being an airport? Malinofsky replied that he did not think it was necessary that the airport be there, but he thought it was only necessary that some sort of [entertainment] use predate the zoning ordinance. If there were activities going on there prior to the first zoning ordinance, the fact that [the site] did not become known as the Northampton Airport until 1929 is immaterial, Malinofsky maintained. If there were flying circuses, barnstorming, etc., it does not matter if the parcel was a dairy or an airport, there was a pre-existing entertainment use going on prior to the enactment of the first zoning ordinance, he asserted. NeJame said he understood [the concept of] pre-existing nonconforming uses - that, if the use was in effect before zoning, then that use could continue as long as it wasn't abandoned for two years or more, since it was then legally nonconforming. However, he indicated that he couldn't understand the claim that the use continued to be grandfathered when it changed to a totally different use, even though still commercial. Malinofsky said he understood NeJame's point, but he countered that what goes on on a particular parcel is not always conclusively controlled by what the title of the parcel is. He said that the property may very well have been a dairy farm and may not have become an airport. Malinofsky clarified that he was not trying to show that there were not other uses before zoning, he was only seeking to show that the uses he was seeking "grandfathered" status for pre-existed zoning. He added that whether a landing strip was located on a parcel calling itself a dairy farm or on a parcel calling itself Northampton Airport seemed to be irrelevant, suggesting that if he could show outdoor entertainment uses prior to the first zoning ordinance, it did not matter. Referring to the chart he submitted, Malinofsky explained that this represented summaries of discussions he had had with Roger Atwood and James Raymond regarding the former use of the property. He began summarizing their testimony as set forth on the table, but NeJame suggested instead hearing directly from both witnesses. Witness Testimony. James D. Raymond of 71 Columbus Avenue, a resident for seventy-seven years, testified in response to the following series of questions from Malinofsky: E Malinofsky: Of your own personal observation, what was the earliest year you have recollection of outdoor activities or entertainment uses at the parcel of land now known as the Northampton Airport? Raymond responded that both he and Roger Atwood lived in the neighborhood from the time they were too young to move around, and this area was very close by - less than a mile away from home. Raymond explained that he became interested in the airport and fairground and was there quite often because he liked to see the airport. He said he recalled some of these activities, specifically, circuses - Coles Brothers and others - coming in from time to time. He said they found the airport a fascinating place to be as youngsters, and he still hangs around the airport. Malinofsky: Going back to 1927, do you have any specific memories? Raymond commented that, "one does not record these things at age seven or eight to be able to recall specifically." However, he stated that he did see these activities every year or two and did recall them, although he did not want to be crowded into saying he remembered specifically on such or such a date. Raymond said he could say unequivocally that these things did take place beginning in 1927 or 28, when he began hanging around the airport. He was born on October 19, 1920, he noted. Raymond continued that he could not nail down specifically whether [entertainment activities] began in 1927 or 1928. They began around that period when he began hanging around at the airport, he said. Malinofsky asked about the variety of events and whether there were any uses other than Coles Bros. circuses? Raymond clarified that he had no personal knowledge of events between 1941 and 1945, since he was away in the war. When asked specifically about the types and frequency of events from 1927 up through 1941, Raymond said that he recalled circuses and air circus, but he could not relate the frequency. He also said he recalled the college getting involved in events which were related to flying and that the airport had auctions from time to time. He confirmed that these activities started in the period of 1927. In response to continued questions, Raymond presented the following additional information: ---- The Coles Bros. Circus and another circus (he said he thought it was the King Bros.) came once a year. The Coles Bros. Circus would stay two or three days. He confirmed that the Coles Bros. Circus came between the years 1927 and 1941 and between the years of 1946 to 1973, saying he knew that when his children were born he would go down once a year to attend events. Raymond said he remembered auctions better from the 1950's than earlier but 5 `.1 acknowledged there probably were ones prior [to the 1950's]. ---- Raymond confirmed there were "periodically" dances held at the airport - at least once a year. Different organizations held events there for fundraising, he noted. There was more than one dance and fundraising event held each year from the early 1950's to the late 1960's and early 70's, he confirmed. Raymond also referred to flea markets and car shows. In response to a question from Malinofsky, he confirmed that, from 1946 on, there were entertainment events at least once a year through 1973. Roger Atwood of 34 Hubbard Avenue, born in 1921, commented that he was "bitten by the bug" by all the events he witnessed as a child, ending up making aviation his life's work. He related that he had run six airports and closed two airports. Atwood referred to some of the aviation feats he had witnessed locally, including an occasion when the whole U.S. Army Air Corps circled up, turned around by the Oxbow and landed at Bowls, Agawam. When asked the year of his earliest memory of entertainment activities at the airport, Atwood replied that [such activities were] from the late 1920's. He said that, in constructing the chart, he recalled flying circuses and barnstorming as early as 1928, and he confirmed that these continued at least annually through 1940. Regarding the Coles Bros. circus, Atwood said that this continued until at least 1941. A King carnival used to come too, he added, noting that he attended the Bridge Street School and used to pass out passes to the kids. In response to leading questions from Malinofsky, Atwood also confirmed the following information: ---- Atwood spent World War II at the airport training military aviators, and entertainment events such as Wave dances were held during this time. ---- Atwood said he recalled carnivals being held at least through 1949 and that there were a number of entertainment events in 1949. ---- Beginning in 1950, there were annual dances sponsored by different service clubs. ---- Beginning around 1951, there were annual carnivals at least through 1973. (Circuses would come to town for two or three days, he related.) Malinofsky asked if there were annual flea markets starting in 1955 through 1973? Atwood said that what people call flea markets today were not necessarily the same thing then, but he confirmed that people would bring parts of cars to trade. Malinofsky pointed out that, so far, he had only asked about things Atwood knew from personal observation. He asked whether he knew by repute or reputation whether any of these activities had been going on in 1926, 1927 or 1928? G7 Atwood said a commercial dairy, or milk business, which produced special milk for babies, operated prior to 1926. He said he was not positive if flying circuses and barnstorming were taking place prior to 1928, saying he recalled they occurred in the late 1920's. Upon further questioning, however, he said that it was common knowledge that these events had been going on prior to 1928, in 1926 and 1927. Raymond agreed that it was his understanding that these events took place in prior years, although he did not [personally] see it and did not remember it. It was common knowledge that [barnstorming and flying circuses] began the year before or two years before, he said. Malinofsky asked if Raymond knew that these events were there as early as 1926? Raymond said he only saw them personally in 1927 or 1928, but he knew that barnstorming and flying circuses had started earlier. He confirmed that it was common knowledge that, prior to 1927 and 1928, these activities were also taking place. Members asked questions, resulting in the following additional details: ---- The parcel in essence used to be a dairy farm which sold milk, Raymond confirmed. He said that it did not look much different, except that some of the land was filled and flattened out. The LaFleur's converted the property to the airport. He said that by the time he started hanging around there in 1928, the cows were gone, and it was an active airport. ---- A potato field was across the street from the farm, Raymond said, with Atwood adding that there were a couple of houses on Cross Path Road with little farms. Bennett asked if the area which is now the airport was the same as the area which was earlier the dairy farm? Atwood said the present airport added pieces to it. There used to be a slaughterhouse [on the property], he added. In response to a question from NeJame, Atwood said the slaughterhouse and piggery were in operation in the early 1920's, and Raymond added that it went out [of business] in the late 1950's. However, Guisto said that, according to Mrs. LaFleur, the slaughterhouse dated back to the 1800's. Guisto said the piggery was actually across Riverbank Road from the airport. Malinofsky asked Raymond, Atwood and Guisto if they were familiar with the current dimensions of the airport parcel and if they could state what parts of the parcel were not there previously? Guisto and Atwood estimated that ten or fifteen percent of the existing parcel was missing back in 1928. Guisto explained that, in its present configuration, the airport has seven parcels. He said that five pieces of land were purchased in very narrow strips in the north northwest corner of the airport, but, otherwise, the airport remained in its present configuration. 7 Guisto also attested to his personal knowledge of entertainment events at the airport. Guisto said that he had run the airport from June of 1992 but had knowledge of events on the parcel back to 1973. Guisto said he made up the list which had been passed out to members (see Exhibit A). Malinofsky asked if Guisto affirmed to the Board that the events [listed] took place in the years specified? Guisto said that he was more than affirming, since there were statements turned in from various companies to back up each of the claims. Specifically, Guisto said he had certification from RGL regarding the air show in 1973 and certification from Bear Mountain Band that they started in 1972 or 1973. He mentioned by name a number of the other events on the list, commenting that these were all certified and documented in City records and turned in to the Building Inspector. Guisto said that he began getting outdoor entertainment licenses about nine and a half or ten years ago - when the law changed, and he was told that he had to get a permit. He maintained that he had never had an event which was not held legally. Malinofsky referred to a letter from Peter Payne saying that the Lion's Club would no longer be holding car shows at the airport. Guisto added that the Warped Tour and Scottish Grounds also would no longer hold events there, noting that they had all been advised to go to the fairgrounds. Guisto asked members to forgive him if he was bitter, but he said that [City officials] had tried to attack and put him out of business in more ways than one. NeJame noted that Guisto's initial question was whether the airport was grandfathered for "outdoor entertainment uses." He asked how Guisto was defining that? Guisto responded [that he was defining outdoor entertainment as] the types of events on his list. NeJame said that auctions did not seem to be entertainment, and Guisto replied that these were not a big deal to him. He indicated that he was more concerned about being able to host air shows, bands, craft fairs and fireworks. Discussion continued, with Guisto expressing frustration with the eight -page Special Events permit application he must currently complete. He contended that this permit process is "only for the Northampton Airport. You can hold anything you want in Northampton as long as it's not at the airport." Guisto also said that City officials had never provided him with evidence that earlier zoning ordinances said a person could not hold a special event where he is. He acknowledged that zoning now does not allow this but contended that there was no law earlier saying someone couldn't do it. NeJame articulated some of the questions he was considering in reaching a decision, including when the Zoning Ordinance took effect, what the airport was zoned at that time and whether some sort of entertainment use was going on when the property was a dairy farm. E Malinofsky pointed out that members have testimony that flying circuses and barnstorming events were going on on the parcel "back to 1925 or 1926 by repute" and "back to 1927 and 1928 by personal observation. He commented that, if something qualifying as a pre-existing nonconforming use was going on on the parcel, what the property was called did not seem to matter. In the course of further discussion, Malinofsky specified that the airport started up in April of 1929. NeJame said he was trying to understand the premise under which Malinofsky was saying that entertainment uses were grandfathered? Malinofsky responded that he was claiming "grandfathered" status, "because at the physical parcel, outdoor entertainment was taking place prior to 1927 - in fact as far back as 1925." Since outdoor entertainment was going on there prior to any zoning law, it is a nonconforming use, he claimed, asserting that it made no difference if the parcel was zoned residential or business. Public Comments. NeJame opened the floor for public comments. Patillo explained the events which had led to the appeal. He said that Guisto submitted a Zoning Permit Application to be grandfathered for entertainment, and he, in turn, asked Guisto to present a chronology showing that there was uninterrupted use going back to 1929. Patillo waited, got pieces of paper which were not complete, then was accused by Guisto of holding up the procedure, he said. Patillo had a meeting with Malinofsky, Guisto and [former Senior Planner] Paulette Kuzdeba, and, at that meeting, Guisto provided the year 1929 [as the date from which the airport was pre-existing nonconforming.] After being asked by Guisto to act, Patillo said that, based on the information he had, he would act to deny the request "and let the [Zoning] Board decide." Ghiselin asked Patillo if the evidence he had now seen now would have changed his mind? Paitllo said that, if the evidence he had seen had beenpresented then, he could have made a decision. NeJame said he was trying to see if there were any mechanism for sending [the request] back to the City to look at the additional evidence which had been put in. He commented that it seemed that there was a lot more evidence now then before. He also said he would like to see when the Zoning Ordinance actually took effect, since the appellant says 1929, and the City says 1927. Also, referring to the appellant's argument that entertainment was grandfathered because it was taking place before the airport came into existence, NeJame observed that the City's position has been different because [City officials] were looking at different grounds for the appeal. He commented that, since the whole focus had changed, he would like to see the appellant's position put down in writing, including i) when the appellant claimed the ordinance came into effect, ii) precisely what he wanted grandfathered and iii) the general rationale [for claiming "grandfathered" status]. He said he thought that if he saw the City's position and the appellant's position down in writing, he could make a better decision. 0 Ghiselin endorsed NeJame's suggestion of returning the request to the Building Commissioner, pointing out that the evidence which had been presented "was totally different evidence than what [Patillo] originally ruled on." However, Malinofsky commented that "the City has been indescribably hostile toward the airport," saying that he did not see any hope for any favorable action on their part. He suggested swapping statements of position before the next hearing. Phillip Sullivan, City Councillor at Large explained his involvement - that he had been approached by Malinofsky some time ago because Malinofsky felt that the City Solicitor was not returning his calls on a timely basis. He said he brought this to Kuzdeba's attention, who agreed to set up the meeting with the City Solicitor, the Building Inspector, Malinofsky and Guisto (which Sullivan attended.) He said his involvement was to expedite the process because of"footdragging" by the legal department. He suggested that Zoning Board members put a time limit on receiving information from the City Solicitor, since he had spent a lot of time today with a person with a problem with a legal matter which has dragged on. NeJame said information should be submitted by June 10th. He asked Bennett to provide [information] to the appellant. Malinofsky requested a continuance to June 17, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. Snyder moved to accept the request for a continuance to June 17,1998 at 7:00 p.m. Ghiselin seconded. The motion passed unanimously 3:0. NeJame said he thought the Board needed two associate members who come all the time. He commented that he thought two more voices would be useful and that this would have allowed him to step down. Snyder moved to adjourn. Ghiselin seconded. The motion passed unanimously 3:0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. M] IMA Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall - 210 Main Street 587-1266 Northampton, MA 01060 (413 ) FAX (413) 587-1264 • EMAIL planning@city.northampton.ma.us -Conservation Commission -Historical Commission -Planning Board - Housing Partnership -Zoning Board of Appeals Board of Appeals Northampton Zoning pp Minutes of Meeting May 20, 1998 The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals held a meeting on Wednesday, May 20, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, MA. Present were Members: Chair Mark NeJame, Alex Ghiselin and Larry Snyder. At 7:05 p.m., NeJame called the meeting to order and introduced members of the Board. NeJame read the legal notice advertising tonight's hearings. of the Public Hearing on an Appeal of the At 7:07 p.m., Neiame open Northamptont the ort is not Building Inspector's decision determine ga uses filed by Northampton Airport, Inc. for "grandfathered" for outdoor entertamm property located at Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Northampton Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1,15 -19, 53 & 71. NeJame explained the procedure he would use in conducting the hearings. Richard Guisto presented the application, accompanied by Roger Atwood. Guisto informed witness, Jim Raymond, was in the hospital in Philadelp Board members. cataract members that his other surgery but that both he and Mr. LaFleur would be happy to speak with Zoning Guisto stated that, although he had been asked to provide proof going back to 1929 [that ort he believed that it was not necessary to provide proof entertainment events were held at the airport], ort was a commercial operation to 1929; rather, he believed he needed to prove only that the at that time. Guisto stated that there were three types of zoning districts in 1929, and the airport was commercially zoned until 1947, when its zoning was first changed to residential. He indicated that he and his attorney believed that he needed to provide proof of entertainment events prior to 1947 only, since, prior to that, such activities were legal. Guisto read a letter from Mr. LaFleur, the airport's former owner. Among other things, the letter stated that a large dairy operated at the site from the late 1800's and that the airport was zoned for ed the Continuation 1 ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER commercial use until the late 1940's. Guisto stated that Roger Atwood would be able to confirm the information in the letter and that Jim Raymond would be back on Saturday. NeJame suggested that Guisto submit the letter from Mr. LaFleur in affidavit form and do the same with [a statement from] Jim Raymond. Roger Atwood of 34 Hubbard Avenue, who identified himself as "a citizen for seventy-six years," said that he had learned to fly at the Northampton airport and run a naval training program at LaFleur Airport during the war, so he was able to see the different functions which went on there. Atwood said that the airport was home to the first inter -collegiate air meet in the country, featuring flying clubs from universities such as Harvard, Yale, Dartmouth and Williams College, in about 1940. (Guisto corrected that the air meet was held in 1937, saying that he had a ticket for the event). Atwood said he also remembered carnivals such as Cole Brothers' circuses being held at the airport in 1937 or 1938, [with organizers] leasing a place on Cross Path Road. He referred to flooding in 1936 and 1938, saying that he canoed through the area at the time. Atwood said he remembered selling tickets for rides on airplanes to earn flying time in 1935 and 1936, noting that he became the youngest commercial pilot in the country in 1940. Guisto said he had a list of other events which he [personally] had seen and would be willing to testify to. Guisto provided this list to Zoning Board members, mentioning some of the specific events on the list. In addition, he mentioned that events such as a training program, USO dances, bond fund-raising, a Wave dance, tag sales and craft fairs were held at the airport. NeJame asked if there were any other public comments? Claudia Lefko of 40 Valley Street commented that one of the issues in her neighborhood is noise. She said that, with loudspeakers, peoples' fear is that not only will those [at the airport] hear the event, "but everybody in Ward III" will. Members questioned Building Inspector Anthony Patillo to clarify the issues involved in his decision. Patillo confirmed that, under the 1927 Zoning Ordinance, the airport was in a residential zoning district. He said that anything which was not business prior to 1929 would have needed permission from the Alderman to continue operating, and he could find no permit on record. He also said that the earliest zoning map, dated 1947, showed the airport as being in a residential district. NeJame clarified for those present that the opinion of the City Solicitor was that the appellant needed to establish that there was entertainment taking place from 1929 forward with no discontinuances for more than two years. He said he understood that Guisto was maintaining that he only needed to provide evidence of entertainment from 1947 forward and acknowledged that there appeared to be disagreement on this point. 2 Guisto said he could prove that there was something every single year from 1939 on. Guisto continued to maintain that the airport had been zoned for business in 1929. He said that he, too, had researched City records. Referring to the zoning designations in 1927 - General Residence, Single Residence and Non -residence - Guisto asserted that the airport's zoning was Non -residence, since there was a business operating, a full-blown dairy [at the time of the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance]. Guisto acknowledged, however, that the property was zoned residential in 1947. NeJame noted that, since all parties agreed that the airport was zoned residential from 1947 forward, in order to obtain grandfathered status, Guisto would at the very least have to show that the entertainment uses he was talking about had existed since that date to the present. Guisto said there was still some question about that, because, in 1947, there were no laws on the books about having outdoor entertainment. Discussion continued, with members attempting to clarify the proof that Guisto would be required to furnish. In the course of discussion, NeJame commented that a lot of the events Mr. Atwood talked about and the other evidence furnished had to do with things which typically go on at an airport, such as air shows. However, Guisto remarked that he had to get permits for the air shows, so he guessed these weren't allowed [as a use accessory to an airport]. Guisto said that he was even told by [former City Solicitor] Kathy Fallon that balloons were illegal, and he had to get permits for those. He expressed frustration about the City "talking out of both sides of its mouth." He asked how people could have a bicycle race without obtaining a Special Events permit, when he can't even have a craft fair? Guisto complained that no one else had been required to furnish the type of proof he was being asked for, commenting that, "Anyone else can do whatever they want in this City except me." NeJame said he thought Guisto needed to show continuous entertainment uses since at least 1947. Guisto said he had only three people with whom to establish such uses - Mr. LaFleur, Jim Raymond and Roger Atwood. NeJame also said he thought members needed to hear about more than just air shows. Regarding the issue of what was legally pre-existing nonconforming, Patillo noted that Guisto had stated at the meeting with the City Solicitor that the airport had started commercially in 1929. Patillo said he looked at the zoning from that time, and there were three zoning districts in 1927, and the airport was listed in a residential district. He stressed that the owners have clearly established that they're an airport, so the only uses in question are the entertainment uses. If these were legally pre-existing before 1927, and if the airport was in existence then and doing these events, "We wouldn't be here," he commented. 3 After Patillo's comments, NeJame stated the conclusion that Guisto needed to show the existence of entertainment events between 1927 and 1949. However, Guisto pointed out that there was nothing in zoning [in 1927] which specifically banned outdoor activities. He said that as long as a property was zoned commercial and not residential, "You pretty much could do anything you want," since nothing stated that [businesses] were limited to certain activities. Patillo countered that the 1927 Zoning Ordinance stated that a business had to be established before 1927 as a legal commercial business [in order to be considered zoned for business]. He advised members that Guisto had stated that the airport was there before 1929, but he stated that it did not become a commercial airport until 1929, after the 1927 zoning. If there was no permit from the Alderman from 1927 stating that airport could be there, then the airport was not a legal use at that time, Patillo concluded. Guisto asked if Patillo were saying that the airport was not legal? NeJame responded that they were not talking about the airport, they were talking about entertainment uses. Guisto offered the argument that the 1927 zoning only contained two designations, commercial and not commercial, without specifying a particular use. He pointed out that what was operating before the airport was a dairy, which was commercial. NeJame advised Guisto that members needed a sworn, their next meeting. NeJame said that the Board also neednotarized affidavit from Jim Raymond for ed something to substantiate Guisto's claim that the airport was zoned commercial before 1947 and information showing that, at least from 1947 on, entertainment uses did not cease for more than two years. Ghiselin asked Guisto when he was first asked by the City to get a permit [for an entertainment event]? Guisto said that he was getting permits all the time from the Police Department and the City Clerk's office, but the first time he was asked to get another permit was when he attempted to hold an equipment auction in 1983 or 1984 but was told he had to cancel because it was illegal under zoning. Discussion continued, with members discussing the basis for a determination that a particular use is legally pre-existing nonconforming. NeJame noted that a question remained as to whether the date [which entertainment must predate] was 1929 or 1947. Once this issue is clarified, Guisto must prove that an entertainment event was held every two years, he summarized. Members agreed that "entertainment uses" must be other than air -related events in order to qualify. Guisto said he would bring an affidavit and Mr. Raymond in two weeks. Ghiselin asked Mr. Atwood what the biggest event held at the airport was, and Atwood responded \I/ that it must have been at least five thousand (5,000) people. Patillo said he hoped members would continue to stick to the issues the appeal is based on and not branch out comparing apples to oranges. NeJame repeated that Board members would like Guisto to provide i) an affidavit from Mr. LaFleur, ii) Mr. Raymond's testimony, iii) clarification as to whether the date entertainment must predate was 1929 or 1947 (from a review of the 1929 ordinance), and iv) information as to what events were held every two years. Patillo stressed that he had no problems with accessory uses related to the airport, such as ballooning, skydiving, etc., so [the evidence] should focus on entertainment uses. NeJame commented that, if members decide that entertainment uses are not grandfathered, Guisto must go through a Special Permit process to allow outdoor entertainment. Guisto made the final comment that he wondered why air shows were considered part of the airport when he needed a Special Events permit to hold them? He observed that uses were ancillary to his business when it was to the City's advantage and not ancillary to his business when it was not to the City's advantage. He asked [City officials] to speak out of the same side of their mouth. Guisto requested a continuance to June 3, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. Snyder moved to continue the Public Hearing to June 3,1998 at 7:00 p.m. Ghiselin seconded. The motion passed unanimously 3:0. Bennett offered to put together a report highlighting the salient facts of the case. 5 Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall - 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 - (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 - EMAIL planning@city.northampton.ma.us -Conservation Commission •Historical Commission -Planning Board - Housing Partnership -Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of Meeting May 6, 1998 The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals held a meeting on Wednesday, May 6,1998 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Mark NeJame, Vice Chair Alex Ghiselin and Larry Snyder. Staff Conservation and Land Use Planner Cynthia Williams, Board Secretary Laura Krutzler At 7:00 p.m., NeJame opened the meeting, introducing the members of the Board. At 7:00 p.m., NeJame opened the Continuation of the Public Hearing on an Appeal of the Building Inspector's decision determining that the Northampton Airport is not "grandfathered" for outdoor entertainment uses filed by Northampton Airport, Inc. for property located at Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Northampton Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1,15 -19, 53 & 71. NeJame read a letter from the applicant requesting a continuance to May 20, 1998. NeJame noted that, since the last hearing, there had been correspondence related to the application. He read into the record a letter from himself to Richard Guisto dated April 29, 1998. Ghiselin moved to continue the Public Hearing to May 20,1998 at 7:00 p.m. Snyder seconded. The motion passed unanimously 3:0. At 7:04 p. eJame opened the Public Hearing on a request filed by Jose moat for a Special Permit to to itar lessons as a Home Occupation under S 5.2,10.10 and 11.11 of the Zoning Ordinance for erty located at 62 Gilrain T ce, Florence, also known as Assessor's Map 29, Parcel 59. NeJame read the legal notice and expl ' the proce would use in conducting the hearing. Representttha g the a , Michael Zachary Edelstein of 25 Mai explained eph Belmon11 t is asking to teach one -on one guitar lessons t pn Nojstudemn s by 1 ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall - 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 - (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 - EMAIL planning@city.northampton.ma.us -Conservation Commission -Historical Commission -Planning Board - Housing Partnership -Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of Meeting April 15, 1998 The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals held a meeting on Wednesday, April 15, 1998 at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Mark NeJame, Vice Chair Alex Ghiselin and Larry Snyder. Staff. Conservation and Land Use Planner Cynthia Williams, Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. At 7:00 p.m., NeJame called the meeting to order. NeJame introduced the members of the Board and read the legal notice advertising tonight's hearings. At 7:42 p.m., NeJame opened the Public Hearing on an Appeal of the Building Inspector's decision determining that the Northampton Airport is not "grandfathered" for outdoor entertainment uses filed by Northampton Airport, Inc. for property located at Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Northampton Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1,15 -19, 53 & 71. NeJame read the legal notice. Richard Guisto stated that he disagreed with the Building Inspector's decision. In support of his Position, Guisto briefly outlined the history of the airport and entertainment events conducted at the site, explaining that the airport was in existence in the late teens and opened up commercially 1929. Guisto said that, in the 19201s, the ain irport had regular air stops in barnstorming events, including visits from famous pilots such as Charles Lindbergh and Amelia Earhart. In the 1930's and 40's, naval trainings were conducted at the airport, and the airport hosted USO dances and parties. There has not been a time when some kind of entertainment event has not appeared at the airport, Guisto maintained. As additional support, Guisto pointed to the fact that entertainment events at the fairgrounds, including concerts, are protected under "grandfathering" provisions. Guisto commented that the fairgrounds last concert in 1978 was a fiasco, while the airport has never had a problem. The ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER airport's ability to park vehicles is superior to anyone else's, he contended, saying the airport can handle parking for almost six thousand (6,000) cars. In contrast, the fairgrounds can not park that many cars without using somebody else's land, and the fairgrounds' practice of stopping cars to make drivers pay a parking fee backs cars up on the highway into Holyoke, Guisto said. Guisto explained the history of his appeal, informing members that he had applied for grandfathered status and been denied by Building Inspector Anthony Patillo. Guisto said he had discussed the matter with former Senior Planner Paulette Kuzdeba and Patillo, and the earliest zoning map he could find was a 1947 map showing the airport zoned business and the fairgrounds zoned residential. However, Guisto said that he was claiming grandfathered status from before that date. Guisto also took issue with the City's interpretation that the fairgrounds is grandfathered for entertainment uses because the fairgrounds is an entertainment use, while entertainment events at the airport are in conjunction with the airport's business. Entertainment is in conjunction with the fairground business, too, he maintained. "A fairground is a fairground in my opinion, it is not entertainment," Guisto commented. Following this line of reasoning, he argued that, if entertainment at the fairgrounds is protected by "grandfathering" provisions, entertainment at the airport should be, too, since balloon rides and sky diving are also entertainment. "All we're asking for is equal treatment," he commented. In the course of his comments, Guisto alleged that "basically, the City has problems with the airport and me." He said he was specifically appealing to the Zoning Board to look at the situation and tell him why the fairgrounds could have entertainment [as of right] and he couldn't. When asked specifically what he would like permission for, Guisto said basically what he has been doing - air shows, car shows, etc. He said he was looking to handle six thousand (6,000) people maximum and was not looking for "Lollapaloosa." NeJame said he assumed Guisto could do air -related events, but this was different from doing music concerts and auto shows, which is a little broader. Guisto clarified that he has obtained a permit for every event held at the airport in the past but, if grandfathered, he would not have to get permits but would be able to hold events by right. In response to a question from Ghiselin, he said he began getting permits twelve years ago, in 1985 or 1986, when [then Building Inspector] Budgar informed him that he could not hold an auction of heavy equipment at the airport because it was not allowed by zoning. Guisto jestingly referred to the regulation requiring a Special Permit for special events as the "Northampton Airport Law," saying that the application process is so difficult that the Lion's Club decided not to hold their car show at the airport this year. Ghiselin clarified that an illegal use is never grandfathered, so Guisto would have to go back to some point before zoning and prove that there was entertainment at the property at that time. Guisto said he understood this. Patillo interjected that the property was zoned residential in 1927, so entertainment events at that VA time would have been illegal Ghiselin asked if Guisto had any historical evidence that there was entertainment at the property prior to zoning? Guisto said that he had sworn affidavits from James Raymond and Mr. and Mrs. LaFleur, but not [attesting to activities] prior to 1927. All he had before then were some photos, Guisto said. He repeated that there is no zoning map before that time - the earliest map is dated 1947. Guisto also disagreed with Patillo's conclusion that entertainment events conducted in 1927 were illegal. He referred to the fact that the 1927 Zoning Ordinance said that any land used for business at the time of the adoption of the ordinance would be zoned for business. He asserted that the airport property was a business before the introduction of zoning, since the LaFleur's operated a farm at the property which bottled and sold milk, and this was the use of the property in the late 1890's. He asserted that because a person could walk in and buy a product, the operation was a business. Guisto concluded that entertainment events therefore occurred legally back then. At NeJame's invitation, Building Inspector Anthony Patillo summarized the events leading up to the appeal. Guisto filed a Zoning Permit Application in May of 1997 to establish whether the airport was grandfathered for entertainment uses, Patillo related. Patillo asked Guisto to supply him with documentation of entertainment uses prior to 1974, since he was under the impression that the airport was established in that year. The information supplied to him proved that all the uses being conducted were not legal uses, Patillo said, noting that Guisto was cited for the auction and had to obtain Special Permits for other entertainment uses. Guisto complained that City officials were dragging their feet and withholding an opinion, so Patillo called a meeting with Kuzdeba, City Solicitor Janet Sheppard and Leon Malinofsky (Guisto's attorney). At that point, Patillo said he was told that the airport was established in 1929. Therefore, in order to determine pre-existing nonconforming status, Patillo said he looked at the. zoning requirements at that time to establish whether [entertainment uses] were legal or not. The information he found stated that in 1927, there were three zones - Non -residence district, General Residence district, and Single Residence district. Patillo said that Guisto could only establish that the airport had been used as an airport, since the associated uses he talked about, barnstorming, etc., were all uses associated with an airport. Patillo also pointed out that Section 2 (E) of the 1947 Zoning Ordinance stated that any aviation use required a permit from the Board of Alderman. He said he checked with the City Clerk's office, and the airport never even received a permit for the aviation use. However, he clarified that nobody is disputing the fact that there was an airport there, the issue is entertainment and accessory uses connected to the airport. Regarding Guisto's comparison of the airport to the fairgrounds, Patillo described this as "comparing apples and oranges." He said that the uses accessory to an airport, such as ballooning, parachuting, etc., were clear and concluded that the information provided to him, in his opinion, did not justify an entertainment use. Patillo reiterated that, if the airport were established and doing entertainment after 1927, there 3 U should have been a permit on record from the alderman. Barring any information such as that, he said that he could not support having entertainment use at the airport. As discussion continued, Patillo supplied the following information: ---- The first Zoning Ordinance was enacted in 1927 and amended in 1929. ---- Zoning maps from 1947 state that the airport is zoned residential. ---- The 1927 Zoning Ordinance states that, "no parcel of land lying in any residence district and not at the time this ordinance becomes effective devoted to any business or industry, other than those specified in Section 1 shall hereafter be used for any business or industry... " Patillo said that if Guisto had evidence that entertainment uses were occurring before 1929, "we would like to see it." Patillo said that the fairgrounds was zoned business and added that, contrary to Guisto's opinion, the fairgrounds could supply documentation from local newspapers for ongoing entertainment uses dating to the 1800's, and this use was never discontinued. With regard to the milk business Guisto referred to, Patillo pointed out that once a use is discontinued for more than two years, it is no longer a legal use. The fairground has been "a continuous on-going operation" which has had bands and entertainment going back prior to any of the City's zones, Patillo commented. The fairgrounds is also not in a Special Conservancy district, he noted. Members asked questions to clarify the information which had been presented, and Ghiselin stated that, since members had just received information, they were not prepared to decide tonight. Guisto provided the additional information that the airport was licensed as a commercial airfield in 1929, but, prior to that [and before zoning], the site was an airfield where people flew in, had rides, and were fueled. He said that there was no permit from the Board of Alderman because the use was grandfathered. Regarding the fairgrounds, Guisto pointed out that they are in an Urban Residential zone where zoning does not allow outdoor commercial activities. He asked rhetorically if a fair constituted a rock concert? He questioned the fact that the fairgrounds are allowed to have a concert after not having had one since 1978, asking whether the policy wasn't "use it or lose it?" He stressed that he was not complaining, since he thought the uses should be allowed; he just wanted to be treated the same way. NeJame confirmed that all were in agreement that the property's use as an airport predated zoning and clarified that the issue in question was whether uses not accessory to an airport, i.e. - entertainment uses, should be considered grandfathered. He advised Guisto that members must see something saying that there were events going on not related to the airport before 1929. He suggested that Guisto request a continuance to allow him to submit further information. 4 Guisto asked if Zoning Board members would consider sworn documents from people alive at the time [as evidence]? NeJame said that he had not researched what type of evidence would be needed. Patillo noted that, at the meeting referred to, City Solicitor Sheppard had expressed the opinion that sworn affidavits could be accepted as evidence. NeJame asked staff to check on this question. NeJame asked if there were any public comments? Alvin Rejniak of Coles Meadow Road, Northampton, commented that, during World War H, the airport used to have big air shows and barn drives for the American Legion. He said he remembered Navy kingpins coming and cutting the grass, and "the thing backfired and set flame to the grass." He confirmed that the airport did have bands there and had entertainment in the 1940's, especially barn drives. Rejniak also said there was a slaughterhouse at the end of the airport which was shut down because it didn't pass state inspections. Snyder moved to continue the Public Hearing to May 6,1998 at 7:00 p.m. Ghiselin seconded. The motion passed unanimously 3:0. 5 C�Jjl L,),gt a Y V ao� JV �t - Y m r-- F Lkr— TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN Mr. and Mrs. Larry LaFluer of Providence RI have made the following statements pertaining to the Northampton (LaFleur) Airport in Northampton MA. From the late 1800s the property known as Northampton Airport was zoned commercial use. The property was zoned commercial until late 40s, after the second world war. The Airport would never have been started if it were not. We operated a large dairy that specialized in infant milk both retail and wholesale, and also a slaughter house. After the first world war, barnstorming and flying circus' at the site were continuous until the late 30s with many other commercial uses during that time. No lapse of 2 years ever occurred between events. In the 40s, the airport was a naval training center until after the war, with numerous events to entertain the pilots and sell US Savings Bonds at the airport. After the war we continued to have auctions of heavy equipment that were not illegal because they were grandfathered prior to the zone change. That challenge was heard in city hall and we won it some time in the 1950s Mr. LaFleur cannot understand why there are problems with events at the airport. He was told when the change in zoning came that there would be no problems with work, buildings or events at the airport and all would continue as before. Mr. and Mrs. Lafleur could not attend this hearing due to their living out of state. The LaFleur's 5-17-98 Good evening, My name is Roger Atwood, I have lived in Nothampton all my life. Since I was 14, I have been involved in aviation in the pioneer valley I even owned my own airport were the Inn at Northampton is now. Lafleur airport has been a place were all kinds of events have occurred since prior to its inception, starting with flying circus, barnstorming in the early 1920s when it was known as Lafleur diary that specialized in infant milk. This was a full time diary that sold retail and wholesale. There was also a slaughter house on the property, until the airport was started in its official capacity in April 1 s` 1929. From that time on there has been circus, bands, flying events, air shows, meets, dances, fund raisers, of all kinds. During the second world war the airport was a training facility for the US Navy pilot training program and during that time there were U.S. 0. dances, US Bond fund raising events, Tag sales, craft fairs etc., since that time there have been continuous events at the airport to the present time. R 3 3 G '� A ti G •'i•• 7 y rt .S A. `C O N n� r- 0 -°° a £ � 'y a.✓ � y n n s G � y � '_ y s cC � o � p ..r o �o ? f • ';::,,,., ax G �. — � A .__ � ^� n •-`. C 3 0 � " .•. 33 a •- j D' ' .Ci. _ Ch S cn1 p " n c1 O .. C 7 O � y cn1 ra = n ? c"1 c► cf �_ _? n np . o y= d .£ ae e O •°.. £ n o_a ° ^ o o c •< •t o 0 m d C' R a. c =° ^ n A oe ('•) a —` 7 y O ^n+ E ° d ti d A '_' O 'LJ A� A � � E w- rt „� � D..... � � O •~i A � G 6 _ n "'� r► a 'i7 y C ._ 'y ^/ C q 7 ". -- _o �. — '� ^ •� p, prb Aaq ~ O S C p, rt 6 .^-. P rt 'O w 7 A etCb d Aa—' 19 7 y D^ S r'O•. n. ~ r A C C O i n d r d G v_ — p C _ .,. _ n d C C» 04 C;- C r p h ° G' A n 7 ^ et R G C6 _ �C - O 3 '* n ePn E �► " � �_ ••' '• 7 ? " •* n S �_ rna — n c � o n p � � . � o R d ACO w O C .°....� r•' 3 S .�-. _ 7 ... '� — rA� a N a - A •°+ G `C 3 0 =• G A F P = d -� ._., m A � _ A a O A A P 3 � n. _ S.0 3 G A10 �i w a m � r� to o CL n .°y :. O n 3 n A° » ef„Ar A R n .°.. et G a p C p O 3 n A .•� _ n O .. '°* .A•. ry 3 R n .•r -�, 3 G_ to a -I' d y u= — A , n n ,:� — A d n rt n. ' ti =• h coo ,1 p co A A A A P n CO ° P O "3 :J Rrrp r' O f9 � 7 p •7 p < p� f7 -� p� p C u G p -�< v� T � 7 A O O a N n _' n _ 7 A y X rnn rnn n .r•'r n 7 R: v, >> re F. n �= •+ _ ti_ C d �. d A H= o o Z LD C p C ,°� 'p• w > > '" o: = ' C, p' n n n — y f` ; y ci A rrtn f _ ._ C A •- y y - 7 7 4G .A/ �+. 7 C W �• _ -� !n :03, - N '+ _ 7 7 rim A ^ .r•'. A y. O = y w O '},,, + .•. 'pi C' r" •+ ra n a< _ n .: ,"'., n n ,,, p _+ o •'+ ri n r -•y-'• R c =� �3 0 c y En re 7 A o- .+ 1 fD " r. 7 A n " u rt - .,, A f: _ x' - n n n _ n a r., .. ray w C n ti d �.. _ O r. G< re a 7 P 't rr. O• C d T? n m Z 'O a 0 cov d 3 l a d .... O 7 y d O G ►. O G A ° v ° A 07 -' or w Ci .�. F ryco a C 7 A -• °: .r C- O- aG.• rn rt : A A .. A Z p �t n r► -r o s n E ,. _G' a to W .a. .+. "'. - ' O C - C ..r G re ° C p a _ C rn C n = '.^ _ — -� �' O 7• P n7 • � .- C .°y "O+ C rt ~ � A rp•' n •_ -' A n """ A 6 '- � .. a 3i O A rt _. 3 y = •� Di a: G 7 w O. a _ O .°j 7c' ra•. ° ? A W pCO "` ' r. n S �• w 6 CO n C A o c rt a 7 — p "` =' ^r �.. O y r1 y y rt •ai C v m A :!-p •,_� rt O p a ^ ? •_ A ,y �'* rt y 3 6 •i n d A � 9 A 9 O' d y n - n C G o- n— t CCD ~ CD en A M 7 = ^r A 7 W y r„ •� rt y A r d R A m -� e_ p ,� �, y •< w d d a a c A A .. ° � �. °' ° .y, a A d C Op J' ///, O eA•� • A O 7 C A n C- G A CO F .^^.. (,,• C fi A 7 ^' A .•:. ~_ ?. w .<.. 0 a. a O ( .: -- A.'"' a•�i 3 �M d° A °. S P Er y d _ O d.. _ 0 P_ O G a '' °° n `:` n p p e+ m 7 `< W_ .�: _ .. J �•t G 3 . _.t 'r "� O o a ° "y n W A R Z7' o eai `<_- - �'l3 UJ •+ 7 A o A• A 'F tri 3 C A e•� _ ^:�•• '- - -• 'y '* - A G 7 cab, !n O Ca ^ .'S7 -G A • m — co r A C C Z. co n•-n-�_,� i7' ^ C - 3 .-<«- - r•'n -fioe a eG, a ci 'O* A ? _ n -n _ <> o. *• o A o o p y A 3 f° G -'a��tia.�. �-: Y'sy'2'�" ..•5... •-T.�:�.' :2:i. ��tl".;w�?ter a•�':, .-_ .. ..• � i+'�%-nti :'_r.-rifC.v`,.. �'`'K-:„•y'•'a'��>:�:+'r.•�vx:::.!:�ia.�-��.-c:F��"i`t,+�,r'„ A O O a � L�•/�• ' x a�nH n g a H, o n = n a• � T A _ a o.10, n C S a. ° •• ►? d "_" En ti p- P O m o o- rt b = n is o O m' m A a d.to fy O < G CLrx n �' m EL n om_ _'c7 H o• n � P O '3 n ''� a o � • r, c0. p L'af m "�' m.' .T.. w O "r C T p . m O O. x O S n .ar • .Qj A T r T _ ,y -' O n .y m r = n O. = A _ tw c � A � c =a m o _ f� ✓� rt o y tra = a= o0! a m O O n n n m •� o 03 p C a OZ rt@ = A �. O a r r� r b a f_m. n O P d z y 0 r9 En. S O y c s Ell EA EA 0 Ell d f° n o O C. n= W n C r _ M C � 0, 0 n y C O. o n r o, •, 0 0 oa � 7; o p 0yo-s n � 0 a ^ rt k n f co C+9 r cm tb r c" a o c' 3 w �. c° 3 .. o 0:2m G n ' = tri .•.. K ti ° •"� cb =_ O 10 r'j�', ^ 7 O O A 7 d O 0 c=s < 0n [a y y= tj d<_ D .w m �_e •" d p n m 2c �iEA LO w to ID c 0_ = o o Y 0, p r� a n o =•�,�p� d= d En _ = A r yeb Ul _a O a „„ 7 al=0 e m C _ A ^ ft'= p el .q A net o En ^ m p co DQ o A 't n o !n rb eb $ c' 7c d CL rnCJ x a r r� r b a f_m. n O P d z y 0 r9 En. Ell EA EA 0 Ell d f° n o G r n= W n C ^+ n -' ^ r ? •• > Apr to a ^ rt k n f co C+9 O n din cb 10 r'j�', ^ 7 O O A 7 d O 0 c=s < 0n [a y y= tj d<_ D .w m �_e •" d p n m 2c �iEA m 7 0, n a n En _ 4 n Ul �" 1 •- O a „„ 7 ft'= p o En eb $ c' CL rnCJ x A•3 n "o °' a p =M N ^ CL z oa a a x= 0jlg NEA !nOR � m m • . m .y � : C -m �: 'p CL ,T - p• O. 13, m co p .y .. - ID n' n. '•�"a: ia.+:.� •� t^:f =4:T _ H•'.n'_ ..R�u::Ca'ii5 .c'.•fS:�.'.-•y _ ^ - ff O -_`- S'_ �•m .`.'.S •1 0,.�.f'-:.�,:�M� D iw `.'r _:::.'t.::. .: i33 %c f:Y-.,.�+. -• •ea�yy.�r��`9�y,�w.-ir,�y.;i.. y... - O _.,r._.a. r. _ D _ _ " :. -rte r' A .T :A. n, -'.i tir- •... �_ N - .- >: :•.. 3Q+�.. '7.a _ _.. _.i.. �� _./1`:_ .e-•'�,'�t�., ».' v.:i::...i►.:�m.�..�cUr�.... �-rt'•a'•=�': s.r •,����C� J.v..�_r.`•'K..h ,.vie. s �.--►�e� +ems• .. .ti -.-s ..r-'1�.Jn:.'..:;: ' ,•--. .";.4•.'�:i.ti;l �. - ' i`->�_...... a r r� r b a f_m. n O P d z y 0 r9 En. LEON W. MALINOFSKY, JR. ATTORNEY AT LAW 1 82 MAIN STREET NORTHAMPTON, MA O 1 060 - 3104 TELEPHONE (41 3) 584-7950 FAX (4 1 3) 582-1865 EMAIL LWM (-W 'MAP.COM 5 June, 1998 TO: The Honorable Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals RE: Application of Northampton Airport Inc for grandfather exemption Sirs: This letter summarizes Northampton Airport, Inc.'s arguments of fact and law in the matter taken up for hearing last June 3rd. No attempt is made to summarize or recreate the testimony offered in hearing. It is te situs o the present Northampton Airport for which the applicants seek grandfathering, an not their business. The Board may find the situs has been in continuous use for entertainment activities for every year since minimally 1925. For the present purposes, entertainment activities should be considered events or spectacles of public interest which draw or may be expected to draw participants or spectators. In the following diagram, the shaded boxes track the lawful right to outdoor activities of the type and manner claimed. Year Situs Uses Situs Ownership / notes 1925 Fye Cirmm Barnstorming ivals Dances Auctions Flea Markets PolkaBandsFirst ands car shows as'"1e"t 1-1 LaFleur commercial dairy and bottling facility. 1926 —Carn 1927 Fast Zoning Law—possible date. Activities are already onooina on situs. 1928 1929 Zoning Law—possible date. Activities are already ongoing on situs. 1930 1931 1932 33-`97 Northampton Airport incorporates, establishes a business at situs. Today this situs Is owned by the Northampton Airport, Inc. G.L. Ch. 40A, section 6 provides in part that "Except as hereinafter provided, a zoning ordinance or by-law shall not apply to structures or uses lawfully in existence or lawfully begun, or to a building or special permit issued before the first publication of notice of the public hearing on such ordinance or by-law required by section five..." The shaded box above shows entertainment uses ongoing at the situs since 1925, as may be found from evidence offered at hearing. The applicants observe that such activities are "uses... lawfully in existence or lawfully begun" within the said section, conferring nonconforming use status for such activities on the situs, currently owned by the Northampton Airport, Inc. The right to such uses logically, and in law, follows the shaded boxes. The current owners of the situs (applicants) seek the following determination: That the situs may be used by its owners for events of the general kind set forth in the "Events List" presented at the June 3`d hearing. Such uses are, by their nature, activities or spectacles of general interest which may be expected to draw participants or spectators. Please contact this office for any further desired information. Y urs sincerely,'' 11N tu��"" Leon W. Malinofsky, Jr. u Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 • EMAIL planning®city.northampton.ma.us *Conservation Commission *Historical Commission *Planning Board • Housing Partnership *Zoning Board of Appeals MEMO To: ZBA From: Staff Date: 6/3/98 RE: Agenda Items 1 • Walter Bak, Finding for change in conforming use on a nonconforming lot (9.3.2); 7-9 Conz St., 31D, 236. - proposed use is acceptable; in fact it is encouraged in the Downtown Plan; - the Planning Board has issued a Special Permit and Site Plan Approval is in process. 2. Jason Mark, Finding for a change in use of a nonconforming use (9.3.1); 89 Market St., 32A, 20. - proposed use is acceptable; in fact, it is encouraged in Downtown Plan; - the Planning Board has issued a Special Permit and Site Plan Approval. 3. Wright Builders, Finding to extend a pre-existing nonconforming structure (9.3.1); 57 Prospect St., 31B, 129. - proposed extension is permissible, it creates no new violations. 4. Northampton Airport, Appeal of Building Inspector's determination denying grandfathered status for outdoor entertainment uses. Old Ferry Road, 25, 15-19, 53, & 71. The board is asked to adjudicate only upon whether the Building Inspector's determination was correct. Issues for consideration include: - Is commercial use of the airport and, by extension, appurtenant use for outdoor entertainment uses other than airport related activities such as flying, jumping out of planes, viewing old planes, etc., grandfathered? For a number of reasons the answer is no; I) A) The area of the airport was defined by City Ordinance as a Residence district in 1927 (this can be confirmed by a close reading of the 1927 adopted ordinance) and B) According to the applicant's statement, the airport did not become a commercial entity ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER until 1929. At this point, available evidence indicates that the commercial use of the airport was NOT a legally pre-existing, nonconforming use, therefore no non -airport ancillary uses (of a commercial nature) could be considered grandfathered as appurtenant to a legal use. II The applicant stated that he could and would provide documentation that there have been non -airport outdoor entertainment uses such as band concerts, car shows, festivals, etc. without any two year gap since 1948 in order to demonstrate continuity of such uses (proving such uses were neither discontinued nor abandoned). A) The 1948 zoning Ordinance and map indicate that the airport location is neither a Business nor an Industry District; B) Therefore the relevant time frame to document grandfathered status would have extended back to 1927 or earlier, not 1948 (in light of I, above, this issue is moot); C) In information filed with this office to date, the applicant has not met this burden, not even to 1948, let alone back to 1927; D) Even the use "aviation field" was allowed under the 1948 Ordinance "only if authorized by permit issued by the Board of Appeals after a public hearing." There is no record of such a permit. III For the past 9.5+ years the Airport has been securing City permits for outdoor entertainment events. Doing so has brought these events into compliance; once in compliance, previously "pre-existing, nonconforming" uses can not legally revert to pre- existing, nonconforming status. IV If, despite the above, the Board should decide to deny the Building Inspector's determination, then the applicant would have to submit an application for a finding that outdoor entertainment uses are grandfathered. The Board then would need to decide exactly what specific uses have that status and could continue without need for permits. ' 'r fA A rn+ O 7 rA r C •� i9 "°/ p •t £ tJ r H C C = O. VL- "`•O TA O ? W •t O IA W. •• fA r+ ._. - p' A R G. A •+ O Oye i ? .rt w ? 7 n m A O £_ A p e� n O? w �•to •s A £ O P r N M "'. < p' C 0 � •s '< .. G -:S � A n O •°i. 7 � ' _ D• £ P � P � p nnAj p p tea � p . r S w-� r S r r ? A tD O d ¢' V m C Q1 O to ?+"'• 6 S "°'� n A .O W A ~ -CL ?. C . • w. ? O << O •rt,• n ... ~. N .: % � r "� • _ n _ n A _ m A •°r• .7.. f` � M ti � n "' °' b f9 `< _ ' CAA o ' A " � is A b � � _ i'a A N " E u � m d' C7 A - o -01 C eb M < i Oi n M ••A C = N d P- rt C (Cj O O. M m 6 � N �. fi � A A iy �. �~' oc .p,� O '� ^I eN+• �' < v+ R p .Z• rt m C ^! G o �, � v. rN•r N 3S AAs p A -a rt C 7 n 0 0 C •< -iY •°+. C 'h S A O d M W �. E C £- O E "' A Oa O " '+ ^! O n n •.. O �. r. •< O y A . a .n,to M " m a0 .E 0 ? .p C p 0 E ^+ n 0 S "+ G. ' = �' C' �' A r? M A. o n a Q• ? O M C ? y A nEn C d n W �. C M rt p n �_'. •< = .�0... A A M• •1. '•C "'Y _ d A a' o. n N A O - o; c Oa O to C d ?y ti? „ `< •n,• Cm _ rA3•. _ •. C .+ fi M O :`�•' n W _ n �T _C O p •+ O G o to f 0 O > P. y ,,,•, .rt to M 7 p rt£ M A O ? p 0 oq ° M^ to 4 _• P. T.T • ._. A. C' O d n 7 n N O C O = r' M ? y _ 7 rnr 9 ? W C A n' C .� fi a ._. rA x `•Ot ^ '� N ✓_ d ,r'• .. A T O C Q�py '•� .. ? y C "� ^ q m `rt•, d rn. ? SW rt A A _ m 7 A et t7 A '! 'J m A O ai ? C. d M d N A fi_ C O O .°j A Y. N O 0:tv A n/ M C O. < ], ~ � O' .q A S iii • p, n ^ r' = � -� N = O C 7 m Li C a- \ ' rt ? 7 A a C Oi • � �� g '� '.- m A N O ^! d? ..? < g A n O ,y fD A •' ,� 2 R G n ?3 A A 2]. � A - 1 V 1 •°i O^ W S a .+ n O 7� C rt] . .0.�, � M O' p << v •Ot £ n LA a, aAe ��... r�C+• 7 _ eb p .t O .+ p W '-' m ^J "Ory P7 - _- Oy to ? '� '< 0 0 �• C \•�/Y E? !A C C •+ °i O ' C v � ^' ° A A ^• O O O �< n m rtrt_. n O N ' O d t ... •y w A -- -. O 7.0>'�O .m..- _ _ O .� .m.. N• C d q- •� rAr m H~ v S 4Ti d ACD .t -- _ a ;`^.y?'E•aa••S>- O"�.`m +r..0 , �• �- ..: ,y.^�_ C ... 5 'CL• sAe C .A ^ ? 7 .-A_' S A fb n ? n � fi P =, � - �• O. _•. _; ... »: S O fi O .+=.. _ _ ,s►y=; _s:,�' _K o - o y --r•� � ,r . a ,.. a 5. -'e o a4 a. o, +^"F! --C•px''c'�' :._ a^�• w 1y."+liP,+-k}t. .-`-•'�'L--�+�'Fer'IY`^' �. +i-'uy"S [•wy�ie��. `'§NNAef- �.'���+R "..'"�"�' _MF' C• C a m A O `< ?+ .Oj O. C ~ 6] =• �.. o ire` -?:r 'L` ,,, r= YC,ii�•t•. fi 7�•1 CD CbO _AO� - A .ii A mto C o .► s '� o E •; o A .+. O A '"` = x a to ^ 0 A ti m m .° m to to aq aq ri A A to A ? 1i ? •f A A rt A A _ W .. W "< = m •f w d A N i9 O C •� i9 "°/ p •t £ tJ r H C C = O. a A <t n a E N '< r°•. ^• L' r'+• n A O_ - O ..+ h �_ R r. n N O . in 7 A � G d `�' G A - a •• 7, 6 �. M 4 n rt � O m A £ O Q • N M "'. < p' C � ::. "'� Oi � fi rt C n A S A p � ry 'C 7. rv^+ , '—' � ,� O• C > Oq •.• fi `N` mom= z O O w N •rt.. y C •� C o n 7 '7 .... C A A to A P _ fy� C -°j Cl '.1 M C d O 0". n - i=7 LM �. En P fC` p fyC A IC] rn+• .N. A rt M _. O "" •` �► O. A H � rt = " o .� C - < A '� ••A u X N C ... ~. N .: % � r "� M �• A _ n _ n A _ A •°r• .7.. f` � M ti � n "' °' b f9 `< N i9 O "� i9 "°/ p •t £ tJ r H C C = O. a A _ C •< N '< r°•. ^• L' r'+• O O �?• �. IA C - O ..+ h �_ R r. m N H in 7 A � G d `�' G A - a •• 7, 6 �. M 4 CA p Oy rt � _• Oy m C ; � ^". A �• C: O. '� ° > Q • N M "'. < p' C � ::. "'� Oi � fi rt C n A S A p � ry 'C 7. rv^+ , '—' � ,� O• C > Oq •.• fi `N` 7�" A O O w N •rt.. y C •� C p y o M '.7+ .... A ''< ."� O a E n• '7 .... C A A to A P _ fy� C -°j Cl '.1 M C d O 0". n ,y 7 r"'' m P fC` p fyC A IC] rn+• .N. A rt M _. O "" •` �► O. A H � ^••• '� ••A u X N C ... ~. N .: % � r "� n A _ n _ n A _ A •°r• .7.. f` � M ti � n "' °' b f9 `< ' CAA o ' A " � =, rt •Ai i6 � � � r. '� •' E '+ b � � _ i'a A N " E u � m d' C7 A °n M < i Oi n M ••A C = N d P- rt C (Cj O O. M m 6 � N �. fi � A A iy �. �~' oc .p,� O '� ^I eN+• �' < v+ R p .Z• rt m C ^! G o �, � v. rN•r N '3 A p p "� rt ? �, o O M •°t A. a' n, _ M d d n °J C• n C n? ~_ m n 0 0 O • ►� C 7 C' C .... C fn'r M W fi< O •m•. ,.,, _-, n g C A r' "� A C O' •t A O r•• H C~ w P '•"' C � p !/ v O fi O d �• � O O. ti O m w O E V O C a '� = n_ A(p M `J C r0. v C X p x C• m^ J A A .�+ f<9 C � "� G v. � ... M u O p n C 'J r C '.•' N � r~+�• ? O M C ? y A nEn C d n W �. C M rt p n �_'. •< = .fir'., A a A A M• •1. '•C "'Y _ d A a' o. n N A O - o; c A :. O_ to C d ,� C C C^ •n,• Cm _ rA3•. _ •. C .+ fi M O :`�•' 7 d O_OO A 'iO _C 04 r3.". ^ M X A G: ' 'Y A LSM• 04 A rt N-�'••_� x _y p y N J .Oi. •_ '�• C7 O p n !r W M O N O C O = r' M ? y _ 7 rnr 9 ? W C A n' C .� fi a W rA on ✓_ d ,r'• .. A T O C Q�py '•� .. ? y C "� ^ q m `rt•, d rn. ? rt .y '_' .•. :.. A n a << g= A 09 t7 A '! 'J m A O ai ? C. d M d N A fi_ C O O .°j A Y. N O 0:tv A n/ M C O. < ], ~ � O' .q A S iii • p, n ^ r' = � -� N = O C � � � m � -� rn+ ti � rt A C n Li C � ii \ ' fT• ? 7 A - p • � �� g '� '.- m << m O. A d �^ m P ti m ..i A A O �� M C M C d� T M O' o O� M fCy . d 7 A .J M � m v+ ..? < 7 _••rte O _ �// � �. p ? C 3< �. n C A p fi O . A �► :�. E M � O. P A r. A f� O fi � E '�% G' [O'f "+ O G' ? O y m 2]. � A - 1 V 1 •°i O^ W S a .+ n O 7� C rt] . .0.�, � M O' p << v •Ot £ n LA a, aAe ��... ... 7 _ p eb p .t O .+ p W '-' m ^J "Ory P7 - _- -.tipy - q O •�O"?O WO -Ap_r+ Ii 7A .A , •:_%.t�y" \•�/Y _� - < !A M A A Am • _D�---' . i ?-.:.'r.,.� �< m rtrt_. n O N ' •. t ... •y w A -- -. O 7.0>'�O .m..- rt A m O -n A `t A y_y A A•�inA _ O .� .m.. N• C d q- •� rAr m H~ v S 4Ti d ACD .t -- _ a ;`^.y?'E•aa••S>- O"�.`m +r..0 , �• �- ..: ,y.^�_ C ... 5 'CL• sAe C .A ^ ? 7 .-A_' S A fb n ? n � fi P =, � - �• O. _•. _; ... »: S O fi O .+=.. _ _ ,s►y=; _s:,�' _K o - o y --r•� � ,r . a ,.. a 5. -'e o a4 a. o, +^"F! --C•px''c'�' :._ a^�• w 1y."+liP,+-k}t. .-`-•'�'L--�+�'Fer'IY`^' �. +i-'uy"S [•wy�ie��. `'§NNAef- �.'���+R "..'"�"�' _MF' .t ;Y.r..+i• 22Z f•. z. 3N' ..•.... .._'y��s""`^zrT,rF.�,---+;+ii �y'i+1.Y:K.w �;i .75k anS. : a. ,,.,,n �.. r _ .,,.�.-..�-�'''r's`,�.� ire` -?:r 'L` ,,, r= YC,ii�•t•. .ii }� rp.� c .P p, to y _ d s c ? n ". o °° es ^ o, v' �' aq aq rt_ fi :'. _�,� e+. '� H ID A -rA.. E P. � S 7 K ,h '� �' A N O n b fi K 7• O O n �,,. a O 7 ^O! O • ..O of H O .� w v? O S~ •'! <O b "+ O E N CDof C ti of - a 7 ti C .O a p fi n -- ^+ a• n A 00•'A eb e1 C M ,.,.0 rt ro N_ S b Aowro a rt° r C n d O :~ A d ,� O N- A 't7 '�, A A A O a O C• .' A O .+••� C n Oi m ' a 0 A �^to O r0+ D y " O .' O l • C, NN p `y O •r0 `n". f= .O c/ ,y ti n O? NH - O ro• ..K??? a=" "KN °nO .O gyp•'.°EK'« E.►WO •e _ esCD n ¢• n ' en+ • - Ia ~ ti "� O ? 9D eb S r rt O •j"• f?i I* O C Kr`�+'O r= O K S O fi ,Oy N K - C ? K? O a' a n eA ea o M ro o n w ,Os C .o► .ni e N fi a• �, d pnr S O O O 7 ID °+ ID a' O t�D = M to Cc a•' O A O to fi K K o y pra. ^ .. q p y .* M ID O '� = p0Cp .✓ O fi rt f9 N A ""' S fi A A N n 7 K `✓ a '7 'z . ? O O. x fl ^ O 9' A? 'L3 =• O rt p rr A �. n' K n K? M O A Hto 0 a J a ?'^' r7 C p, N a M ,N+• O g fi ti"" O .* M E � � n a � m• � � �+ °' � n O M A ? b W Oe,W A K C f9 a ;,y =' O N —• O N .o. a A O? p A K p .+• ? C. O e) b A G C A W A °� '17 _ ea .Km A 7 • A 'y A N a n� a A K '< S C O C a rt e► rti y g M fi y •' a �, g d A rt S a s co % p 'rP M is O• 0 2 M O a£ n O A y. aNn y? O O M C W "� r+ �fi.' "� �► O '• O O 7 S a M n o n to Oew O E a as ° + :• r e ° z- - e� `n g _ M e� g is p e; _ e� ? O M rt A A J O fi i1. A O rt 7 O O a M In .+• 3 _ a m � '< w � .?•. a, i� � n i oz_ to e+ •::: t. r ..t�c�yyti..t �t':rP .,„�•� •a..TJF:i� Y7r;..1ly.•. O n S o• D O to f'w n n to to a 04 of O O H peb �_ o► o es s n CJ W �1 z n y to a K C n �• y f S c� H y o a < cco K O n o rl••1 �i �jyr 2Dr .Oyy a o to c 7 O o to 4 • to rt gD toto a O O K �.. 9Dp o x x K < K e '. N .SK .^+•�'aaa• •'•R � � D.�•„ :.y� ..._ r - h O A _ rt W N'- p . pD M •�_ _ 04 ' a K '�tYNeC: Fr•��+.. k ,y Ji: :' n .:4 m .0.. ; r � `4�_ •..� ' ai a �'� •s , •lr-, -.. �-;i�ati:.ce;; .� a. VD e � � ` .cam" - _...._.._ _ _ __ _. � n i oz_ to e+ •::: t. r ..t�c�yyti..t �t':rP .,„�•� •a..TJF:i� Y7r;..1ly.•. Y Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall - 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 - (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 • EMAIL planning®city.northampton.ma.us *Conservation Commission -Historical Commission *Planning Board • Housing Partnership *Zoning Board of Appeals April 29, 1998 Mr. Richard Giusto Northampton Airport, Inc. Old Ferry Road P.O. Box 221 Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. Giusto: On April 15, 1998 the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) conducted a public hearing where you were present to appeal a decision made by the building commissioner. The building commissioner determined that the Northampton Airport is not grandfathered for entertainment uses beyond the accessory uses associated with an airport. You stated during the hearing that you could provide evidence of such entertainment uses at the airport prior to 1929 to show that such entertainment uses are legally pre-existing non -conforming. Because a non -conforming use which has been abandoned for a period of two (2) years cannot be reestablished, your evidence must also show there were no" discontinuances of the entertainment uses for more than 2 years since 1929. During the last public hearing, you stated that you would be presenting sworn affidavits to substantiate the entertainment uses which you referred to in the public hearing. With respect to the affidavits, it is the opinion of the City Solicitor's office that, whenever possible, witnesses should appear before the ZBA to provide actual testimony rather than provide sworn affidavits. This will give zoning board members a chance to ask questions directly of each individual. If a witness cannot be present at the hearing due to physical constraints then a sworn affidavit may be considered for acceptance. You may request a continuance of the hearing if witnesses will not be available to testify at the next public hearing scheduled for May 6, 1998. If you have questions regarding this issue please direct them to Cynthia R. Williams at 413-587-1287. Sincerely, Z�V�, Mark A. NeJame Chair, Zoning Board of Appeals ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER U § 655 ZONING ORDINANCES AND BYLAWS Ch. 17 a more general building business involved a use diff and purpose." erent in character Even though an ordinance permits a board of appeals to authorize the extension of a nonconforming building, the board has no power to allow an extension which involves a violation of the ordinance relating to set -backs. Such an extension can only be allowed if the circum- stances warrant a variance.` A nonconforming use of premises in a single residence district as a grbcery store may not be extended to cover a use for the preparation of food for sale and a catering service, where the zoning ordinance forbids the use of premises in the district for any "commercial purpose" and forbids the alteration of a nonconforming building to provide for a substantially different use.46 A valid nonconforming use cannot be destroyed by the failure of the owner of the property to obtain a license from the local board of health." § 656. Abandonment or Discontinuance of Nonconforming Use A zoning ordinance or bylaw may define and regulate nonconform- ing uses and structures abandoned or not used for a period of two years or more. 44. Town of Wellesley v. Brossi, 340 restaurant was held not conclusively to Mass. 456, 164 N.E.2d 883 (1960). show an abandonment, although the build - 45. Wrona v. Board of Appeals of Pitts- ing was vacant for some three years. field, 338 Mass. 87, 153 N.E.2d 631 (1958). -Mere non -occupancy does not establish 46. Hines v, Commissioner "of Public an intent to abandon a nonconforming use. Works of Fall River, 342 Mass. 54, 172 See Dobbs v. Board of Appeals of North- N.E.2d 232 (1961). ampton, 339 Mass. 684, 162 N.E.2d 32 For a case where the court held a hotel ' (1959). in a residence district to be a nonconfonn_ mg use requiring board of appeals approval See generally, the following. Pioneer In - for its extension, see Crawford v. Building sulation & Modernizing Corp. v. City of Inspector of Barnstable, 352 Mass. 504, 226 Lynn, 331 Mass. 560, 120 N.E.2d 913 N.E.2d 240 (1967), appeal after remand 356 (1954), and Town of Wayland v. Lee, 325 Mass. 174, 248 N.E.2d 488 (1969). Mme• 637, 91 N.E.2d 835 (1950). 47. Board of Selectmen of Wrentham v. Nonconforming use of structure as nurs- e Monson. 355 Maes. 715, 716, 247 N.E.2d 'ng horn could not be converted to noncon- 364, 365 (1969). forming use of structure as apartments where Property had not been used as nurs- ing home for more than two years, Daw- son v. Board of Appeals of Bourne, 18 Mass.APP.Q. 962, 469 N.R2d 509 (1984). For legislative history of regulation of nonconforming uses, see Bartlett v. Board § 656 1. M.G.L.A. c. 40A, § 6. Paul v. Selectmen of Scituate, 801 Mass. 365,17 N.E.2d 193 (1938). In this case, the mere non-use of a nonconforming use of a 126 Ch. 17 ZONING ORDINANCES AND BYLAWS § 656 Under Massachusetts law, the right to continue a nonconforming use is not confined to the existing user, but runs with the land! However, that right can be lost if a predecessor in title has abandoned the use.' To constitute an abandonment, the discontinuance of a noncon- forming use must result from the concurrence of two factors, (1) the intent to abandon and (2) voluntary conduct, whether affirmative or negative, which carries the implication of abandonment.' Abandon- ment is primarily a question of fact.' There are two criteria that can be used by cities and towns that may be desirous of extinguishing nonconforming uses; a city or town may employ either or both. The first is "abandonment", on which there are many cases.' An abandonment is something that can happen momentarily, without lapse of any stated period of time.' The sale of property protected as a nonconforming use does not by itself establish an abandonment of the use." of Appeals of Lakeville, 23 Mass.App.CL 664, 505 N.E.2d 193 (1987). Evidence supported finding that noncon- forming use of land as access road to gravel pit had .been abandoned. Where property owner operated gravel pit in one munici- pality as access road for trucks hauling sand and gravel from pit, it was not error for judge to consider the two parcels sepa- rately for the purpose of determining whether preexisting nonconforming use of land in second municipality as an access road had been abandoned. Burlington Sand and Gravel. Inc. v. Town of Harvard, 26 Mass.App.Ct. 436, 528 N.E.2d 889 (1988). 2. See Revere v. Rowe Contracting Co. 362 Mass. 884, 885, 289 N.E.2d 830, 831 (1972). & See Wayland v. Lee, 325 Mass. 637, 642 n. 2, 91 N.E.2d 835, 838 n. 2 (1950). 4. Pioneer Insulation & Modernizing Corp. v. Lynn, 331 Mass. 560, 565, 120 N.E.2d 913, 915 (1954). See Cape Resort Hotels, Inc. v. Alcoholic Licensing Bd. of Falmouth, 385 Mass. 205, 220-21, 431 N.E.2d 213, 219 (1982), appeal after re- mand 388 Mass. 1013, 446 N.E.2d 1070 (1983); Dawson v. Board of Appeals of Bourne, 18 Maw.App.Ct. 962, 963, 469 N.E.2d 509, 510 (1984). Predecessor's conduct in "mothballing" facility did not establish that predecessor "abandoned" nonconforming use of proper- ty. Derby Refining Co. v. City of Chelsea, 407 Maes. 708, 555 N.E.2d 534 (1990). 5. Paul V. Selectmen of Scituate, 301 Mass. 365, 370, 17 N.E.2d 193, 194 (1938). 6. Pioneer Insulation & Modernizing Corp. v. Lynn, 331 Mass. 560, 565, 120 N.E.2d 913, 916 (1954). An abandonment of a nonconforming use results from the occurrence of (1) an intent to abandon and (2) voluntary conduct which carries the implication of abandonment. 7. See Dawson v. Board of Appeals of Bourne, 18 Mass.App.Ct. 962, 469 N.E.2d 509 (1984). & Wayland v. Lee, 325 Mass. 637, 91 N.E.2d 835 (1950). Where lodge had at all times been used for commercial housing of guests, there was no discontinuance of nonconforming use notwithstanding change within owner- ship. Cape Resort Hotels, Inc. v. Alcoholic Licensing Board of Falmouth, 385 Mass 205, 431 N.E.2d 213 (1982), appeal after remand 388 Mass. 1013, 446 N.E.2d 1070 (1983). The right to continue a nonconforming use after adoption of zoning regulations is 127 V § 656 ZONING ORDINANCES AND BYLAWS Ch. 17 The other criterion is "not used for a period of two years or more". The Legislature by providing a second criterion intended to authorize cities and towns to extinguish otherwise protected nonconforming uses if particular premises are not in fact used for the protected purposes for a minimum of two years' §§ 657-660 are reserved for supplementary material. I. JUDICIAL REVIEW Library References: C.J.S. Zoning and Land Planning §§ 265-315,316-333. West's Key No. Digests, Zoning and Planning 6-561-749. § 661. Judicial Review—Generally Any person aggrieved' by a decision of the board of appeals or any special permit granting authority, or by the failure of the board of not personal to the particular owner or occupant on the effective date of the regu- Iation. See Revere v. Rowe Contracting Co., 362 Mass. 884, 885, 289 N.E.2d 830, 831 (1972). 9. Failure to use two of dwelling units in nonconforming use building for a period of more than ten years prior to application of building. permit to renovate dwelling units justified denial of grant of building permit. Bartlett v. Board of Appeals of Lakeville, 23 Masa.App.CL 664, 505 N.E.2d 193 (1987). § 661 1. A person owning property close to and in the same district as that of the property for which a variance is sought is an "aggrieved person." See Vainas v. Board of Appeals of Lynn, 337 Mass 591, 150 N.E.2d 721 (1958). In Reynolds v. Board of Appeal of Springfield, $35 Mase. 464, 140 N.E.2d 491 (1957), it was held that the owner of adjoin- ing property, even though located in anoth- er zoning district, was a "person aggriev- ed." Owner of property "affected by" grant of variance (notice provisions) was "person aggrieved" with standing to challenge grant. Rafferty v. Sancta Maria Hospital, 5 MassApp.CL 624, 367 N.E.2d 856 (1977). A corporation organized after the grant of a special permit but before the expira- tion of the 20 -day appeal period which purported to be the successor of a commit- tee ommittee organized to oppose the development is not a , "person aggrieved". Amherst Growth Study Committee, Inc. v. Board of Appeals of Amherst, 1 Mass.App.CL 826, 296 N.E.2d 717 (1973). Where only visible interest of plaintiffs it} contesting decision of city council grant- ing ranting special permit was protection of exist- ing xisting motel facilities from competition, none of plaintiffs was a "person aggrieved", nor was it enough that either plaintiff might have had a general civic interest in en- forcement of the zoning ordinance. Wal- tham Motor Inn, Inc. v. LaCava, 3 Mass. App.CL 210, 326 N.E.2d 348 (1975). In order to be deemed a "person aggriev- ed", one must demonstrate that his legal rights have been infringed. See Circle Lounge & Grille, Inc. v. Board of Appeal of Boston, 324 Mass. 427, 86 N.E.2d 920 (1949). Person is "aggrieved" if such person has possible claim of definite violation of pri- 128 ab; cei bol Pa 47( ter lav cot or pe7 en: tot res ate apl Mt rei 79,1 we ..aj ow bei me wo adl C-14- tlf SJ t fr i 7 f�rzr r st SPEP"MESSAGE .y Yff From Subject File No 98 E24,1�emetriLs,S'ol Maarinw Rnaci File Old Fc= Rd Signed S '`' " i I J-4� N (0"k Date March 27, 1998 Samuel B. Brindis, P.E. tffice of Planning and Development ity of Northampton City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 - EMAIL planning@ city. northampton.ma.us -Conservation Commission *Historical Commission -Planning Board - Housing Partnership -Zoning Board of Appeals March 31, 1998 Northampton Airport, Inc. Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. Guisto: The Appeal Application of the decision of the Building Inspector determining that the Northampton Airport is not "grandfathered" for outdoor entertainment uses has been tcepted by the Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals, and a public hearing will be conducted t the Board's meeting scheduled for April 15, 1998 at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton. You and/or your representative(s) are required to attend this meeting to explain the application and discuss the merits of the application. Approximately two weeks before the Public Hearing is scheduled before the Zoning Board, a legal notice announcing the meeting will be published in the Daily Hampshire Gazette (copy attached). All the abutters listed in the application will receive a copy of this Notice in the mail. If you have any questions, please contact the Office of Planning and Development, City Hall, Telephone 587-1262. Sincerely, Laura H. Krutzler Board Secretary ,enclosure 6". ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ISYDDIO�ff- J. Raymond Other Events ■ - ..: �__ �■ ■.A ig• 0 Me Bpi ■ ..�■li fri ®■ �■ �,�, I i� i A MAN r M • .,. ■equip sales Polish ..dances Eliz. St. + aocordian ■ ON 41 W. girl ■ ■�;�•-�.�■■ ■moi �■ ■ :- : .:: ■ U U EVENT LIST 1973 = Air show, for Spfld. Police dept. / Bear Mountain Band a� 3 1974 = Bear mountain band / heavy equipment auctions 1975 = Air show for Spfld. PD / Bear Mountain / heavy equipment auctions 1976 = Bear Mountain, twice. / Polka Band,/ Fireworks 1977 = Church group craft fair / Polka Band / fire works 1978 = Church fund raiser with polka band 1979 = Circus / craft fair 1980 = Concert / carnival with rides / crafts 1981 = Kids Day event / craft show / circus. (kids and craft till 1996) 1982 = Great Race / Bear Mountain 1983 = Great Race / Bear Mountain / chamber fireworks 1984 = Same as above 1985 = Great Race / craft fair 1986 = City Drunk Driving test with the mayor / Gazette fireworks show 1987 = Circus / DARE car show / lions car show / Mustang & Ford show 1988 = same as above 1989 = Hot food Hot Jazz / DARE car show Lions car show / Mustang & Ford show 1990 = same as above 11 a 1991 = Circus / Italian Fest / Lions & Ford car shows 1992 = same as above 1993 = lions & Ford car shows / carnival 1994 = Spring Feast / Lions & Ford Car Show 1995 = Warped Tour / Lions & Ford Car Show 1996 = Warped Tour / Lions & Ford Car Shows / Scottish Games 1997 = Scottish Games / Lions and Ford car Shows * Air shows in 1973, 75, 86,94 / Heavy Equipment Auctions in 1936,1955,1957, 1974, 1975, 1983,84,85,86,87,88. PETER A. PAYNE COMPANY 8 EASTHAMPTON ROAD, NORTHAMTON, MA 01060 PHONE: (413) 584-5084 June 3, 1998 Mr. Richard Giusto Northampton Airport Northampton, MA 01060 Re: Mustang Car Club of New England One -day Event —August 11, 1998 Dear Dick: After completing the requisite eight -page Application for a One -day Temporary Event Permit for the above -referenced non-profit club, I felt compelled to notify you that, because of the many time constraints involved in the collection, compilation, completion and submission of this application, it may be that too many man hours are now being expended in the preparation of this package. With all the time involved for approval of the various committees, it may not be feasible for our club to continue with your venue as a site for our yearly event. It is estimated that a total of approximately one-week is required to assemble this package. This amount of time takes away from my work schedule and it is creating a hardship for me. Therefore, unless this situation changes in the future, we will have no recourse but to look elsewhere to stage this event. This is regrettable as we have enjoyed our relationship with you and your generosity in allowing our club to hold this event at the Northampton Airport. Very trul y , Peter A. Payne State Director Mustang Car Club of England APPEAL APPLICATION \ (Chapter 40A, Section 8, M.G.L.) 1. Name of Aace1lant: Northampton Airport, Inc Address: Old Ferry Road, Northampton Telephone: 584-7980 2. Owner of Pro Same Address: Same Telephone: Same 3. Status of Applicant: x Owner Abutter _Other (explain: ) 4. Parcel Identificcation: Zoning Map Sheet# 25 Parcel# 15--y 71 , Zoning District(s) sc StreetAddress Old Ferry Rd. 5. Sections of Zoning Ordinance under which Alleged Zoning Violation is occurring and/or Appeal is beim filed: Section , Page - (Applicable sections which govern granappeal/ denial o tonin exemption basion pre-exist<ng'n3Hcon�ornung use status for outdoor entertainment events as specified int6) below.) 6. Narrative Description of Alleged Zoning Violation and/or reason for which Appeal has been filed: Appellant appeals from an adverse determination by the building commisioner as set forth in the letter dated February 25, 1998 attached, that appellant's property is not entitled to a so called "grandfather" exemption from zoning regulations allegedly prohibiting outdoor entertainment uses such as band concerts, car shows, games, festivals and the like. l'� i9a Date: Appellant s Signature: OFFICE USE ONM Date Filed: - File #: (memoreAwp\zbA&ppeai.zb* 10=192) 1W 1 51997 `' f APPLICANT/COl FILE # q 6 22 5 63 PROPERTY LOCATION: MAP PARCEL: M THIS SECTION FOR -OFFICIAL USE ONLY: PF.RMTi' APPT.TrATTON ('TTFrWT.TQT ;;Ap proved as presented/based on information presented I l I - Denied as presented: (%Se ,f �n42c�inmP�C4tcM,rlt� ri� •�o be r-ef15 _Special Permit and/or Site Plan Required under: § 1_ffl, /U. /� ) _ LZPLANNING BOARD ZONING BOARD Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed Finding Required under: § w/ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed _Variance Required under: § w/ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed Other Permits Required: Curb Cut from DPW Water Availability Sewer Availability �SeP 1P$1'Ba:.of.Iea.y ':'";�,: Well Water Potability -Bd Health .. �,� '., !Permit from ConservationCommission Signature 0 NOTE: lssuanoe of at zoning permit does not relieve an applioant's burden to oompty with all zoning requirements and obtain all required permits from the Board of Health. Coneervatlon Commission, Department of Publio Works and other appiioable permit granting authorities. MAY 1 5 1997 ` File No. tP "PT OF BUILD!NG INSPECTIONS NORTHAMPTON. MA 0! oQ ZONING PE=T APPLICATION (§10.2) �E TYPE ORPBNT ALL INFORMATION 1. Name of Appl 2. Owner of.44.Qperty: Address: T cV 2R2:+ C L 3. Status of Applicant: _�ner Other (explain):_ 4. Job Location: �Telepho : Telephone: Contract Purchaser Lessee Parcel Id: Zoning Map# Parcel# District(s):_ (TO BE FILLED INKY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT) 5. Existing Use of Structure/Property Q Description of Proposed Use/Work/Project/Occupation: (Use additional sheets if- necessary): 7. Attached Plans: Sketch Plan Site Plan Engineered/Surveyed Plans Answers to the following 2 questions may be obtained by checking with the Building Dept or Planning Department Files. 8. Has a Special PermiWadance/Finding ever been issued for/on the site? NO DON'T KNOW_ YES IF YES, date issued: IF YES: Was the permit recorded at the Registry of Deeds? NO DON'T KNOW_X"� YES IF YES: enter Book Page and/or Document # 9. Does the site contain a brook, body of water or wetlands? NO DON'T KNOW YES IF YES, has a permit been or need to be obtained from the Conservation Commission? Needs to be obtained Obtained , date issued: (FORM CONTINUES ON OTHER SIDE) M u _.i 10. Do any signs exist on the property? YES_ NO IF YES, describe size, type and I Are there any proposed changes to or additions of signs intended for the property? YES NQS�C IF YES, describe size, type and location: 11. ALL INFORMATION MUST BE COMPLETED, or PERMIT CAN BE DENIED DQE TO LACK OF INFORMATION. This cclu= to be filled in by the Badding DepaLrtmenC -. �L111 aV1V(j: 1 nereoy certary that the infor conta' d ein G is tru an accurate to the best of my know dge. DME: 1 APPLICANT 's SIGNATURE NOTE: 1 ano zonin - permit does not relieve a p ioant's burl o pty wltia .$1 Czoning uir ants and obtain all required permits from the Boa o ealth. Conservotic ommission. Department of Pubiio Works and other appiioable permit granting authorities. FILE # Existing Proposed Imequirea By Zoning Lot size Frontage Setbacks - side -rear L: R: L: R: Building height Bldg Square footage %Open Space: (Lot area minus bldg &paved parking) # .pf Parking spaces #fof Loading Docks Fill: ':(vol-Ume --& location) -. �L111 aV1V(j: 1 nereoy certary that the infor conta' d ein G is tru an accurate to the best of my know dge. DME: 1 APPLICANT 's SIGNATURE NOTE: 1 ano zonin - permit does not relieve a p ioant's burl o pty wltia .$1 Czoning uir ants and obtain all required permits from the Boa o ealth. Conservotic ommission. Department of Pubiio Works and other appiioable permit granting authorities. FILE # u February 25, 1998 Northampton Airport Old Ferry Rd. Map 25 Parcel 15&71 Dear Mr. Giusto, I have reviewed your application for a decision as to whether the airport is "grandfathered " for entertainment use beyond the accessory uses associated with an airport. Paulette Kuzedba , Senior Planner, and myself, reviewed the files, maps, and Zoning Ordinances for the City of Northampton going back to 1927. The information that we found clearly indicates that the use of the airport for any thing except as a airfield and accessory uses connected directly with aviation are the only uses permitted. The Zoning Ordinance from 1927 state (copy enclo�� there ere three zoning rlic.�cts_ Non-resi .nsg., (T�neral Residence, and Singh residence dietritots Airt-at its inction was in an area that was a residence district The Zoning Ordinance from 1927 read.." Section 2 ... no parcel of land lying in any residence district and not at the time this ordinance becomes effective devoted to any business or industry, other than those specified in Section 1 shall hereafter be used for any business or industry,......" Since the airport by all records was started in 1929 this is the ordinance that was in effect which the airport would have to comply with as being a pre-existing non -conforming use. Enclosed you will find a zoning map dated October 8. 1948 which also the airport in a residence district. Any expansion beyond the original use as a airfield would have required a permit Eom the alderman and our records indicate no permit was ever issued. Therefore the uses that were not subordinate and incidental to the principal use of the airport were illegal uses and cannot be considered as grounds for being grandfathered as a pre-existing non conforming use because the uses never were legal. Therefore I am denying your application that the airport is grandfathered for entertainment uses not associated with the accessory uses as an airport. Sincerely, Anthony Patillo Building Commissioner City of Northampton CC. M Kerns, J. Sheppard, P. Sullivan, L. Malinofsky BOARD OF ASSESSORS ASSESSORS Joan C. Sarafin, MA.A., Chairwoman i ! Telephone Robert C. Buscher, Secretary "! 586-b950 Ext. 200 Edwin M. Padeck e WALLACE J. PUCHALSKI MUNICIPAL BUILDING 212 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 TO: THE NORTHAMPTON BOARD OF ASSESSORS FROM: { P"QD '�! i 1,-5TW C 1 A77-1. L fin/ W . M F S Ky STP (Individual or Company Name) 72- 7777 77 PHONE _1 �3� S� `f --?I SU DATE: (3F_C'H, 1�9$ I/WE REQUEST FROM THE BOARD OF ASSESSORS, ABUTTERS LISTS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT P/+ 7 I fve R i►tAM P la r� ti 1 iz Pol�T o LD THE MAP AND LOT NUMBER(S) OF THE ABOVE PROPERTY ARE THE NAME OF THE BOARD(S) REQUESTING THIS LIST IS* APKAL5 2. 3. THE Ln/IST IS REQUIRED FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSE: M1�QZAL O F 1�ZC�so of ��H��ONS �..� v SS�o A.4.XQZ_ THE NUMBER OF COPIES OF THE LIST REQUIRED IS Z I UNDERSTAND THAT THE BOARD HAS UP TO SEVEN (7) WORKING DAYS IN WHICH TO COMPLETE THE LIST. REQUESTED, AND WILL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL SEVEN (7) WORK- ING DAYS FOR EACH SUBSEQUENT REQUEST. I FURTHER UNDERSTAND THAT I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY E CONTAINED HEREIN. (Signature of Applicant) DATE LIST WAS COMPLETED �pSSou *IF YOU ARE UNSURE OF THE BOARDS REQUIRING THE ABUTTERS LISTS OR THE NUMBER OF LISTS REQUIRED PLEASE CONTACT THE APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENT. U ---YYl a 9 41 0 4 8L 4� ca�nc4v-Anow�n io Ize- "1�c1YtDQ SS SS 4-e--,� (UA ire- cls cam. - -- -- ----- - - Al .C_t1--\ LYMI-nom--..t� _=-- �,:ct�.. �c nc --c. ►,�l ,,z( f}, 5.- OrVt - ems' Ce-) 0. LA --J-- C"Icl ; nC4jA o t0-� t0 �r Pu Q U -AZ O Ie. ---3 a,\e. _Lof pz 6"; 1 X 3 n d ,sir ; ci--5 r�,i &,Y W; Gem, O -t d r,mx� 4 -)1 n ie 0 D Lv" CZ-1[u"W-,c-k - bv'a- TELEPHONE (4 1 3) 584-7950 FAX (4 1 3) 582-1865 Paulette Kudzeba Planning Department City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 i L./ LEON W. MALINOFSKY, JR. ATTORNEY AT LAw 182 MAIN STREET NORTHAMPTON, MA O 1060 - 3 104 OCT Re: "Grandfather" determination for uses at Fairgrounds Dear Ms. Kudzeba, EMAIL LWM @ MAP.COM 30 September, 1997 This is a formal request for information regarding the grounds of a so-called "grandfather" exemption granted to the Fairgrounds. A copy of this letter is being sent to the city solicitor, the building inspector, and the mayor. As you know, my client, the Northampton Airport, is in the process of applying for a "grandfather" exemption for certain uses on their situs. As I write this letter, Mr. Giusto and I, pursuant to a request from the city solicitor, are gathering information and documenting events in support of that application. In an effort to understand the kind of detail required for the grant of such an exemption, I looked at the Fairgrounds' application. It would be fair to say I was stunned to see not a single listed supporting event of the kind for which their new exemption was granted (general entertainment uses as opposed to the conduct of county fairs and agricultural uses). Neither do I find anywhere in the application a request for nonconforming use determination (the so- called "grandfather" exemption). On this record, it is impossible to see how the planning board could even have considered the grant of such an exemption. Can you explain and cite authority? I can only conclude I may be missing something major, so please, if you can, by return mail identify for me where I can obtain any information or application submitted by the Fairgrounds in support of a request for grandfathering. cc: Janet Shepard, Mary Ford, Anthony Patillo Y urs very zinc ely, Leon W. Mali ofsky, Jr. DRAFT COPY February 25, 1998 Dear Mr. Guisto, I have reviewed your application for a decision as to whether the airport is "grandfathered " for entertainment use beyond the accessory uses associated with an airport. Paulette Kuzedba , Senior Planner, and myself, reviewed the files, maps, and Zoning Ordinances for the City of Northampton going back to 1927. The information that we found clearly indicates that the use of the airport for any thing except as a airfield and accessory uses connected directly with aviation are the only tonipermitted. edrmi�ted � Non -residence, The Zoning Gene inance from 1927 state (copy enclosed) there were g Residence, and Single residence districts. The Airport at its inception was in an area that was a residence district. The Zoning Ordinance from 1927 read.." Section 2 ... no parcel of land lying in any residence district and not at the time this ordinance becomes effective devoted to any business or industry, other than those specified in Section 1 shall hereafter be used for any business or industry,......" Since the airport by all records was started in 1929 this is the ordinance that was in effect which the airport would have to comply with as being a pre-existing non -conforming use. Enclosed you will find a zoning map dated October 8, 1948 which also shows the airport in a residence district. Any expansion beyond the original use as a airfield would have required a permit from the alderman and our records indicate no permit was ever issued. Therefore the uses that were not subordinate incidental lgrounds for being grandfathered as a airport were illegal uses and cannot be considered as pre-existing non conforming use because the uses never were legal. Therefore I am denying your application that the airport is grandfathered for entertainment uses not associated with the accessory uses as an airport. Sincerely, Anthony Patillo iTY OF NORTRAMPTOpT )AASSAIRUSETTS In the Year One Thousand Nine Hundr®d and Forty -might -- - ORD INA2TCTs Be it orda fined by the C ity Counc it of the C ity of Northampton, in City Council assembled, as followas aRAPTLM 46 Chapter 46 of the City Ord finance a of the City of Northampton entitled "Temporary Ordinance establishing certain building districts" is hereby amended by striking out all said Chapter 46 and inserting in its place the f of l ow ing s CHAPTER 46 Old I N G ORB IITA XC� SEC ADMINISTRATION AIM ENFORCEMENT 1. Pu The purposes of this ordinance are to promote the general welfare of the City of Northampton, to protect the health of its inhabitants, to aicourage the most appropriate use of land, to lessen congestion in the "streets, to avoid undue concentration of population, to reduoe the hazard from tire, and to provide adequate light and air to buildinge by regulate Ing the location, use and height of buildings and the spaces about them, 2. Enforcement This ordinance shall be enforced by the Building Inspector. He shall issue no permit for the erection or alteration of any building, or part thereof, the plans, specifications and intended use of which are not In all respects in conformity with the provisions of this ordina'nos, No municipal officer or board shall grant any permit or license for the use of any building, structure, or land, which uno would be in violation of any provision of this ordinance. With each application for permit to build there shall be filed with the Building Inspector a plan{ shoving -the i lot, is as area, mr.d the location of the building. The application for at bulldiz�g permit ehall be submitted to the Building Inapeator in duplicate and the Building Inspector shall retain one cap bm q ,y and su it OTI)e 0o -Y to the of Aeffesso.,,:,s'. The Inappotor of Buildings witit the approval of the .City COMIOLI may, and if required by it shall Institute appropriate legal PrOOcellfl& to 611force this ordinance and to restrain by injunction any violsitione thereof. 3. Char, No promise or building, or part thereof, hereinafter ®rooted or silte'redo Wholly or partly, In use or structure shall be used nor shall the open 8PaOcs Ora said . premises be In any way reduced until the Building Inspector shall have certified on the building permit or, In came no permit Is IGBucd, $hall halre issued a certificate of occupancy, apecify',ing 'the uoe to 1 Vh1Oh that PrOmI308, or the building may be put, upon being sufficiently completed to oor4)ly with the Provisions and regulations relating theretoo 4 There shall be a Board Of APPO&IS of three members and one associate' appointed as provided in 800tiOn 30 of Chpter 40 of a the Genera -5slawsp as amended, which shall act on all matters within its jurlad L0 tio ;urA9r this ordinance and under the G. L.- of the Commonwealth and a ny ,.,-amendments thereto in the manner proscribed In said section and sub got al r ways to the,rule that it shall give due oonsideratlon.to promoting the, publio health, safety, convenience, and welfarep encouraging 'the most appropriate use of landp and oonser#Ing property value, that 4t shall permit no building or use Injurious, noxious, offensivap or detrim en�tal to a neighborhood, and that it shall prescribe SPPrOPViate condition® f tone and sa s guards In each case. The sections of this' ordinance wherein the Board of Appeals is author-. axed to grant at Permit either with -or without a public hearing, erg not to be construed as mandatory, or that Zoning by consent is intended. The purpose Of the public hearing to to allow the generaX public an opportunity to exPress themselveaq but .regardless of the response to the ]hearing, the Board shall make Its decision with due regard for the health.'safety, 0*11- vent-ance and welfare of the Inhabitants. `f'1019t,00 MAY V -P the provisione of this ordinance shall be tined �jllut 'more 0,mr, Ityler-Ity 6.011ars ($20.00) for. each offenso. E ; aah day that 00ntlnuea shall conatituta a separate offense, tv, arty f560tion or provision of this ordinance c!h.all not :'.tavali,datq. ;any Other section or provtsion thereof. ta -!?-'r61TAnOO shall take Offset upon its final accept anoe by the City J Is 'hertibV divided into five districts dom1g. 1',011MG, and as shown On the zoning wap at-teohed 'hereto, rind filed ,7'.Lth ts"Rf CI-Ity Clerk, which map ill h6roby made a part of this ordInanoso Roeldenqe "AV) Rouidenoo "Br, Residenoo "OK Sun Ine a a Industry 2, JZ?, jq f.r, (a) District boundaries sh&1l bo as 8hoWn on the zoning map. (b) Where M*diotr.lot boundary divides a :Lot in single joint O:r 00=0n Ownership at the time such district 10 astablishedv a Use authorized 0", the lose restricted, Portion of a uOh lot BIRY be extended'int6 the more r0fStricted portion, but in no came more than thirty (30) feet over the OQUIblichad boundary. -4- ; 1. The words and terms used in this ordinance shall be as -dating . d, In thfs 300tt.on, Those words and terms not daflned herein shall be as speoi- f led 1.11 t3'1,c, Build Ing Code of the C I'ty of Northampton. 2. Wo da used In the present tense inoludea the future, the singular number* Ina ludem the plural and the plural the singular,, the Word "lot" inclurieas the word "plot", the word "building" shall include they void. "struoture", 3. A 70family" is any number of individuals living together as a single housekeeping unit, or a single person maintaining a separate housekeeping unit. 4. A plot" is a parcel of land 000upied or to be 000upled by a build - Lug or group of buildings and their acoaassory buildings including such open rap-1o&as as ae.re required by the provisions of this ordlnanoe. 5. A `"detached one family dweellingo irs as building designed for e;ecatspazoy ;ar oeacaaled exclusively by one family, '• A "two family house". or a "semi-detaohed dwelling" Is a detached building O.ogignod for 000upanoy or ocoupied exclusively by two familles living Independently of each other. 7. A "corner lot" is a lot l000ted at the intereeotion of two "streetsl and bordering both streets. The froth of the lot shall beer on the street' on Y'hich the house faces, S. A "non-oonforming urea" is a use which did not comply with -this a, ted lusnoe at the time of its adoption or at the tune of its amendment � 9, A 0front yard" is the spa©et across the full dimone�Ion of ihe. lot extinding fVOM the front line of the building located on sudh lot to tho. f rant line of suoh lot. 10. A "rear yard" is the spa.® across the full dimension of the lot extending from the rear line of the building located on each lot the rear line of such lot. rF 11. A "wide yard" is the erpac@ extending from the front yard to the i rear yar4 between a building and. the adjacent side line of the lot Ott nhioh said bu12ding is located. An "aoo@ssory building" is a building the use of which is subordi- nate and incidental to a principal building on the same lot, allah as a stable gatage$ brim, sheds playhouse or greenhouse. 13, An "accessory use" is a use subordinate and incidental pto a prinoi- pal use of the same lot or'building. 14. A "boarding house" 10 a dwelling in wh toh the business . of prorid Ing not more than 20 peopld with rooms cr meals and rooms ie Conducted for prof it. M Ties "height of a building" is the vertical distance measured at the center line of its principal front from the established grade, to the level of the highest point of the roof beams in the case of flat roofs or roof inol,i.ning not more than one inch to the foot, and to the isan height 'level between the top of the main plate and the highest ridge I'the case of other roofs. A "nc, ighb orh o od" grocery store is a food and grocery store ser►i0 Ing this neighborhood people where it is located. It met for sa7•ar as are normally carried in food alio r inolads such."items grocery stpr@e suoe3lt that. it " Shall Hot ino2ude the sale of gasoline, garage supplies, or aloohollo beverages. �•7s The "yard of a roar building" is the spade across the full width of the lot and @xtcnding from the rear line of the front building{ to the front line Of the rear building. 3.8, A "hotol" or "ieina is a superior lodging and boarding house ao_ . oommodating more than twenty people. 19. A "lodging house" is a dwelling in which the business Of pr9v1d1ttg not more than 20 People with rooms is conducted for profit. 20. A "oowwroial vehicle" is 8 vehicle registered for commercial yes. 21• An "owner" in relation to a lot In single, joint or oommon OQner_ ship shall be each Person having any interest therein, but regarding aeo 4 ion 3, paragraph 10 one a igna Lure Is auf f intent if there to no vInual e•kr a. oj—'C ", t°r.�a t the aw-nors are not in agreement. If there in disagreement ;:�ni,��;,..; •s,,n' ,Wr;err� of a lot then the absent or dissent of that lot shall be cr ^ :,q:i za a.zae,ri by `Aso Mj ority, a tie will constitute dissent . In any event ' V. El mn. of the number of signatures each lot will count an one owner i.;:: .t; zrmi("Mg; the 90% Of signaaturme required. 22. A OTouri.st Rome" in a dwelling in which the business of providing not more than 20 people with roams or meals and roomds is conducted for pa:^csxit exnept an def fined under Residence "A" where the limit In 4 people. 2'3. A "Ousi amary► home occupation" is an occupation which is oustomar• 9,:iy ;;irfo;t^=d by the oocupent in the normal course of his or her home dUt10Q .5=14 ars sewing, cooking, washing clothes. BBC TICK RFF3IDENCE "A" Tile reside -nae "'A" diet riot shall include all the area of the city not xao lodod ixa any other district. In this, district no building shall be orc9ry•r,ed for or altered for and no building or premises shall be used for any I, Detached one family dwelling. Chztrch, parish house, museum„ library and educational line. U. Tho office or studio of a physician, artist, mus io lana lawyer, tc!ary:h,zll" en"Zi.neeer or other life professional person who in resi¢izag an the Va the same building. 1+'nrsR, poultry f ann, garden or nursery selling only produce or plants ')ort ion of Which Is raised in the City of Northampton and Wily use injuricu , nodous• or offensive to the neighborhood, No 'uUm (oxceept roa-!sides stands shall be allowed an an aoeessory► use and 4a;;I provided in this section. ?�aez;,c;+iaa hA x'eoz:'e;s•hional or water supply use. 191; 'homea and boarding houses taking not more than four persons. r cs wa ';s Falaace or parking space :dor not more than two M motor prmricied. that ;dor each two thousand {2000 square feet that the area WIA a.. tbAl! lot exa;®oda five thousand (5000) square feet, one additional motor aaoy tic garaeged or parked, provided, however, that except on a farm, }j_m one (1) cormaeroial vehicle shall be'garaged or parked on any ;.('t i.,. ,: vaW.dentiril, diatr• .oto rter°rise buildingep provided they are constructed to conform -c, with the buildings in the district, and provided furthers J7�t '�,.be :r -r. oposed or Factual use dose not include a storage yard or repair ! op , t:►, Any of thn, fallowing uses, provided they ,are not injurious, ,"1oxioi:u3 oz- offensive to the neighbor3aood, and only, if authorized by permit '.e:®uQQ b,, the Board of Appeals after a public hearing. it) Private o lub not co nduc t eid. for profit and not o onta i ming acre sleeping rooms, provided, that there Is no bowling alley or gale A,' izr'oxl.oating beverages, (b) Hospitals, charitable institutions and sanatoriums provided, . .iv;^h'aMJ.IAIngs be located not leas ,then one hundred (100) f0et from the ,-.-:tox:�.or lines of the plot on which the institution is loomed and pro- tdod `they are not primarily for contagious diseases nor for•the care of �pilrar;,tio, drug and liquor patients, nor as correctional institutions s::1E: the care of the insane or feebleminded. (0) Custcttkary home occupations carried on for profit by a resident a,caou?,miat, with the assistance of not more than t.NO employees regularly. (d) A. storage yard for periode up ,to five years the permit for which 9my bar renewed by the Board, of Appee.la after a public hearing,.if .in the ,i; tnie;ju c1Z the Board it is not injurious, noxious"or offensive to the tcaiglthorh;ood. The storage yard shall. be screened from view' in a manner epprolrritate to the environment ae determined by the Board of Appeals. Aviation field, broadcasting station, cemetery, fur fast, golf iAs ub, oottntry club, greenhouse, oonvcalesoent or nursing home, ice harvest- 3:sY. rta:ti4 a'Gcrags on the same premise, munic ipal use,. outdocri mov ie theatre, roi.ono quarrying, gavel bar.0r., stand bank, removal of topsoil, ca mpa and ove::night camps. A 5`) ('vwT8T8i()n of a single faraai:iy house to acoommodato two families, • 1 • r b a t+ � 00. Tb" the a , rOa of the lot On which the house is located 'UM24t 71500 rsiqUare feet, 4 j g DU00- tM11,7 Awjlge Zrs UiA structu-ru.j change Is made In the exterior oth, than is necoricary to proT,11,de means of agrees from each dwell- EM required by the OV21-16 or municipal building codes or iom3. S*V-'g Ir-t7eye jesdi Vg to the s000nd or any higher floor, unless rami, at the building, shell be located within the wells of the and Ori a -oorner lot a,.1 such stairways shall be within the of the building. -C`40 b0ax'd 0a Appeals May aUthorize a neighborhood grocery store ViaiOn Of the Board publjk� necessity warrants It and if ninety o? the proyerty owners 'I-fithin a radius of three hundred (300) 000;sr 01 the Proposed lo0ation of the I building consent in :.2J1A;1.-1']["�; ts> Ouch use. 'I'hO Petitioner does not count 68 a property owner­ -cill the land within Vita three hundred (300) feet radius of 13 04Y�itenrlintq of the proposed buildiing, In whiah'asse he would be the .11417art iBing sign in conJunef;10n with permitted uses Which sign "OeOd'a total area cif tw() (2) square fast for each permitted 117-all be suchsigns as are V-UStomary on any building used 'for POrmitt6d In this section. .1Ad,,r0:.rt1ts1ng 819118 POeta inirq? ,, to the Bale or looms of a lot or builf", 1:1 U-onWhich they are Placed, which sig . no shall not exceed a total t"(Svelve (12) square feet. Azq eace'ffisory use as def ins(I in Sec.tjon 2. 3Very buildingg housing or designed to house, one or more A Provide In conTmotion with It and on the same lot off UPaOG for automobile& equal t' 0 the number Of dwelling units aluch dwelling" QT TOR 4 11KK 8 Raaldenoa "D" district no building Shall be .erected for or I ;®rt11. h' ct7r axi • nO bu ild ing or premise My be used for an u Y purpose except$ k. .Ally use permitted in a Residence "A" district. • A WO family Or semi•detaohed dwelling. i 3. Dormitories, hospitals or sanitoriume not primarily for contagious ses rtOr for the Dare of epileptioe or drug or liquor patients; fc'ritabe institutions Nhich are not correctional institutions, nor 'M&rIlY 'tiO:S' the caro of the insane or teeblemindod; and provided 'such ''�`'•ldintau be 10Wated not lose than one hundred (100) feet from the exterior n1es n:[ th(D 910t On which the institution is located; also isolation, drug, ie;,0t10 ks.�J"Pitals, correctional institutions, and asylums for the (IM30&166d, Provided they be in any part not loss than two hundred . ,?VOsm the exterior lines of the plot on which the institution • •� u VW :I3oaxd Of Appeal;.® may authorize after a public hearing, son- e two family house existing at the time this Ordinance beo�pe '60 000caummodate not more than four (4) families, provided$ (,R) That the area Of' the lot on ft Loh the house ie to be t.r"otod ahall be at least 9800 square feet. The aPFsarande and character of a two family house in Find n0 tna jor etruoturs.1 change is made in the exterior r':';s;:;•. ��JE1xa iG to DaKsary to provide means of egress from each dwell. a.r1;.5 1!A3 it a s required by the building code or fire regula ti ons. � ) 8t0 'wa;re leading to the second or any higher ,floor, unless -'?Oar Of the= building shall be located within the walls of the +)tt i l al J,tsg, and on a corner lot all such Stairways shall be within the of the building. ;�<• XTery building housing or designed to house two or more faml.• sixf-e1-I. provide in conmotion w a its it and on the acme lot, oft street n ;, i ..r %08800 fo.- automobiles dwells o mAl to the nw6er of q ng unite provided f fart A do elopment containing a group or groups of single family, 1vvo :sa+:3. or mule1-dN',�.allingot or any combination thereof, on a single lot stair �4,;t tic the f allelvil"A c and itiones iZ; 11 i)er._U l: ShI111 -KA M11+.4—A .n.___ .L- - - l,b) -No buileYing e22all be erected to a height in excess of 2* ;borlea or 35 fast. Wither the basement nor the half story shall be oa- -Upied so ivia9g or 0111,0PIng quarters. except for janitor's apartment in 'he bas®snettC. ro; Buildingis shall be Be grouped that each building shall face or the ftta.l, length of 'its front either upon any existing street, or upon 'n QP0n OpMes vhloh in its least dimension shall not be lose than 60 feet. `.;?tev°et t;ites retia eslmvatiorlaof the principal buildings are built parallel n sp-P('t 01;'?ar or wjt;::ai,rk 30 degrees of parallel, the average distance be- ;,3eer. 't;hei,x• long dim•<;ne ion shall be not lose than 50 fest4 Each building p:r.•i- icsi pal or ffx;;teosory shall be at least 30 feet distant from any '�)uiidAvag In tht::� g)?oup, which distance shall be measured in a t,fae pointe of the buildings which are nearest No d.we::iing unit shall contain lose than three, rooms ex- "`t&,i°:'�' b-Ilts anal bstftrooms. There shall be a minimum of 600.square t,xcjus ive of halls and stairs f or eaoh three, roan .;:a:l.:i. TYE and for s;:ac�hy additional room the floor space shall be in- c.3a„t•^a �''N lii �.tBCdt ..1�0 in - square feet. ,), 17hOrs 81161.1 be at least 3000 square feet of lot area for ;3 ., : H:ss? .;it on the last, d'agee a>-;• off street parking apace shall be .provided for one :hes lot. 0 Ro part a .' any PrtnO ipFal building shall be within 20 feet of of Aw,''(galo may -e'ary t1aea above conditions for buildings In it fiv!da that the variance will give equal oir better light, bt..t.).,'! inga used Yor. reeidanoo. 7, .;;-',AY ^.c?oeafeor;Y use as def ined in Section 2. M93 -LM -5 MSII>;1�,NCE "C" rasidanoe "13" district no building shall be erected for or Falte�xw$sf fUT and no building may be used for any purpose except$ (i) 1117 urge permitted in a residence "A" or "B" district. (2) A building for three or more families, detached, semi-detached. or bstwacir1 party vualls. (3) hoarding houses and lodging houses, provided that, there ie no c%it$play Of flashing electric signs and provided that a public restaurant or dining; room shall be allowed only as an accessory use in such building, (4) 310tG113, inns and dormitories, provided that there,' ie no display Cif f1aakxi,PSg electric signs and provided that a public restaurant or dining Vcosi aha;,.A. be allowed only as an accessory use in such building, and pro vided 't'hat the building small not be 1009 than, fifty (50) feet from the ' ,$tree -t; Bales nor U ss than fifty (50) feet from either lot line. ( 03) IMezy' building housing or designed to house three or more J'emi.:li«a phall provide In oonrmotion with it and on the same lot off street 'arking spmos for automobiles to the number of dwell! units T$6 provided In Duch dwellings. {�) :every building having more than four rooms for rent shall. pro- -ride mtn'mjm off street parking space gquivalent to one space for each , i• a.ar�r:! :7,Oakllo for scut„ 11'riva to clubs not oo nduoted for prof it. .(,ny accessory use as def ined in Article 2. SECT6 BU3 IHSS b}uoiness district no building shall be erected far`' or altered (DEW 11 CZ bu ilding ®ha 11 be used f or any purpose injurious, ? noxious or ';0 a neighborhood, by reason of the emission of odor, fumes, .01"ev v'ibra•tiono or noise or other cause or for any purpose except$ ! s S o4 b o� � ti w q° >; -12 - Any usa permitted In a residence "A#p residence 03" and residence fir',80",Ie filling station, garage for storage and reps ir a, ""a 1kPV,:)0jV ;?ozmotor vehicles but not an automobile junk yard. It 6) ',?heatrov hall, club, other place of amusement or assembly. (4) 110atsurant, ( 5 ) "u-3i-nd8s Or PrO968810nal off Ice or bank, (6) 110wepaper, job printing or dry cleaning. ( 7 ) Hunioipal use. (8) h storage yard except junk yards and automobile wrecking upon permit fron tba Board of Appeals after a public hearing, The storage yard shall, be noreened Iti a mariner appropriate to the environment as detvlrmlrta(lby the Board of Appeals'. (9) Any other retail businesip service or public utility not - involving 111anufe,atuz-o on the premises OxCePt of products the major portion of, which 10 -to Ve «!old at retail by the manufacturer to the consumer and provided further th.,ut not more than four O.PeratITSID shall be eMloyed in such MR11- t1facture. AdvOrtiSing signs as regulated by law. Ciger manufacturing, tailoring, candy manufacturing or other light arae-Mfecturing establishments of a similar nature. providing that they fAre not injurious, noxious, or offensive to a neighborhood by reason of' ;he omission of odor, fume, dust, smoke, vibration or I noise or other oaus(D. SECT19N -7 MU&fRM& - fil aZi industrial district no building shall be erected for or altered '_'.or, and uo building or premises shall be used for any purpose injurious, obnoxaou* or offensive to a neighborhood by. reason of the emission of odor$ fumes, dust, smoke,, Vibration or nols6 or other cause or for any Purpor'le &xompts Arty use permitted In a residence "A", residence "B", residence IV 'bur-, Iness district. sf i ` -13- (?) Ary induatrial use for any purpose not injurious, obnoxious, or of'; tiriaive by reason of the emission of odor, fumes, duet, smoke, vibration, noise of other cause. ' (3) Any of the f 0110wing spec'if ied purposes provided approval Is grenteel by the Board of Appeals after a public hearing. Acid zmnufaotarer Ammionl€a, chlorine or bleaching powder manufacture Aeplialt manufacture or tefining Automobile wrecking 001luloid manufacture t°oal tar products manufacture Greoecte me:nutaoture D fist tllat ion of o cal, wood or bones -'ice i7eE :: ' L:L^6�a 'r��btSYriY . r= —Z:ri � r i�: 3iY.«�► i•✓`.�p�y% • "'!` ., ice. ✓%�. ib .n i'+ir,`i i-: Jr t/'l ✓'i9%i: 'IV . * •,i„•isar.:Ar,-a .... ''.!%. 'r .� � *"Xf"i'1Vr !K[r"S�'�. 'r S.'E�,rf .:'cncilavia manuta.ature • Petroleum refining 7)yroxyline plastic manufacture or the manufacture of articles therefrom Radium extraction Rubber, oaoutohouo or gutta-percha manufacture from crude or scrap materials. Sewage disposal plant except when controlled by the munioi- pal ity Stoop yard Sulphurous, sulphurio, Nitric or hydrochloric acid manufacture Tar distillation Tar roof Ing manufacture Slaughter house Any area used for the storage of rage, scrap paper, scrap metal, or junk Wol.uding automobile panto or building materials salvage yards, shall be completely enclosed by a substantial and solid fence at least six (6) feet high, with openings only for ingress and agrees, said fence shall not, be located nearer than six (6) feet to any public sidewalk. BON p� �} ryD-14- -0011 L/��•�p ORM —12M 'Tin 1. Any building or part Of a this b builds time 01ad.�aptiOn Of this is bei � ®S Premises, which at the y- ng Put to a nOn-conforms V`ay Oont issue to 'be used for the same nB use, PurPOse ■ .2- Any business in operation at the. time this Ordinance r'ay e -rand with the !s Passed Permission Of the Building Inspector. 3. Any non-oonforming use may be changed to another non-canfoaming VBG gar anY non-Oonformi ng building array be rebuilt or r !'roars the AOard of A repaired On permitPpeals, such new use or reconstructed building not 1:0 be eube,us,ntially different in character or more detrimental or ob. ;iOctionable to the neighborhood. d" Whene'fea a non-ooaaformi rag usO has been changed to a more 1astricted or conforming use it shall not again be changed to ' "striOted use. less 5- lVhen any nonan onf orm i ng use has been discontlnued for a Period t Y t �c (P�) yc13a';a it shall not be re - le Ll oorafo l'rAIV with this Ordinance'. future and future use shall AF fflA YARD AND HT �OULATIO See Teble A iso d.dre-Minis shall be erected in a residence A B :1.*fag t.laalra Qixt � or C district on q Y (d0) feet wide except that narrower lots shown on d .'(worded in the Registry of Deeds previous to the crdIi.IFlsara ,v {s adopted may be built on time this Provided that all requirement. gyp. a'aga-rd t0 Yarde are fulfilled. iEa a. X'enidence "Aa district, twenty (2.0)no building shall be built lfess t$a feet from the street line $ provided that no rtaed b(5 a'p't braolC more than the average major building Of g the setbacks Of the buildings C)12 the D"t lots On either side if both thsss lots have major buildings' 'l"uil•t 'theroon, ng e ro � w 4 ® 0 4 a Q, n All +) !°;+{.e9.e�aca and residence "C" district no building shall be ��i.e#•i.'i; 'i.ei�:-:s thala fifteen (15) feet from the street line and no accessory building 14joei than twenty (20) fact from the street line, provided that • n . 11 c aana j or oUllding need be set back more than the average of the setbacks of the buildings on the next lots on either side if both these lots have major 'buildings built thereon. In the case of corner lots each street line roust be considered. 3.! ?f In a residential district no building, except a one-story accessory bu'lldfng, shall be built within ten (10) feat of a side lot line. In any other district no ,building of mote than one story shall be built within six (6) feet of any lot line unless its roof. and the wall nearest the lot limo Y,,aVa fire resistant outer coverings. If as authorized in Section 9, paragraph .1, narrower lots than sixty (60) feet are allowed, the Board of Appeals may permit a minimum side yard dim.insion of not lose than six (6) feet on each side. 44. Teartard� In ,a residential district no building except S one-story accessory building shall be built within fifteen (15) feet of the rear lot line. 5.L OL Ria r Bu 11d !raga Yn front of every building not fronting on a street other thain a oae-Otor3� accessory building, there shall be a yard not leve than twenty (20) feet deep, and in front of every such building in a residence dis- t:cfot not less 'l';han thlrty (30) feet deep, unless on permit of the Board of Appeals. 7'othi.l'-S:: herein shal;i prevent the projection of steps, roofless cis iiunsys, fire escapes, cornices, eaves or at ornamental f-N.Iturss Into any required yard. "n n residential district the minimum lot size shall be six thousand (.it)tiG7, square feet. If as authorized in Section 9, paragraph 1, ani°�'c=>�rrc�c lotra than sixty (60) feet are allowed, the Board of Appeals may a Minimum lot size of fim- 9) square foot. In a residential district 110 lot shall havq more thars :1arEy (40) .percent of its total area occupied by buildingb, rng, CoI yss3bJ141Z In a reside'zce3 district n0 structuress fence os plaxstkrl�; ow three ex {3) feet in he1.gl�t shall be maintained On any corner lot within a triangular area formed by the lot lines along the streets to "he Points on such lines a dib•tance of fifteen (15) fact from their intersaation and a line 00nrssating f3uoh points OXOOpt on pexMit from the *Boar€i. of Appeals. Any fence or planting that does not conform to the requirerr;.sjjts Paragraph shall be made to conform within one of :rsis 3n to ' ordinance beoomec� effectiveo year from the that this The height of a builds ' n8 shall not Eexeeed the heights rra below except 'y.istod whes^e variations May be permitted by the Boei�d of k The Board of App®cls ms ppealb" y issue permits far buildings over tis:roe storbe Only in cases where provisions for pabseriger elevator service have been 'wades Residence *A".- All builds nes 2 1/2 stories -'35 feet Rea Idenoe Dormitories m 3 stories - 40 feet (b) Educational 0 3 stories - 40 fee.t (c) Other buildings - 2 1/2 stories ii:i feet Residence"C!p m (a) Hotels - 3 storles - 40 fest (b) Eduoati.ona-1 - 3 stories - 40 feet (a) Dormitories - 3 stories m 40 feet (d) Other buildings n 2 1/2 stories - 35 beet Business (a) Dwellings .. 2 2 1 stories / °- 35 feel (b) Others; - 3 stories - 40 feet Industrial _ (a ) De'eIJL'IT198 "° 2 1/2 stories - 35 feet (b) Other buildings 3 stories m 40 J(c () ; A one-story aooessoxy building shah, not exceed fifteers (:15) feet in heig17st aboiy-v the ground level. 0 0 i _l7_ IC The provisions of this ordinance governing the height of buildings In all districts shall not apply to chilaneya, cooling towers, elevator bulkheads, skylights, ventilators and other necessary appurtenant features Usually carried above roofs; nor to domes, towers, stacks or opEres if such features are not used for human occupancy;, nor to ornamental towers, observation towers, wireless or broadcasting towers, water towers, and other like structures which occupy lees than twenty- five percent of the lot area. Such features and structures may be erected to their required height and in excess of the height limitb otherwise provided for the district in which the structure is built. SECT, - T_10� 10 RESTR IO T IONS I- No building orr prsmises in any district shall be ep�st Yaltered, alt or usael for any, purpose harmful to public health, safetylor comfort It reason of by the emission of odor,.fumes, gasp dust, smoke, chemicals, Poisonous fluide or substances, organic matter, refuse, vibrations or zioise;, or other cause, or dangerous because of liability to cause fire or. explosion, Na structure of any objeotionab.Is character or harmful to property•valries shall be erected in any district. 2, N6 permit shall be granted for the use of any building that may be.harmful to public moral,.s 'or injurious to the safety or: welfare of the neighborhood. 3. No lot shall be changed in size or shape eo that the height, area, or yard provisions herein proscribed are no longer satisfied. d. All gasoline filling stations and roadside stands shall be Jo - Oe ted at least fifteen (15) feet from the street line slid shall have provision I or off street customer parking.. '5. No publio:garagep gasoline filling station, or an'y drive entrance thereto shall be located within three hundred (300) feet of any school, church, library or hospital buildings. 9 0 4 Y0 0 N V ."Brae Generationk,.-`,.,_,A t LaFle Air Ali4ded Fami. - By DOROTHY FOTTER It. isn't unusual in this part of the country to know of several generations In one family an. gaged In the same business such as cabinet making, iron business, ,Me In and the like, but It us find more'than two generations that have been Inter. :eSted In flying or anything con- nected with It. ; ]Public flying and ownership of planes is - hardly 25 years old. I But right ght here In Northampton three generations 'in the LaFleur family have been .Involved In some phase of flying. The LaFleur Airport, a part of this area known 'as "The Mead• wall for hundreds of years, was started In 1929 by Larry La. Maur's grandfather. Larry is the present operator. His grandfa• ther born in Canada, had moved to tills town and started a dairy farm. When fire destroyed his buildings and cows, he decided to'do something that wasn't as `demanding as milking twice a day. Interested In the Increasing use of planes, Grandfather La. Fleur decided to change his level Pasture and.corn land on the Meadows . . . 55.acresofft ... Into an airport.. This he did'mak. Ing It the: second privately owned airport -In New England . . . Preceded only by the one at Bethany, Conn. After his giandfatheri death Conveniently. lobated pp.JieT in 1930, LpTy's father, Lucius, local operated the flying field for a and tr ie'fii short time and then rented It to field to a I difi fie 0 a series of operators, ' who' char- air. It is the second. oldest,, pi tered planes, . did passenger flights, Instructed student pilots sippi to a, scrap, heap and sold and serviced -planes, Llu, sas- cius never learned to fly, and With his' valuable tralnlng.�j evewtoday is content to be just r mechanico plus his pilot's Ace a Passenger. Larry was equipped 'to contl Joseph Baltron was the first to In the flying busineksti ghd_dli rent and operate the iimort. He as a mechanic foj:.,­t1*Co, was followed through the years 's Northam] Z ­l Hood, George Gall-' Er' ' they; by Donald . po Wen.. the * Peau, the American School of their lease, Larry stepped it Aeronautics; Joseph Lyman, and the third jeneration'.01ibliA Since 1946 Larry has been the Ily Interested in. the":., 'In'jg;'f airport manager, In 1943 anoth• and, addrd his tralrilrif-g, the' -er fire levelled the original fession to Personally operate hangar (which'was a converted 'In Lar a seven. KpWs . ..a . a p barn) land destroyed 10 planes ager of �;e field e,, hqs I l4cludbig the one owned by stu' avia�lon-Oevelopdrorrj alspor dents at Smith College. [Phe re: something that Is. needed - anj built main hangar, the present accepted part of family and -1 office, and a new hangar now nese life. Each ev6nfiig, -'211 take Cam of the Increasing num. vately, owned pl4rjes j)aik!jt bar of locally owned planes. .• field'are are 'rolled .pdttucl(ed, Until a flood Washed out the Place In the main•hangapj- Connecticut River dock, the La. 1149 six of his,own,VmW441 Fleur Airport had the distinction necessary for. the of being one of the very few In ands . passenger seri the United States having the Student instruction-iodtov combined facilities of a land and adverligilik, bannersalta the water field..gliders based there;. Larry has been Interested . In Three planes are owned b) Cal Companies . who h4v9,LfQ the family airfield ever since lie they are -invaluable � `jn_ - sat was a Youngster and worked for time for their executivis the various operators, He took instruction, too, and obtained his salesmen, other pompgriias,Plarly have Larry fly A Pilot's ligense. as soon as the federal regulations would permit and Products all.g_eithwa) w en'he'wag 16 try. And.indivldpi.��'#J�e..��4 Thenh rs old. E .0 a wen,_lig. tgq? i Force tage- I_tWs.pa-engem$,jarW6 and was shuttled around th 0 getting to Boston andkNo .rOufh and ether; points various classifIcallons and tra i n. -and the jrconverj6n66.:o;;.z0� ings. He entered the cadet train. travel, Larry ha4�19undj.4t� ' Ing, program -- JUSL.. A"t-becams- -eongested -h ghwayj�CW_ :overcrowded. . . . I tE land are Ilterally.so. , After four transfers ttheI Mho"', 0 as Into 'air, � many Southern colleges for train. are using plan*e*s�-' for ; j Ing, the 0 Iner finally be ung - delivery of came a mechanic and aerial gun• traffic imposes a'! bi ner for B,24s. In 1946 he was re• age hazard d"d leased, after - ferrying' the big A'usual ' day'.. at a planes from Florida and Missis. Airport starts. with.. -a r�- r co I ttl_ Wi Od'.a Nj , .0 ind� "il"fi�,�ill�(".".�f...,.,... �nte po,�vneClUrPOT,�' %, 0 [akin to the xg �1,11` out tak an in, the lmain `WuigAr �,t S;W ently' needed parts to Toledo. And ;).k P 8' Qid then'M:f?.'Smiffi College - student i -A thp,�-p e.4. 9 %along a -'snake in a burlap Xi `;Droc 1$, bag ,for . an . exhibit 'Of - snakes in riuq , tlthe. bqt*� icelebrities. elebhti • such as ' Charles: eV bergh: and -Ruth Nichols have, jgP hal have,stilent pilots ori.their first' a A 0. -P IDO as tu j�101 r�gq.PUntry,,fl1ghtj.owhoBe first' -the X0 pie 4 19r. V tds,'are, Vhere the heck am eld,�, 4*44 a'Voymer's I311 And Larry has bagged uvo 'gee ?rq4rSay t PlOaamts'on his ftld when they It So. tba A4 ithqthermos: dew up. Wfrout' *ol his landing a oml h 'k-, ;kldgq��y Planqs,p .41ting . a;,; Unfortunately damage to eehee4:*,to, C3464�'.�arepf th too extensive to per. :_J6 and 'thifpilots ..t feating'. - an egiste There's., ;�iother flier gay, has III in the La. W, had Pri.: tlj�, -4Vr'famii Larry's older 31 tel Phyllis ho learned to fly Z)Rf7y, �, .9 I'lla the Pth &N a creT ore he'did. Jointly they owned lane`. -Which was destroyed in AW WNRX9, ye, Zryll T* the'1141194r blaze:'She taught fly.' 5 V -1v I firp; Xg AV. ;y Ulf during the war, -but now puts In �"O'nly.�'ejj&jgij ' time yearly to niph;'f;J,'SaL P., her'Commerclal and instruc. #ngs.'. At '904d ­i, UFleur Airport . has sur. WPI a-.,trad� ed.,,,t rite iko A a ;Pj1h I , - I , 94"':1 E i, , ft''gr_"Ing pains .,of avi. A#Wera c or, g,j)C0sjj0 I 104,zr, through -'the. y ars . and is Yana n woserVingi.i-a typical- commu. VVIt '-thelanding space and We in jqq .q that are jt requiredpart I IS" uAc business and pleas. iVIR .40 011Y V,The 'airport routines. happenings roX4 P Q, work and A. are all s family q! r4, env;q -on, Lar M 4, oroth and dau rl 94# cc 0 a uh six, who' re a a- 9 Dlin+­ InLr IA'al 'JanPq and the was came at anecl ner, for 13.241 leased,. after Chew are' )ort.: They , a at the LaFleur Air. siness and personal t teli'Nerthampton family-owned itot.,and tn'echanic. Tarry (hrl) 914:4. ; the hangar' mornings Y,..- � g. . There's another flier in the La. Fleur Saini]y Larry's older sister Phyllis, who learned to fly before 1}e did. Jointly they owned a'plaiut which was destroyed in the hangar blaze. She' taught fly. Ing during the war,.but. now puts In only enough time yearly to keep her commercial -and instruc. tor ratings. The LaMeur Airport has sur. vived, the growing pains of avi- ation through the ppYears and is now nity with ithe land ng spa em and services that are a required part of accepted business and pleas. ure.cflying. The airport 'routines, and' unusual happenings are all Fliart•of a day's work and family, ving—fo third generation Lar"' M wife Dorothy and daughter Judith, agefl six, who are accus. tomed to using the airlanes and welcoming airborne visitors. Ll7 0 O CU r*i CD 3 CD 4_j O a X cv w z Q J a L,J 0 L,J H C.. I z Q J H 0 z i L 0 C3_ L Q 0 0 z 00 v 0 I 0 z 3 O Q U Q v 0 Q U Q v a LL U c O H Q U O U 4_j Lil � m Q REPLACE BILLBOARD SIGN STRUCTURE. ` V SEE DETAILS SH --� /- FAA BUILDING 1 CIROSS/ 119 I I _ I _ pq TN _ RO o _ D O r :{ _ +118.5 CDO 117.0 69 " NOO.00'00'W ' I \ 87.70' h 145.55' - - ♦ ~\ o�n PROP BIT.CONC. APRO & TAXIWAYS 00 00 Lo N �' cv 22 N51-42 (10) I 19.6 , -' ----- - ----- --- - - , V - X 8 '51'hf 231 �- X, s I 11;781 SF - I 2 ' I I - t [TYP + I 1 8.6 _ i P 0 ED I 40� _ �IN9 -59.00 1 1.0� J 1',22.0 ,' -�' I 119.69 i / O ►. air 12 I;X: ,:s. N �n '�`� N ti 10'x10' - - _--�' - ' "MLS MARKINGS S BE , 120.5 IN CCORDANCE WITH F �+ + s• 119.5 •� AD SORY CIRCULAR___ -- 32.5 121.5 ,� PR P. QIT:CONC. APRON I &TAXIWAY AMENDED - _ s0oro0 0o w AMENDED------- + + 277.37' %` I _"3• "�, �? I -- / 1 R21 ; j- 119.2 20 N ,sus �_ �..._ n - - V I 0f 00' 123.1 - 42 1 1.26 - 118.0 N51 0) I i. ,59,7 5' / I i 51' x,,•187' I i' ;x, �� ;,� X37.50 9,5.37 SFro R Lj_j OPO ED i 1.07- - 1.07 -- 8 N IT HANG 123. 5 121.26 / «. ' N 5, X 121. / 2 KrUMINOUS CONCRETE TOP COURSE x 19.62 /� 11`1.5 J _ i% 1� _� �C % BASECOURSE S� �oT00-w - I L �� , � .8, � (' - ' i 1. - �F t/ / / ( MHD M2.ot.7 - DENSE -GRADED CRUSHED STOIC X f--- `✓ 146.45 -PROP. BIT.CPNC. APRON & TAXIW -'� I " -- ---- - --- ___-- - / PREPARED , __.Fig �� TYPICAL BIT. CONIC, SIDEWALK PAVING NTS - \` 'l 1. OMIT GRAVEL SUB -BASE FOR STANDARD DUTY PAVING. 122.5 8S� I '` i / 2. ALL MATERIALS AND METHODS SHALL CONFORM TO THE ` '_r3 X,2, C �1 NG PA /i•'t�1 25'R �s?s ty ti) o; X 12,.88 _ - \ / MIASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT'S "STANDARD 3. 15R IT.8Z ,--- I i / SPECIFICATIONS FOR HIGHWAYS AND BRIDGES". AS TYP. AT &L X ' 2' ' 6 i AMENDED. UW-OF-PAVNG , 2;,. t9% -UED GES t 1 4BMNDUS CONCRETE TOP 11 , !1( - - - - - - - - = - - - - - - - - - - 60 1-3/4BRMNOUS CONCRETE ENDER COURSE 2 6- BASE 11 u E �' \ / / ( MHD M2.01.7 - DENSE -GRADED CRUSHED STONE Im 019 SU8-BASE COURSE MHD Mt.oao - GRAVES eor�ow-TSE B / /\ - 1 x , nw I __ \ ' I ' 1\ / SUBCRADE x 12 \_ % ` 2O PREPARED TYPICAL BIT, CONC. HEAVY-DUTY PAVING A _ _ NTS X +a 25 /. FLOOD STORAGE CALCU MO Cj LA NS X 0 / 1 � O - ---- z 04 -- -- 1 1 1 V 1 1 10 1 1 19 1/ 2 Z I _k4_ CID O146 / 1 1 1 PAVEMENT,, MARKINGS SHALL BE r-._) __``__ _/, o IN ACCORDANCE WITH FAA ADVISORY CIRCULAR 150/53,40-1G, ` - - - AS AMENDED 2 12 X S 21.1„ - - \ x .. s- - X 1-.' 94 L"T 4E D' E'_ T \/23 " C T R I C, A NORTH AREA. 6 - No. DATE REVISION GENERAL GRADING 1. 03/07/05 REDUCED T -HANGARS CUT (CY) 2. FILL (CY) LAYOUT & GRADING CHANGES NET VOLLUME CHANGE (CY) ELEVATION RANGE SOUTH NORTH + SOUTH NORTH A 'Tf{fit'+',Sf", +=FILL, ( )=CUT 118-119 0 553 0 43 (510) 119-120 426 1121 8 1429 `, (109) 120-121 1214 1030 133 1644 (467) 121-122 839 1176 642 1181 (191) 122-123 9 639 0 458 (190) 123-124 0 4 0 4 1 (1) 123-124 0 0 0 0 1 0 BUILDINGS CUT Demolition, CY FILL New Construction. CY ELEVATION RANGE F.B.O. AIRPORT OFFICES BILL- REMODELED BOARDS F.B.O. SKYDIVING FACILITIES BILL - BOARDS 118-119 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 119-120 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 120-121 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 121-122 33 34 0 24 2 1 (40) 122-123 56 68 0 53 2 1 (67) 123-124 56 68 0 53 2 1 (67) 124-125 56 68 0 53 2 1 1 (67) SUMMARY ELEVATION RANGE GENERAL GRADING ( See Above) BUILDINGS ( See Above) NET VOLUME. CY +=Fill. ( )=Cut 118-119 (510) 0 (510) 119-120 (109) 2 (107) 120-121 (467) 3 (464) 121-122 (191) (40) (232) 122-123 (190) (67) (257) 123-124 (1) (67) (68) 124-125 0 (67) (67) NET FLOOD STORAGE LOSS/(GAIN)= (1.705) CUBIC YARDS 6 - No. DATE REVISION BY 1. 03/07/05 REDUCED T -HANGARS TEJ 2. 05/11/05 LAYOUT & GRADING CHANGES TEJ - EXISTING CONTOURS 11 PROPOSED CONTOURS + PROPOSED SPOT GRADE 119.6 A 'Tf{fit'+',Sf", SCALE '^ JE^aj, 1"=30' GRAPHIC SCALE 30 0 25 30 AM 1 inch = 30 ft. LEGEND PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE SPECIAL CONSERVANCY (SC) ZONING DISTRICT AND WITHIN THE 100 -YEAR FLOODPLAIN OF THE CONNECTICUT RIVER. THE 100 -YR FLOOD ELEVATION IS 125.0 FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL. PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND LOT SIZE INFORMATION FROM PLAN ENTITLED "PLAN OF LAND IN NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS SURVEYED FOR NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC.", BY ALMER HUNTLEY, JR & ASSOCIATES, INC., REVISED JUNE 25, 1997. BASE PLAN INFORMATION PROVIDED BY GALE ASSOCIATES, INC.. DRAWING No.G1.3, ENTITLED "GENERAL PLAN, SAFETY PLAN AND SAFETY DETAILS". INSTALL INFILTRATION SYSTEMS AT TOPOGRAPHICAL LOW POINTS AS NECESSARY. SEE DETAILS ON SHEET 4. SHEET TRIS: PROPERTY LINE NORTH AREA SETBACKS ---------- EXISTING EDGE OF Northampton, MA PAVEMENT CONSULTANTS INC. SILT FENCING 296 North aloin Street 290 Roberts Street, Suite 207 -- --- L - EXISTING CONTOURS 11 PROPOSED CONTOURS + PROPOSED SPOT GRADE 119.6 A 'Tf{fit'+',Sf", PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE SPECIAL CONSERVANCY (SC) ZONING DISTRICT AND WITHIN THE 100 -YEAR FLOODPLAIN OF THE CONNECTICUT RIVER. THE 100 -YR FLOOD ELEVATION IS 125.0 FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL. PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND LOT SIZE INFORMATION FROM PLAN ENTITLED "PLAN OF LAND IN NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS SURVEYED FOR NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC.", BY ALMER HUNTLEY, JR & ASSOCIATES, INC., REVISED JUNE 25, 1997. BASE PLAN INFORMATION PROVIDED BY GALE ASSOCIATES, INC.. DRAWING No.G1.3, ENTITLED "GENERAL PLAN, SAFETY PLAN AND SAFETY DETAILS". INSTALL INFILTRATION SYSTEMS AT TOPOGRAPHICAL LOW POINTS AS NECESSARY. SEE DETAILS ON SHEET 4. SHEET TRIS: SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NORTH AREA PROJECT AND LOCATION: NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS Northampton, MA BAYSTATE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS INC. Civil Engineers Environmental Scientists 296 North aloin Street 290 Roberts Street, Suite 207 East Longmeadow, MA 01028 East Hartford, CT 06108 BEC PROJECTNo. SHEET No. 04-041 V A 'Tf{fit'+',Sf", SCALE '^ JE^aj, 1"=30' No. ,� : ; 5? �',: DATE JAN. 2005 ` a DRAWN BY TEJ d CHECKED BY `, TEJ OF T SHTS 6+50 8+00 No. DATE REVISION BY TYPE F. LEBARON FRAME &GRATE _\ 8"0 PERF. PVC — — — � t — 1. 03/07/05 REDUCED T—HANGARS TEJ CAT. No. LF246 OR APPROVED EQUAL 6" CLEANOUT 'u ~ — _ .� 122 '�0 20 40 60 eo ,00 120 140 160 leo 200 220 240 260 '� 2. 5/11/05 REVISED NORTH X—SECTIONS TEJ — -- — — _ — ,20 - ,20 ADJUSTMENT BRICKR I PROVIDE HOODED 2'-6» 6" (2 COURSES, MAX. 6n) OUTLET FOR ALL (MIN.) 3/4" — 1 1/2" FILTER FABRIC "s0 20 40 6o so 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 "s 260 44. CATCH BASINS CRUSHED MIRAFI 14ON 7+50 .. A STONE » OR EQUAL. 6+00 124 124 2' PERFORATED 12 (TOP & SIDES) SOLID, _ 122 122 — — — -- — 122 22 I .r.. �. r I 1 I I........................ ..... _ .-. r ............. 0 20 40 6o eo , , ...................... .............. ......................................................... o0 20 , 40 160 Iso 200 220 240 260 . . ........................ .................................................................................. ............................................... t v o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 , 20 00 00 00 00000000 0 0 00 000 0000 00 SECTION THROUGH STEEL REINFORCEMENT o0 00 00 000 00 000 0CIA 0 00 000 0000 00 - 11e 11s 1 180 200 220 240 260 INFILTRATION TRENCH 0 2 0 40 6o so 100 120 40 160 . ........ .......... 7+ 00 ................. .................... .......:........... .......... NTS 5+50 124 124 MORTAR ALL—,..KOR—N—SEAL JOINTS o FLEXIBLE CONNECTOR L 8"M SDR35 PVC O 0.59 I � ?EPDM RUBBER 122 _ ` / � .,�- — — 122 122 ~' � � � — _ -- — -- 122 8"x8" TEE WYE ( �" " ) 120 ~ — ~ -r 120 120 120 J 0 8"O SDR35 PVC A lie 20 4a 60 80 ,00 ,20 140 ,80 1e0 200 220 240 280 118 o ZO 40 60 80 ,00 120 ,40 160 Iso 200 z2o 240 260 _ I �,�., fog GRAPHIC SCALE N MAINTAIN 4' MIN. ABOVE SEASONAL HIGH WATER TABLE60 0 30 60 a -o" $•-o" 8'-0• 8•-0• 8'-0" 8'-0' 4'-0• 5+00 6» ,:. :1^ :: -; y : r -` =� • r frame from• from• frome fromefrome 124 124 MIN. I —I _ 60 ft. \ » , 22 1 inch = 5 4'-0" 5 _ ^" HORIZONTAL SCALE MIN. MIN. Stringer 120 ~ ~ — 120 TYPICAL DETAIL 6 0 3 6 l u Rear access I I Rear catwalk STO RMWATER INFILTRATION SYSTEM '°°°� I � � � � '� ,20 "° '� iso 200 220 240 260 leo 300 320 340 36o Seo 400 420 440 4ao ,� 500 520 540 560 I do NTS '�� roc• 4+50 1 inch = 6 ft. TO BE INSTALLED AS NECESSARY TO PROMOTE ; 124 124 VERTICAL SCALE RECHARGE OF STORM RUNOFF. $ $ , ---- --- —'-- 122—�!___�-"� 122 Rear catwalk 1/4' cap plate 120 120 '� — 1 61 I I i (welded� pipe at t' p l 118 118 Front catwalk 20"0 x .250" torsion pipe 0 20 40 80 80 100 120 140 160 ,80 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 WSK9 front ledger Column connection 4+00 124 124 122 122 �e 120 ���— �► 120 Column Ladder _ Rungs - 3/4'0 rod, 12' c/c— = Stringers - 2 1/2"x 3/8' borstock, 16" in. to in. 1,8 ,16 Standouts - 2 1/2'x 3/8" borstock, 8•-0" max. spacing 0 20 40 80 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 3+50 (Ladder to mast OSHA stondords) Column pipe 3+50 (36"0) 124 124 124 124 122 122 Slope --- T-- away r column 122 �� 122 _ — 120 T 120 AGrade 0 20 40 6o 8o 100 120 140 1Q0 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 3+00 v� , j • ar / 120 1 �' 120 \ I I ' �J1MG TO BE / i �/ 118 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 ISO iso 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 t 18 28 ADMEM AM FLOOD-fROMW 128 AM 10M AS AWKW FJLI P ' ' 3+00 ,26 26 11 . � M •i I I 124 - - - 24 0 " �.� 124 -------- Concrete foundation v d \ 14 I PROP. m - -- - -- - --- -- -, - -- -- -- - '- --- - - - �� � � •' M 122 � - - -- HANGAR 122 22 1 I + ! �� �.� �.► �� _ _ -� — \ i e • • 120 120 �..r�! 20 P i_.000� ---� S • 0 20 40 60 8o 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 I a • I 1 t 8 0 20 40 60 8o 100 120 140 ISO 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600 620 J / 2+50 � '� 2+50 124 124 Footing 128 128 diometor 122 I � _ _ _ _ (see schedule)4. r� _ ._-------------------- '22 ELEVATION ,28 I ,26 EX. 120 120 BILLBOARD REPLACEMENT DETAIL L 124 R I(,�r7fY ,M�!"�"' 124 A �. I 0 20 40 60 eo 100 120 140 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 No NTS HANGAR 122 ' i I 122 l REFERENCE: PLAN PREPARED BY RENAISSANCE 120 — 2+00 _--- 120 MEDIA GROUP, INC.; PHOENIX, AZ, No. G-7032,- 124 } ) } '24 DATED 05/06/04. 118 ,16 0 20 40 60 so 100 120 140 ,60 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 300 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 122 - - ��-------�_.__.,—_� _ 122 2+00 120 �- — / - - 120 128 128 0 20 40 6o 8o 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 I EX 128 I HAND 126 PROP1+50 ,24 pip HANGAR (TO ) 124 HANGAR / 124 - 124 122 / / / I 122 122 -,� --�_�"'� �--_---.-.• _ ___—_�.---�� _ t� 120 `—�.•—�'�"'.�� ,20 SHEET TITLE: 120 - _ r. -..► 120 Ila, 0 20 40 60 0o 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 SW 5601 B 18 0 20 40 bo 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600 620 640 660 680 700 720 740 760 780 8°o 820 18 SITE DEVELOPMENT P N 1+50 DETAILS 128 ,28 PROJECT ANO LOCATION: 1 +004 EX 36" MINIMUM LENGTH FENCE POST, ,2s HANGAR ,26 10' MAXIMUM CENTER TO 1 128 128 CENTER DRIVEN A MINIMUM OF 12 INTO �• (TO REMAIN) 4. E>� s � a s `�°U"° 124 ,�;R ''"� 1 ,24 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT t I F H.O. I I HANGAR 1 , 26 I 124 1 ' IPROP. 1 (TO _' 21.7* I HANGAR PROPR ,2a GEOTEXTILEUM HEIGHT of ,� , — —' �� FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS I IFF - 121.70 I 1 FF - 121.70 FF - 121.70 . ' I I 6" MINIMUM DEPTH IN 120 122 GROUND _ _ _ _ — — — — — Northampton,MA _ — — — — — — — lie 0 20 40 60 8o 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 r� 56018 120 ��.� - - 120 �� FLOW ,1s 1,e PERSPECTIVE VIEW 36" MINIMUM FENCE 1+00 0 20 40 bo eo 100 120 140 180 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 380 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600 620 640 No 680 700 720 740 760 POST LENGTH BAYSTATE ENVIRONMENTAL FILTER �� �� R �' CONSULTANTS INC. CLOTH FENCE POST SECTION HANGAR 0+50 FLOW MINIMUM 20" '� 128 (TO REMAIN) 128 . 128 128 UNDISTURBED Civil Engineers Environmental Scientists S �+ EX. EMBED GEOTIDMLE A MIN, 126 PROP. 126 296 North Wain Street 290 Roberts Street, Suite 207 126 t HANGAR 1 I HANGAR 126 TOP VIEW OF 6" vERncALLY INTO FENCE POST DRIVEN A HANGAR 1 East Longm dowA., MA 01028 East Hartford, CT 06108 I (REMOVE) 1 (� REMAIN) 1 POSTS THE GROUND THE GROUNUM OF D 12" INTO ' I ; ;; BEC PROJECT No. SHEET No. 124 I I . FF = 121.71 1 PROP PROP 124 HANGAR — — ` HANGAR 124 � t: � r.{ FF - 121.70 1 HAMM 124 FF - 121.70 - � � ��C TH : 04-0418 1 I I � 121.70 CROSS SECTION ,� ' I 122 E , ^ �y SCALE ,� ,� SECTION A ` / JR.VERT. 1"=6' • I — — _ _ — — — — STAPLE / r; J E N K I'V � •. t� —... — -- — , — _ ......... �.,........r....� STAPLE 120 / / 120 =� ,. _ — / No. �3�353 .� HOR. 1 "=60' 120 --"' 120 JOINING TWO ADJACENT SILT `"----+—^—~------ — ' "r DATE tts _ � Ile .9J �c,�T� .�`'. � JAN. 2005 0 20 40 6o so 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 380 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600 820 640 860 880 700 720 740 760 FENCE SECTIONS 0 20 40 80 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 580 ` '�` ° TEJ BY SOUTH AREA SILT FENCE DETAIL NORTH AREA CROSS SECTIONS NTS CROSS SECTIONS ` CHECKED TEJ BY 4 ��_ OF SHTS s q� h\ / Planning Board - Decision City of Northampton File No.: PL -2001-0072 APPLICATION TYPE: SUBMISSION DATE: Special Permit/Site Plan—Planning 8 1 312212001 Applicant's Name: Owner's Name: Surveyor's Name: Date: April 30, 2001 NAME: Northampton Airport NAME: NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC. COMPANY NAME: ADDRESS: Old Ferry Road ADDRESS: P O BOX 221 ADDRESS: TOWN: NORTHAMPTON STATE: MA ZIP CODE: 01060 TOWN: NORTHAMPTON STATE: MA Z,IP CODE: 01061 TOWN: STATE: ZIP CODE: PHONE NO.: FAX NO.: PHONE NO.: (413) 5847980 0 FAX NO f PHONE NO.: FAX NO.: EMAIL ADDRESS: EMAIL ADDRESS: EMAIL ADDRESS: Site Information: STREET NO. SITE ZONING: 152 CROSS PATH RD Sc TOWN: SECTION OF BYLAW: NORTHAMPTON MA 01060 54 MAP: BLOCK: LOT: MAP DATE: ACTION TAKEN: 25 1 015 I 001 Approved NATURE OF PROPOSED WORK: Renewal of special permit to allow outdoor commercial recreation at the airport HARDSHIP: CONDITION OF APPROVAL: See below. FINDINGS: In Granting the Special Permit, the Planning Board found: A. The requested use for outdoor commercial recreation protects adjoining premises against seriously detrimental uses because the number and size of events allowed under this permit will be limited to no more than eight events per calendar year, of which no more than two shall have attendance of up to seven thousand five hundred (7,500) people. The remaining events shall have less than three thousand (3,000) people. The applicant has made provisions for crowd control, traffic management, notification of abutters and compliance with the noise regulations in the Zoning Ordinance as outlined in the Special Permit application and in information ,presented during the public hearing. B. The requested use will promote the convenience and safety of vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site and on adjacent streets and minimize traffic impacts on the streets and roads in the area because the applicant will be required to submit a traffic management plan which has been approved by the Northampton Police Department to the Building Inspector in advance of each event Also, conditions attached to this permit prohibit the obstruction of public roads or parking on public roads or unaffiliated private property. C. The requested use will promote a harmonious relationship of structures and open spaces to the natural landscape, existing buildings and other community assets in the area because none of the proposed events will permanently alter the natural GeoTIVIS®1998 Des Lauriers & Associates, Inc. Planning Board - Decision City of Northampton File No.: PL -2001-0072 Date: April 30, 2001 landscape or existing buildings. D. The requested use will not overload, and will mitigate adverse impacts on, the City's resources, including the City's water supply and distribution system, sanitary and storm sewage collection and treatment systems, fire protection, streets and schools. E. The requested use meets any special regulations set forth in the Zoning Ordinance under Section 10.11. F. The requested use bears a positive relationship to the public convenience or welfare by providing an additional venue for outdoor commercial recreation such as craft fairs, musical entertainment, etc. The use will not unduly impair the integrity of character of the district or adjoining zones, and the use will not be detrimental to the health, morals, or general welfare. The use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Ordinance. G. The requested use will promote City planning objectives to the extent possible and will not adversely affect those objectives, as defined in City master or study plans adopted under M.G.L Chapter 41, Section 81-C and D. In addition, in reviewing the Site Plan submitted with the Special Permit, the Planning Board found that the site plan complied with the following technical performance standards: 1. No new curb cuts are requested. Pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular traffic movement have been separated on site to the extent possible. The following conditions were imposed on this permit Northampton Airport, Inc., Special Permit for Outdoor Entertainment Events Special Permit Conditions The Special Permit application and the applicant's narrative are hereby incorporated by reference. As conditions of granting a Special Permit for Outdoor Entertainment Use the Planning Board hereby establishes the following requirements: Enforceability: All conditions specified herein must be complied with at all times. If the conditions of this permit are violated, the Special Permit shall become null and void. Enforcement; if necessary, shall be through complaint filed with the Zoning Enforcement Officer, the Building Commissioner. Review period or renewal date: This Special Permit shall lapse If, after two years from the date of issuance, the applicant has not submitted a renewal application and received the Planning Board approval for another two-year term. The renewal procedure shall follow the Special Permit application process. Specific concerns to be reviewed include all issues related to the instant conditions. Number of Events: As the applicant has represented in the application, there shall be no more than eight events per calendar year, of which no more than two ("Major Events) shall have attendance of seven thousand five hundred (7,500) maximum. All remaining "Small Events" shall have attendance of three thousand (3,000) maximum. No combination of events shall ever exceed attendance of seven thousand five hundred, and no combination of "Small Events' shall exceed attendance of three thousand. Attendance/Crowd Control: There shall be advance ticket sales only for Major Events. The audience shall be restricted to the fenced/secured area for Major events. There shall be one time entry, no re-entry allowed, for large events (Attendees shall not be allowed to re-enter the event grounds after leaving.). Ticket prices shall include any parking fees. For Major Events, event publicity shall include notice that ticket sales will not be available the day of the event. The applicant shall take measures to keep the audience out of the fields for all events. GeoTMS®1998 Des Lauriers & Associates, Inc. �u Planning Board - Decision City of Northampton File No.: PL -2001-0072 Date: April 30, 2001 Alcohol. The applicant shall comply with all recommendations of the Northampton Police Department and the License Commission with regard to alcohol. Notification: The applicant shall provide notice of upcoming events to residents of Riverbank Road, Cross Path Road, Fair Street and Old Ferry Road by mailing notice/a printed schedule of events by May 1st of each year, said notice to include the date of the events, day of the week, time (e.g., 11 AM-7PM), expected attendance, and contact numbers for complaints or concerns. The applicant shall provide notice to the Northampton Police Department, Northampton Fire Department and Emergency Medical Services forty-five days in advance for Major Events and fifteen days in advance for Small Events. Notice to the Police Department shall include a request for the development, review and approval of a traffic management plan, and prior approval of the Fire Department will be required for events with anticipated attendance over four thousand. License Responsibility. N shall be the applicants responsibility to ensure that all other necessary permits for the Entertainment Events are in place, including but not limited to the securing of appropriate permits from the Building and Health Departments by/for all participants and vendors. Traffic (and Parking) Management/Event Security.- The ecurity:The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Northampton police with regard to traffic. The applicant shall submit a security and traffic control plan which has been approved by the Northampton Police Department to the Zoning Enforcement Officer - the Building Commissioner - in advance of each event All public roads are to remain unobstructed at all times to residents and farmers. There shall be no parking for airport entertainment events allowed on public roads or unaffiliated private property. Aggressive towing shall be implemented, if necessary, at the expense of the applicant Noise: Noise levels from entertainment events shall comply with the environmental standards in the Northampton Zoning Ordinance, to be measured at the property line and lowered if too loud. This shall be self -monitored by the applicant with enforcement by the Zoning Enforcement Officer. Trash: All trash must be picked up within twenty-four hours. Coordination of Events to Avoid Conflicts: The applicant shall make all efforts to avoid conflicts [with events taking place at the fairgrounds or activities at Sheldon Reid] in the scheduling of events. The Northampton Police Department shall make the final decision when there is a conflict in the scheduling of events. COULD NOT DEROGATE BECAUSE: FILING DEADLINE: MAILING DATE: HEARING CONTINUED DATE: DECISION DRAFT BY: APPEAL DATE: 3/22/2001 41512001 votes to 4126/2001 Paul Diemand REFERRALS IN DATE: HEARING DEADLINE DATE: HEARING CLOSE DATE: FINAL SIGNING BY: APPEAL DEADLINE: 3/29/2001 5126/2001 4/12/2001 4/12/2001 5/20/2001 FIRST ADVERTISING DATE: HEARING DATE: VOTING DATE: DECISION DATE: 3/29/2001 4/12/2001 4/12/2001 4/30/2001 ECOND ADVERTISING DATE: r4/&2001 HEARING TIME: VOTING DEADLINE: DECISION DEADLINE: 8:35 PM 8/24/2001 8/24/2001 MEMBERS PRESENT: VOTE: Keith Wilson votes to Grant George Kohout votes to Grant M. Sanford Weil, Jr. votes to Grant Paul Diemand votes to Grant Daniel Yacuzzo votes to Grant Kenneth Jodrie votes to Grant Andrew Crystal votes to Grant MOTION MADE BY: SECONDED BY: VOTE COUNT: DECISION: Andrew Crystal I Paul Diemand 1 7 1 Approved MINUTES OF MEETING: On April 12, 2001 at 10:20 P.M., Yacuzzo opened the Request by the Northampton Airport, Inc. for a Renewal of a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval under Sections 5.2, 10. 10, 10.11 & 10.13 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow outdoor commercial recreation at the Northampton Airport, also known as Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1, 15-19, 53 & 71. GeoTMS01998 Des Lauriers & Associates, Inc. i Planning Board - Decision City of Northampton File No.: PL -2001-0072 Date: April 30, 2001 Yacuzzo read the legal notice. Dick Gusto of the Northampton Airport, Inc. presented the application. He explained to the members of the Board that he would like to renew his Special Permit which was granted June 10, 1999 with the some conditions. There are no changes necessary, said Giusto. Yacuzzo read the comments from the Northampton Police Department. Well said that there should not be any selling of tickets for any event on the airport property. Giusto agreed. Yacuzzo asked if there were any comments from the public. No one spoke. Crystal moved to close the public healing. Diemand seconded. Crystal moved to approve the Renewal of a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval under Sections 5.2, 10. 10, 10.11 & 10.13 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow outdoor commercial recreation at the Northampton Airport Diemand seconded. The motion passed unanimously 7.0. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 11, I, Angela Dion, Board Secretary, hereby certify that I caused copies of this decision to be mailed, postage -prepaid, to the applicant and owner on April 30, 2001. GeoTMS®1998 Des Lauriers & Associates, Inc. Planning Board - Decision City of Northampton Fle No.: PL -2001-0072 Date: April 12, 2001 Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws (MGL), Chapter 40A, Section 11, no Special Permit, or any extension, modification or renewal thereof, shall take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that twenty days have elapsed after the decision has been filed, or if such an appeal has been filed that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Hampshire County registry of Deeds or Land Court, as applicable and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of title. The fee for such recording or registering shall be paid by the owner or applicant. It is the owner or applicant's responsibility to pick up the certified decision from the City Clerk and record it at the Registry of Deeds. The Northampton Planning Board hereby certifies that a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval has been GRANTED and that copies of this decision and all plans referred to in it have been filed with the Planning Board and the City Clerk. Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 15, notice is hereby given that this decision is filed with the Northampton City Clerk on the date below. If anyone wishes to appeal this action, an appeal must be filed pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 17, with the Hampshire County Superior Court or the Northampton District Court and notice of said appeal filed with the City Clerk within twenty days (20) of the date of that this decision was filed with the City Clerk. Applicant: Northampton Airport, Inc. DECISION DATE: April 12, 2001 DECISION FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: 1 April 30, 2001 -2-0, 1 0. March 27, 2001 �r PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT • CITY OF NORTHAMPTON City Hall • 2 i o Main Street, Room ii • Nortbampton, MA o i o60-3 t 98 • (413)587-1266 • E=587-1264 Wayne Peiden, Director -email: planning@city.nortbampton.ma.us - internet:wwwnortbamptonplanning.org Richard Giusto Northampton Airport, Inc. P.O. Box 221 Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. Giusto: The application of the Northampton Airport, Inc. for Renewal of a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval granted on June 10, 1999 to allow outdoor commercial recreation at the Northampton Airport under Sections 5.2, 10.10 and 10.11 of the Zoning Ordinance for , property located at Old Ferry Road has been accepted by the Northampton Planning Board, and the Public Hearing will be conducted at its meeting scheduled for Thursday, April 12 at 8:35 P.M. in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton. A representative(s) of the Northampton Airport, Inc. is required to attend this meeting to explain the application and discuss the merits of the application. Approximately two weeks before the Public Hearing, a legal notice announcing the meeting will be published in the Daily Hampshire Gazette (copy attached). All the abutters within three hundred feet of the property will receive a copy of this notice in the mail. If you have any questions, you can reach me at the Office of Planning and Development, City Hall, Telephone 587-1262. Sincerely, , Angela Dion Board Secretary Enclosure cc: Ted Hebert, P.O. Box 878, Northampton, MA 01061 Lisa Fusco, P.O. Box 878, Northampton, MA 01061 Jon Plassmann, P.O. Box 878, Northampton, MA 01061 planning board - conservation commission - zoning board o f appeals - bousing partnership - redevelopment autyority - nortbampton GIS economic development - community development - bistoric district commission - bistorical commission - central business arcbitecture origin aiprinted on recNciedpaper PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT • CITY OF NORTHAMPTON CitN Hall • 2i o Main street, Room ii • Nortbampton, MA o i o60-3198 • 4131587-1266 • Fax: 587-1264 Wayne Feiden, Director -email: plann ing@city.nortbam pton.ma.Hs • in ternet:wwwnortbamptonplanning org NORTHAMPTON PLANNING BOARD LEGAL NOTICE The Northainuton Planning Board will hold a Public Hearing at 7:00 P.M. on Thursday, April 12, 2001 in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, MA, at which time Public Hearings will be conducted on the following: 7:45 P.M. — Request by James Powers for a Special Permit with Site Plan under Sections 6.12, 6.13, & 10.10 of the Zoning Ordinance to create two flag lots with a common driveway for property located at 109 Glendale Road, also known as Assessor's Map 42, Parcel 77. 8:15 P.M. — Request by the Trustees of Edwards Church for a Special Permit with Site Plan under Sections 6.2 & 10.10 of the Zoning Ordinance to construct a new addition for property located at 297 Main Street, also known as Assessor's Map 311), Parcel 112. 8:35 P.M. — Request by the Northampton Airport, Inc. for a Renewal of a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval under Sections 5.2, 10. 10, 10.11 & 10.13 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow outdoor commercial recreation at the Northampton Airport, also known as Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1, 15-19, 53 & 71. 9:15 P.M. — Request by Wzorek Family Investment Trust for Approval of Preliminary Subdivision Plans under the Subdivision Control Law and the Rules and Regulations Governing the Subdivision of Land in the City of Northampton, Massachusetts, for property located off of Burts Pit Road and Westhampton Road, also known as Northampton Assessor's Map 36, Parcels 71 & 74. PUBLISH: March 29, 2001 and April 5, 2001. Office of Planning and Development, Account # 71350 Room 11, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, MA 01060 planning board • conservation commission • zoning board o f appeals • housing partnership • redevelopment autbority • northampton GIS economic development • communitvvdevelopment • historicdistrictcommission • bistoricaIcommission • central businessarcbitecture original printedon ruNcled paper 9. 6 co z a u O O C) O O b b O N O O b b b 0 O O p 0 0 0 0 0 b -- 0 0 0 0 O tl � O O O z 0 0 �, z Z 0 0 o 0 0 z p z A 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 �► wE~NHE~z�:w o�z���z ¢ o a�z z z p z z z� O 0a� x A Q 3 as w w w z_z_ _z z_ 0a�¢w¢�G�OGOOGOOGOOGOO�a��U�a O a, a, a, 1%0vii O O O O 1%0 oM -- vl N N N N vl M a a a a -- -- oo -- ¢ 00lozuUUU z z u u u w > > > x x x x a m m mm� m � G4 z z z z W W a z� aaa¢1:40000aa¢A ov��r3r3o�r''��F0 0Hz aoWz ¢¢�CIO 00 � � OO N c�! fyi c�! fyi a a � iaW1 coOGO x 4 4 4 z z z z �+ p� a aaaa�nap¢gp¢g3a �p¢q� U N U U U U vl U R'i R'i U O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N m Ti, U w N . . CNn VNi VNi VNi VNi VNi VNi VNi VNi VNi VNi VNi VNi VNi VNi VNi VNi VNi VNi "O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N A O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o J Ctn to > N // poPO O 70 7d 7d 70 H O 0 0 0 0O W O O� G z z Z vOy a a a a a vaa ay � .c >>� N �O a O N IN00 400000 7d 7d 7d 7dy 7d PO °� Z�y5�o��r tz o�,�a00000�rrr�� zzzzz-c Z H r a a a a ai i i m con, C-cncncnM R.PO �0 000000cn c t7o C 7d rd 7d 7d 7dH M C C C R° z y ,._ ,d H H H H to n n a a z o a a r� H r� ON O O O O O �0 17 =f =f N `"' O o�000000zd MX y G 7d >C >C >C X k N N N �'1 IM -1 N Z a o Ox tti7iy y O O O z O H H H H tr1 v' �qd Hz rr7d7d7d7d�zzzz0.no O d � z � a � y O r" O z H tr1 7d "� r � �z o� o°00000 15 z Zy z z z z z o -.3 0 0 O O H o p o HO z z z z z U4 p z — — — O J� J� O °CD CD CD J� z p o 0 0 °o` O o 0 0 °O` o o 0 0 opo z O ONo O o 10D, 0� O o� o o o o O O N O O p O a y y a 5-� vv � II � H O ~ 0 O zzz�-moo 00o z z zW �0000 o� +rte aG HHzw1:4w H o 00001:� 14 0.4 zzzz o0A a >3wwiwiwi�z_z_z_z`"zwwi N N N Fl, (1! N N N N V] 3 p PLO w Q 7a U o � O O O Okn v o -- kn N N N kn M a a 0 0 0 z U U U U 000 � U QQFFF a� a>>> w F F F xxxx w 'n0000 ~P� zzzz04 o Wa Sil aorn H Q a E-p H> Q a rnrnrn0 0000a Wao ry� O Gq Gq 4 4 4 z y a a a Q Q Q 3 Q Q Q Q � A a� > N b C) POG a°G u V N d U N U U Ukn U V 7a 7a U b - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ �O O O O O O O O O O ~ ~ ~ C O O O O O o a� M oo � %,0 O oo �o ON ~ � O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N \ IH O O O C O e 40 °�000��o z000000 H H o z zz°z° o0 0 1 0A a zo zo zo W O O O O O> 0 p" www v na na na na na U W3 M. pr a s o"o 1+ Q W � Q OppV U U U U Wz >>> W H H H H zzzzaz a a a Q x O O O O Q z z o x F y Qza�xx Q� c00�°zz°Ozz°°��� 1:04 1:04 U O 0>> w U U U vii U Z U ti ti ti U O - � O O O O O O O O O O O O O O cn 00O n ON 00 �o -- N O MaP a 5 p aAc-/ /,5- 25-056-001 S' 25-056-001 BOROWSKI CHESTER J & NANCY E 5 HENRY STREET NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 25-071-001 DAVE'S ELECTRIC 40 MOUNTAIN RD NORTH HATFIELD, MA 01066 25-071-004 WEEBER CHARLES H III 108 NO VALLEY RD PELHAM, MA 01002-9729 25-071-007 BENOIT MARK 76 BLOKLAND DR LONGMEADOW, MA 01106 25-071-010 SURNER BENJAMIN JR & MARK E BE 3640 MAIN ST SPRINGFIELD, MA 01107 25-071-013 SURNER BENJAMIN S JR & STEPHEN 3640 MAIN ST SPRINGFIELD, MA 01107 25-071-016 SURNER BENJAMIN A JR & STEPHEN 3640 MAIN ST SPRINGFIELD, MA 01107 25-071-019 SURNER BENJAMIN A JR & STEPHEN 3640 MAIN ST SPRINGFIELD, MA 01107 25-071-022 ARMSTRONG ROBERT D & SANDRA BOX 76, SHEPHERD RD BUCKLAND, MA 01338 25-071-025 KEEFE FRANK J JR & 11 BOFAT HILL RD WILLIAMSBURG, MA 01096 25-045-001 BOROWSKI BERNARD S & IRENE T 26 WILLIAMS STREET NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 25-071-002 WHITE KEVIN & FRANK J TORRE 12 BARRETT PL NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 25-071-005 MELLING VINCENT J 88 RICK DR FLORENCE, MA 01062 25-071-008 BENOIT MARK 76 BLOKLAND DR LONGMEADOW, MA 01106 25-071-011 SURNER BENJAMIN JR & STEPHEN G 3640 MAIN ST SPRINGFIELD, MA 01107 25-071-014 SURNER BENJAMIN A JR & STEPHEN 3640 MAIN ST SPRINGFIELD, MA 01107 25-071-017 SURNER BENJAMIN A JR & STEPHEN 3640 MAIN ST SPRINGFIELD, MA 01107 25-071-020 SURNER BENJAMIN A JR & STEPHEN 3640 MAIN ST SPRINGFIELD, MA 01107 25-071-023 EASTMAN KEVIN B & MIKAL WEISS 135 MAIN ST NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 25-071-026 ON THE WING LLC 132 FOMER RD SOUTHAMPTON, MA 01073 25-015-001 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC. P0BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 25-071-003 PERLMAN DENIS 1 KING ST NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 25-071-006 ALLCROFT ROGER 69 ADAMS RD HAYDENVILLE, MA 01039 25-071-009 BENOIT MARK 76 BLOKLAND DR LONGMEADOW, MA 01106 25-071-012 SURNER BENJAMIN A JR & STEPHEN 3640 MAIN ST SPRINGFIELD, MA 01107 25-071-015 SURNER BENJAMIN A JR & STEPHEN 3640 MAIN ST SPRINGFIELD, MA 01107 25-071-018 SURNER BENJAMIN A JR & STEPHEN 3640 MAIN ST SPRINGFIELD, MA 01107 25-071-021 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC. P.O. BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 25-071-024 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC RIVER RD LEEDS, MA 01053 1 i j r � '. ,i Y -r City of Northamr lon, Massachusetts Office of PlannNig and Development City Hail • 210 Mr.in Street Northampton, w',A 01060 • (413) 586-6950 • Community and economic Development • Conservation • Historic Preservation • Planning Board* Zoning Board of Appeals f6eo i-7— T6 f►{LtYG; 6E�i D �' ��`'t'��-loll Special Permit Issued by Planning Board Map I. D.1;2��-� File Date Submitted_J)% OPD Staff Review for fee and for completeness �- and for B.I. signature Planner Review Set up public file folder Legal Notice Gazette, (Notice 7 and 14 days before hearing) Legal Notice Posted si q/gq Agenda Posted Letter to Owner -1111-?-)q? Letter to Abutters/Towns Copy to BI 4-7 t917 Copy to DPW .j?�q�/ Copy to'BOH Copy to C.C. Copy to Fire Dept._/�� Copy to P.B. members Planning Board Hearing Planning Board Decision gq' Decision filed with City Clerk !//5-19? Decision mailed to: -7/157/ 9f Owner/Abutters/Towns Decision to DPW Decision to BI__ Permit entered on computer ?1-ig Decision filed O.P.D. -7/�°)K (Memorex: PLAN. BD\PBINSTRU 4/3/92) HAMPSHIRE, FRANKLIN, AND HAMPDEN AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY POST OFFICE BOX 305 NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS 01061-0305 VOICE: (413) 584-2237 WWW.3000NTYFAIR.COM FAX. -(413)586-1297 0 0d** q f=;;;11 tl j Ql0 j}o9n114, 2000 Ir�l� Mr. Daniel J. Yacuzzo, Chairman Office of Planning & Development City of Northampton City Hall 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Dan, Members of the Executive Committee of the Three County Fair and I, met today with Dick Guisto and Tony Long regarding the July 8, 2000 Country & Western event that is being held at the airport. The meeting was amiable and our concerns regarding fireworks were eased. Dick and Tony have agreed to tone down the fireworks so that there are not any loud noises and to stage the fireworks at the far end of the airport property away from the Fairgrounds. They will provide the event manager of the 4-11 Fair, which will take place that same weekend, with a telephone number to reach them should there be any problem during the event. We will remain in close communication regarding this and future events. Manager cc: Capt. Michael Wall Dick Guisto AMA 1 W 1' i J 1I 4�r v'1p.O. BOm ZZI F j,�M_pTOF, lllA 0-r06I .fly To: The Northampton Poli k e Department, Fire Department, Lic6rtse Commission, Board of Health, Building Inspector, City Council_& The following is a detailed description of an upcoming event to be held at the Northampton Airport. The purpose for forwarding this to your attention is in the hopes you may provide us with any necessary applications or permits, relative to your department, for this event to take place. If there are no applications or permits required any friendly suggestions would certainly be welcomed as well. Our goal is host an event everyone can enjoy with the least, if any, negative impact on the neighbors. Your assistance in achieving this goal is appreciated. Details: On Saturday July 81h, 2000 the Northampton Airport will host the "WPVQ Country Barnstormin Concert". This is a one day event with gates opening at 11AM. Music starts at Noon and the last act will be done no later then 9.30PM. The day will begin at 6:30AM with a large hot air balloon launch and end by 10 - 10:15PM with a fireworks display. We expect 7500 people in attendance. There will be food sold by vendors as well as beer, soda, water and juices available. Other vendors will include: tethered hot air balloon rides, a rock climbing wall and the Gyro space ride and some retailers, i.e. clothes, & CD's. We are aware of and have already secured, or are in the process of securing, the following safety and permit steps: Beer Sales: We have taken out the application for a short term, wine & malt liquor license and will be purchasing an insurance policy with at least $300,000 per occurrence coverage. We shall be employing trained servers. Beer will only be allowed in certain areas where "wrist bands" must be worn. Wrist bands will be available only after a proper ID has been shown. Security & Safety: Capt Wall has been advised, upon his recommendation we will hire the required off duty police officers plus 15 Sheriff's, two State Troopers & private security. We shall request the presence of the Fire Dep. with a truck as well as a police cruiser. The NPD will be charged with security. A first aid tent will be set up. Traffic & Parking: The hired NPD officers shall be in charge of traffic. Parking will be limited to only Airport property. Handicapped parking will be available. There will be 10 parking attendants responsible for directing parking and keeping the flow steady. We will take every necessary precaution to insure little or no inconvenience in traffic or parking throughout the neighborhood. Food Vendors: �✓ Each vendor is a licensed restaurant. Each tent will be equipper/ with refrigeration. All grills will be gas powered. Vendors are advised to bring a fire extinguisher. Facilities for cleaning & washing hands will be available. Ever Sound: Every possible precaution to reduce sound throughout the neighborhood is being taken. We have hired a professional sound company to supply the best quality of sound at the lowest possible levels. The stage and speakers will al/ be facing out towards the mountain and will be placed directly in front of the two large hangers. This placement should all but eliminate any sound problems. A special phone line will be open all day to report any sound complaints. We have area Fireworks: already obtained the application for a fireworks display. We will be hiring a licensed and experienced company to be responsible for the entire show. We expect the show to begin around 9:30 and end no later then I0:15PM. As it is the Fourth of July we are excited to offer this to all of Northampton. Trash, Sanitary & Clean up: We have already hired a company that will provide us with trash and recycling bins. The same company shall dispose of the trash. A crew will be hired to clean UP the area. 20 "port -o -potties" will be on site Miscellaneous: Every vendor, sponsor and company involved are all experienced in their rields with trained staff and insurance. A licensed electrician will be on hand during set up and the day of the event. The entire event area will be fenced off and tickets will be sold in advance to limit attendance at 7500. This is a Country & Western concert with a strong emphasis on entire families attending. While we do not anticipate many problems, we are taking every possible precaution to protect both the concert go'ers and the neighbors and to insure a successful event. Whenever Possible we are using non profit groups for assistance and in return making generous donations to them. For example: we have arranged for the Honor Court to provide a staff and we are working on securing the Red Cross for hrst aid. Again, if you notice anything missing, whether required or just suggested, please notify me. Thank you for your attention. l hope to see you all on July 8TH! 584-7980 r Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall a 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 a (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 • EMAIL planning®city.northampton.ma.us *Conservation Commission -Historical Commission -Planning Board • Housing Partnership -Zoning Board of Appeals DECISION OF NORTHAMPTON PLANNING BOARD APPLICANT: Richard Guisto Northampton Airport, Inc. ADDRESS: P.O. Box 221 Northampton, MA 01061 OWNER: Northampton Airport, Inc. ADDRESS: P.O. Box 221 Northampton, MA 01061 RE LAND OR BUILDINGS IN NORTHAMPTON AT: Old Ferry Road MAP AND PARCEL NUMBERS: MAP 25 PARCEL 15-19,53 & 71 Ata meeting conducted on June 10, 1999, the Northampton Planning Board unanimously voted 5:0 to grant the request of Richard Guisto for a SPECIAL PERMIT WITH SITE PLAN APPROVAL under the provisions of Sections 5.2, 10.10 and 10.11 in the Northampton Zoning Ordinance to allow outdoor commercial recreation at the Northampton Airport. Planning Board Members present were: Vice Chair Daniel J. Yacuzzo, Kenneth Jodrie, Anne Romano, M. Sanford Weil, Jr. and Associate Member Alton Neal. In Granting the Special Permit, the Planning Board found: A. The requested use for outdoor commercial recreation protects adjoining premises against seriously detrimental uses because the number and size of events allowed under this permit will be limited to no more than eight events per calendar year, of which no more than two shall have attendance of up to seven thousand five hundred people. The remaining events shall have less than three thousand people. The applicant has made provisions for crowd control, traffic management, notification of abutters and compliance with the noise regulations in the Zoning Ordinance as outlined in the Special Permit application and in information presented during the public hearing. 1 ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER B. The requested use will promote the convenience and safety of vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site and on adjacent streets and minimize traffic impacts on the streets and roads in the area because the applicant will be required to submit a traffic management plan which has been approved by the Northampton Police Department to the Building Inspector in advance of each event. Also, conditions attached to this permit prohibit the obstruction of public roads or parking on public roads or unaffiliated private property. C. The requested use will promote a harmonious relationship of structures and open spaces to the natural landscape, existing buildings and other community assets in the area because none of the proposed events will permanently alter the natural landscape or existing buildings. D. The requested use will not overload, and will mitigate adverse impacts on, the City's resources, including the City's water supply and distribution system, sanitary and storm sewage collection and treatment systems, fire protection, streets and schools. E. The requested use meets any special regulations set forth in the Zoning Ordinance under Section 10.11. F. The requested use bears a positive relationship to the public convenience or welfare by providing an additional venue for outdoor commercial recreation such as craft fairs, musical entertainment, etc. The use will not unduly impair the integrity of character of the district or adjoining zones, and the use will not be detrimental to the health, morals, or general welfare. The use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Ordinance. G. The requested use will promote City planning objectives to the extent possible and will not adversely affect those objectives, as defined in City master or study plans adopted under M.G.L. Chapter 41, Section 81-C and D. In addition, in reviewing the Site Plan submitted with the Special Permit, the Planning Board found that the site plan complied with the following technical performance standards: 1. No new curb cuts are requested. 2. Pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular traffic movement have been separated on site to the extent possible. 2 The following conditions were imposed on this permit: Northampton Airport, Inc., Special Permit for Outdoor Entertainment Events Special Permit Conditions The Special Permit application and the applicant's narrative are hereby incorporated by reference. As conditions of granting a Special Permit for Outdoor Entertainment Use the Planning Board hereby establishes the following requirements: Enforceability: All conditions specified herein must be complied with at all times. If the conditions of this permit are violated, the Special Permit shall become null and void. Enforcement, if necessary, shall be through complaint filed with the Zoning Enforcement Officer, the Building Commissioner. Review period or renewal date: This Special Permit shall lapse if, after two years from the date of issuance, the applicant has not submitted a renewal application and received the Planning Board approval for another two-year term. The renewal procedure shall follow the Special Permit application process. Specific concerns to be reviewed include all issues related to the instant conditions. Number of Events: As the applicant has represented in the application, there shall be no more than eight events per calendar year, of which no more than two ("Major Events") shall have attendance of seven thousand five hundred (7,500) maximum.- All remaining "Small Events" shall have attendance of three thousand (3,000) maximum. No combination of events shall ever exceed attendance of seven thousand five hundred, and no combination of "Small Events" shall exceed attendance of three thousand. Attendance/Crowd Control: There shall be advance ticket sales only for Major Events. The audience shall be restricted to the fenced/secured area for Major events. There shall be one time entry, no re-entry allowed, for large events (Attendees shall not be allowed to re-enter the event grounds after leaving.). Ticket prices shall include any parking fees. For Major Events, event publicity shall include notice that ticket sales will not be available the day of the event. The applicant shall take measures to keep the audience out of the fields for all events. Alcohol: The applicant shall comply with all recommendations of the Northampton Police Department and the License Commission with regard to alcohol. Notification: The applicant shall provide notice of upcoming events to residents of Riverbank Road, Cross Path Road, Fair Street and Old Ferry Road by mailing notice/a printed schedule of events by May 1St of each year, said notice to include the date of the events, day of the week, time (e.g., 11 AM-7PM), expected attendance, and contact numbers for complaints or concerns. 3 The applicant shall provide notice to the Northampton Police Department, Northampton Fire Department and Emergency Medical Services forty-five days in advance for Major Events and fifteen days in advance for Small Events. Notice to the Police Department shall include a request for the development, review and approval of a traffic management plan, and prior approval of the Fire Department will be required for events with anticipated attendance over four thousand. License Responsibility: It shall be the applicant's responsibility to ensure that all other necessary permits for the Entertainment Events are in place, including but not limited to the securing of appropriate Permits from the Building and Health Departments by/for all participants and vendors. Traffic (and Parking) Management/Event Security: The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Northampton police with regard to traffic. The applicant shall submit a security and traffic control plan which has been approved by the Northampton Police Department to the Zoning Enforcement Officer - the Building Commissioner - in advance of each event. For Major Events, the applicant shall cause signage to be posted on Bridge Street indicating that the event is sold out and that there are no ticket sales the day of the event or at the event. All public roads are to remain unobstructed at all times to residents and farmers. Noise: Noise levels from entertainment events shall comply with the environmental standards in the Northampton Zoning Ordinance, to be measured at the property line and lowered if too loud. This shall be self -monitored by the applicant -with enforcement by the Zoning Enforcement Officer. Trash: All trash must be picked up within twenty-four hours. Coordination of Events to Avoid Conflicts: The applicant shall make all efforts to avoid conflicts [with events taking place at the fairgrounds or activities at Sheldon Field] in the scheduling of events. The Northampton Police Department shall make the final decision when there is a conflict in the scheduling of events. 4 Planning Board - Decision City of Northampton File No.: PL -1999- Date: April 22,1999 Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws (MGL), Chapter 40A, Section 11, no Special Permit, or any extension, modification or renewal thereof, shall take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that twenty days have elapsed after the decision has been filed, or if such an appeal has been filed that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Hampshire County registry of Deeds or Land Court, as applicable and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of title. The fee for such recording or registering shall be paid by the owner or applicant. It is the owner or applicant's responsibility to pick up the certified decision from the City Clerk and record it at the Registry of Deeds. The Northampton Planning Board hereby certifies that a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval has been GRANTED and that copies of this decision and all plans referred to in it have been filed with the Planning Board and the City Clerk. Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 15, notice is hereby given that this decision is filed with the Northampton City Clerk on the date below. If anyone wishes to appeal this action, an appeal must be filed pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 17, with the Hampshire County Superior Court or the Northampton District Court and notice of said appeal filed with the City Clerk within twenty days (20) of the date of that this decision was fled with the City Clerk. Applicant: Richard Guisto - Northampton Airport DECISION DATE: June 10, 1999 DECISION FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: July 15, 1999 00/21701 WED 09:20 FAX 3. 4. 5. 6. 7- 8. A. Applicant's Name: Address: C1 1,N i Parcel Identification: �.J CITY OF NORrEEAM PTON PLANNING BOARD APPLICATION FOR: hTh �J 006 LIMI,R 24,21 2001 Telephone:_ �� Z Zoning Map. # Parcel # Zoning District:—. c 4-+ Sheet Address- 41 n . . Property' Recorded in the Registryo�eds: County; a Book: Page: Status of Applicant: Owner ; Contract purchaser Lessee Other (explain) Property Owner: )Address: besscribe Proposed Work/Project: (Use additional Telephone - if necessary); / Has the following ad'or=tion been iucludzd in the application? Site/Plot Plan �C List of requested waivers Fee Signed/Deztied Zoning P ernrit Application Site Plan and Special Permit Approval Criteria. (If any permit criteria dov4 not apply, explain why) Use additional sheets if necessary: Assistance for completing this information is availaljplr through the Office Of Planning & Development. How will the requested use V How will the project provide for: surface water drainaPe sound and sight buffers;_ the preservation of views, light and air: .., 00/21/01, WED 09:21 FAX •r B. How will the requested on. adjacent streets? ..� �.0 uie protect minimise traffic �Qnd safety ofp destri � s�Ile1,L on the streets and roads in the .,% Z 007 within the site and � 171P 20-001 Where is the location of eway openings iarelation to traffc and adjacent eets?N TAT , t.>:� ,: h{ /J CI?, f-, : l' 1 What features have been incorporated into the desisn to access -by emergency vehicles: I—J A convenient provisions for persons with C. How'al the proposed use promote a the natural landscape: to existing buildings: 19 loading spaces: of struct'ares and open spaces to: other community assets In the area: • What measures are being taken that show the use will not verload Th water supply and distribution systems °'u lud' sanitary sewage and storm water roller on and treatment cyst..... fie protection, streets and schools How will the proposed project mitigate any adverse ' above acts�n the City's resources, as listed 05 �e E List the section(s) of the Zonm pro osed g Ordinance that States What special re p .project (flag lot, 14mmon drive, otc.) Ye, lot size avers g'al&trans are 1equired for the 5 03/21/01, WED 09:21 FAX i ro008 How does the oject ma t the eu�ents? �. MAR 2 2 2001, CC • ZC lIIZ (Use additional sheets nec Bary) State how the project tweets the following technical perfornna- ---- ____ standards: l Curb cuts are miniauized• n Check of# L'1- that apply to the project _use of a common driveway for access to more than one business use of an existing side street _use of a looped service road 2. Doet.the Project require more than one driveway cnt? �~--- NO YES (ifes, Y explain why) 3' Ar p cstrian, bicycle and �velxiewar traffic affic separated'on-site? NO (if no, explain wily) FOR PRO.iECTS 'FIAT REQUIRE r.;TERMI DIATZ SrmPLAN ., — APPLICATION AND �j B Jtt ApPROYAL ONLY . STGN Y certify that the information undcrs4pud owucr(s) grant i application. Date.__� Applicant's Signatl Dater Q Owner's Signature: $xplain Why the rcqucsted use will: the best of nay Imowledge. The r*Perty to review tliis ------------- not unduly impair the irtt egrity or character of the district or adjoining zone,: -- -�--- wC nearrn, morals or general, w 8 elf" e_ be in harmony with the general p ose 'uP rend intent of the Ot'djuauee: 6 Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall - 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 - (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 - FMAIL plan ningocity.northampton.ma.us -Conservation Commission -Historical Commission -Planning Board - Housing Partnership *Zoning Board of Appeals DECISION OF NORTHAMPTON PLANNING BOARD APPLICANT: Richard Guisto Northampton Airport, Inc. ADDRESS: P.O. Box 221 Northampton, MA 01061 OWNER: Northampton Airport, Inc. ADDRESS: P.O. Box 221 Northampton, MA 01061 e •* t MAR 22 2001 P I J RE LAND OR BUILDINGS IN NORTHAMPTON AT: Old Ferry Road MAP AND PARCEL NUMBERS: MAP 25 PARCEL 15-19,53 & 71 Ata meeting conducted on June 10, 1999, the Northampton Planning Board unanimously voted 5:0 to grant the.request of Richard Guisto for a SPECIAL PERMIT WITH SITE PLAN APPROVAL under the provisions of Sections 5.2, 10.10 and 10.11 in the Northampton Zoning Ordinance to allow outdoor commercial recreation at the Northampton Airport. Planning Board Members present were: Vice Chair Daniel J. Yacuzzo, Kenneth Jodrie, Anne Romano, M. Sanford Weil, Jr. and Associate Member Alton Neal. In Granting the Special Permit, the Planning Board found: A. The requested use for outdoor commercial recreation protects adjoining premises against seriously detrimental uses because the number and size of events allowed under this permit will be limited to no more than eight events per calendar year, of which no ,more than two shall have attendance of up to seven thousand five hundred people.. The remaining events shall have less than three thousand people. The applicant has made provisions for crowd control, traffic management, notification of abutters and compliance with the noise regulations in the Zoning Ordinance as outlined in the Special Permit application and in information presented during the public hearing. 1 ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER J 2001 F2 MAR 2 2 B. The requested use will promote the convenience and safety of vehiculan w, : 0rF1(E —� movement within the site and on adjacent streets and minimize traffic i pc it " 0 N. t� n No o = streets and roads in the area because the applicant will be required to su mit a traffic management plan which has been approved by the Northampton Police Department to the Building Inspector in advance of each event. Also, conditions attached to this permit prohibit the obstruction of public roads or parking on public roads or unaffiliated private property. C. The requested use will promote a harmonious relationship of structures and open spaces to the natural landscape, existing buildings and other community assets in the area because none of the proposed events will permanently alter the natural landscape or existing buildings. D. The requested use will not overload, and will mitigate adverse impacts on, the City's resources, including the City's water supply and distribution system, sanitary and storm sewage collection and treatment systems, fire protection, streets and schools. E. The requested use meets any special regulations set forth in the Zoning Ordinance under Section 10.11. F. The requested use bears a positive relationship to the public convenience or welfare by providing an additional venue for outdoor commercial recreation such as craft fairs, musical entertainment, etc. The use will not unduly impair the integrity of character of the district or adjoining zones, and the use will not be detrimental to the health, morals, or general welfare. The use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Ordinance. G. The requested use will promote City planning objectives to the extent possible and will not adversely affect those objectives, as defined in City master or study plans adopted under M.G.L. Chapter 41, Section 81-C and D. In addition, in reviewing the Site Plan submitted with the Special Permit, the Planning Board found that the site plan complied with the following technical performance standards: 1. No new curb cuts are requested. 2. Pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular traffic movement have been separated on site to the extent possible. 2 MAR 2 2 2001 The following conditions were imposed on this permit: Northampton Airport, Inc., Special Permit for Outdoor Entertainment Events Special Permit Conditions The Special Permit application and the applicant's narrative are hereby incorporated by reference. As conditions of granting a Special Permit for Outdoor Entertainment Use the Planning Board hereby establishes the following requirements: Enforceability: All conditions specified herein must be complied with at all times. If the conditions of this permit are violated, the Special Permit shall become null and void. Enforcement, if necessary, shall be through complaint filed with the Zoning Enforcement Officer, the Building Commissioner. Review period or renewal date: This Special Permit shall lapse if, after two years from the date of issuance, the applicant has not submitted a renewal application and received the Planning Board approval for another two-year term. The renewal procedure shall follow the Special Permit application process. Specific concerns to be reviewed include all issues related to the instant conditions. Number of Events: As the applicant has represented in the application, there shall be no more than eight events per calendar year, of which no more than two ("Major Events") shall have attendance of seven thousand five hundred (7,500) maximum.- All remaining "Small Events" shall have attendance of three thousand (3,000) maximum. No combination of events shall ever exceed attendance of seven thousand five hundred, and no combination of "Small Events" shall exceed attendance of three thousand. Attendance/Crowd Control: There shall be advance ticket sales only for Major Events. The audience shall be restricted to the fenced/secured area for Major events. There shall be onetime entry, no re-entry allowed, for large events (Attendees shall not be allowed to re-enter the event grounds after leaving.). Ticket prices shall include any parking fees. For Major Events, event publicity shall include notice that ticket sales will not be available the day of the event. The applicant shall take measures to keep the audience out of the fields for all events. Alcohol: The applicant shall comply with all recommendations of the Northampton Police Department and the License Commission with regard to alcohol. Notification: The applicant shall provide notice of upcoming events to residents of Riverbank Road, Cross Path Road, Fair Street and Old Ferry Road by mailing notice/a printed schedule of events by May 1" of each year, said notice to include the date of the events, day of the week, time (e.g., 11 AM-7PM), expected attendance, and contact numbers for complaints or concerns. 3 The applicant shall provide notice to the Northampton Police Department, Northampton Fire Department and Emergency Medical Services forty-five days in advance for Major Events and fifteen days in advance for Small Events. Notice to the Police Department shall include a request for the development, review and approval of a traffic management plan, and prior approval of the Fire Department will be required for events with anticipated attendance over four thousand. License Responsibility: It shall be the applicant's responsibility to ensure that all other necessary permits for the Entertainment Events are in place, including but not limited to the securing of appropriate permits from the Building and Health Departments by/for all participants and vendors. Traffic (and Parking) Management/Event Security: The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Northampton police with regard to traffic. The applicant shall submit a security and traffic control plan which has been approved by the Northampton Police Department to the Zoning Enforcement Officer - the Building Commissioner - in advance of each event. For Major Events, the applicant shall cause signage to be posted on Bridge Street indicating that the event is sold out and that there are no ticket sales the day of the event or at the event. All public roads are to remain unobstructed at all times to residents and farmers. Noise: Noise levels from entertainment events shall comply with the environmental standards in the Northampton Zoning Ordinance, to be measured at the property line and loweied if too loud. This shall be self -monitored by the applicant -with enforcement by the Zoning Enforcement Officer. Trash: All trash must be picked up within twenty-four hours. Coordination of Events to Avoid Conflicts: The applicant shall make all efforts to avoid conflicts [with events taking place at the fairgrounds or activities at Sheldon Field] in the scheduling of events. The Northampton Police Department shall make the final decision when there is a conflict in the scheduling of events. L! MAR 2 2 2001 ? LL/ t CITY CLERXS OFFICE NORTHAM"TOS+, MA 0060 4 U Planning Board - Decision City of Northampton File No.: PL -1999- Date: April 22, 1999 Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws (YIGL), Chapter 40A, Section 11, no Special Permit, or any extension, modification or renewal thereof, shall take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that twenty days have elapsed after the decision has been filed, or if such an appeal has been filed that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Hampshire County registry of Deeds or Land Court, as applicable and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of title. The fee for such recording or registering shall be paid by the owner or applicant. It is the owner or applicant's responsibility to pick up the certified decision from the City Clerk and record it at the Registry of Deeds. The Northampton Planning Board hereby certifies that a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval has been GRANTED and that copies of this decision and all plans referred to in it have been filed with the Planning Board and the City Clerk. Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 15, notice is hereby given that this decision is filed with the Northampton City Clerk on the date below. If anyone wishes to appeal this action, an appeal must be filed pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 17, with the Hampshire County Superior Court or the Northampton District Court and notice of said appeal filed with the City Clerk within twenty days (20) of the date of that this decision was filed with the City Clerk. Applicant: Richard Guisto - Northampton Airport DECISION DATE: June 10, 1999 DECISION FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: July 15., 1999 r MAR 2 2 2001 .' U�m 4 Nm- = File # MP -2001-0118 APPLICANT/CONTACT PERSON NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC. ADDRESS/PHONE P O BOX 221 (413) 584-7980 Q PROPERTY LOCATION 152 CROSS PATH RD MAP 25 PARCEL 015 ZONE SC MAR 2 2 2001 � THIS SECTION FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY:�`' PERMIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST ENCLOSED REQUIRED DATE Building Permit Filled out Fee Paid TVeof Construction: BARNSTORMIN CONCERT - 1 DAY EVENT 8/4/01 New Construction Non Structural .interior renovations Addition to Existing Accessory Structure Building Plans Included: Owner/ Statement or License 3 sets of Plans / Plot Plan THE FOLLOWING ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN ON THIS APPLICATION: Approved as presented/based on information presented. S/ Denied aspresented: 1/ Special ermit and/or Site Plan Required under: § PLANNING BOARD ON�ARD Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed Finding Required under: § w/ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed Variance Required under: § _w/ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed Other Permits Required: Curb Cut from DPW Water Availability Sewer Availability Septic Approval Board of Health Well Water Potability Board of Health Permit from Conservat' Commission Permit from CB Architecture C mmittee Signature of BuiTafkrg Official t Date, Note: Issuance of a Zoning permit does not relieve a applicant's burden to comply with all Zoning requirements and obtain all required permits from Board of Health, Conservation Commission, Department of public works and other applicable permit granting authorities. MAR 2 1 2001 DEPT OF BUILDING INSPECTIONS --- 10 001 F Mpl File No. mpol I &MAR 2 2 2001 11 � l i PERART APPLICATIO. Tease a or type print all information and return this form to the Buildiug hispector's Office with the $YO_ filing fee (check or money order) payable to the City of Northampton 1. Name of Applicant: NOPMAMPTION AWORT, INC Address: F' RD ' OR'IHAt'iPT'ON Telephone: 584-7489 2. Owner of Property Address; Telephone: 584- 7980 3. Status of Applicant Owner g Contract Purchaser • urcaser Lessce Other (Cxplau7t) 4. X0b Location: E�trcel Id: Zoning Map#� Parcel#..: In Elm Street District • In, CentrallBusinem-District . ..('TO BE FIZZED:IN'BY--: TFIE Bi117 DIIvG Dl AR NT) 5. Existing Use of Structure/Property Aj Q=t - 6. 7. Description of Proposed Use/Work/Prcject/Occupation: (Use additional sheets if necessary): Cot�i i/6iirlfi• �E•�►a�n� Attached Plans: Sketch Plan X Site Plan En&eemd/Suzveyed Plans 8. Has a Special Permit/Variance/Finding ever been issued for/oat the site? NO DONT KNOW YES x 0 YES, date issued:. Ile' YES: Was the Pmnit recorded at the Registry of Deeds? pY NO DON'T SOW YES IIS YES: enter Book Page and/or Document # 9. Docs the site contain a brook, body of water or wetland's? NO DOS KNOW YES IF YES, has a permit been or need to be obtained from the Conservation Commission? Needs to be obtained Obtained , date issued: (Foran Continues On Other Side) b3/21/ id. Do any sig e.= on the property? IF YES, describe size, type and location_ ---- 0 002 YES_e-)� NO MAR 2 2 2001 CITY Q-Uf ,i OFPCE Are, there auy proposed changes to or additions of signs intended for the property? YES r NO T1» YES, desc'be size, type and location: �.Mc. �1 I )� �.-„..-►-�. , i r-� rr. ALL LVFORMATTON MUST BE COMPLETED, or pERAUT CAN BE DEIVIE,D DUE TO LACK OF INFORMATION. 77dz column to be Billed in EiST�NG-Y the$uiklin Dzdrtmen .......... POSED�r� Via- ,,: Lot Size Frontage. Setbacks Front Side Rear Building Height Building Square Footagb % Open Space: pot am minus buflftg & paved # of Par3wug Spaces # of Loading Docks F,II: (volume & location) R: FIA 12. Certification: I hcreby certify that the information con/ed h e s to to best of zrty imowledge. Date: Applicant's. Signature � NO'E_ a of a mx� pelt does not relieve an applicane burdwa to c all required permits from the Board of Health. Conserve ' n Com.” • a. th ZOIIing requiremeAts and obtain Department of Public Works axed other Historic and Architectural Boards, applicable permit granting authorities. Barnstormin' Concerts Inc. P.O.Box 878 Northampton, MA 01061 March 19, 2001 To whom it may concern, lely/10- how i� W-- jr p ECEOVE. MAR192001 DEPT Of BUILDING INSPECTIONS NORTHAMOTON, MA 01060 This is to serve as notification that the Northampton Airport will be used as a venue by Barnstormin' Concerts Inc. to present a country music concert on August 4, 2001. Notification is being made to all neighboring residences, the Mayor's Office, the Police and Fire Departments, and other City Departments. The event will be presented during daylight hours and will not include a fireworks display. All efforts are being made to minimize any negative impact on the`Community. Please feel free to contact us at (413) 584-7980 X-12 with any questions or concerns. espectful y -r Bamstormin' Concerts Inc. V Ted Hebert Richard Giusto Lisa Fusco Jon Plassmann MAR 2 2 2001 CITY CLEP.KS OFFICE NORTHAIIAPION, MA 01060 c -,j Q � II (� o p •••• �o �o �0 0 0 � o 0 �C8 C8 CS O 0 zo 0 0 0 0 Z o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 O ° O O O z U E" z O zA�� ozzzzo° O �I zQ z z°zz°9oQ�o 3 w w w 0 0 0 0 w ¢C/)zzzz¢� �CA�� w W N N N N a 0 V� CO O O O v civ o --� �n N N N V'1 M a a a a oo .•-� M �o u4 ¢¢000"444z ¢ U_ U_ U PaW E� 0? `i' t� O O O X23 zzzza�z� rZx ¢ a a a¢ P4 o o o o¢ w �Oa o ° z ¢za�a�a�x� °0z O 00 N O O O O¢ a C7 O GA GA 4 ti 4 z z z z N N z O pq ppqq W ppqq �,, 1NO14) U N U U U h U U Fri .�- U �m '. '. '. '. O O (� C 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O a 1^.\`v 7 CS Q411 Q� W M .,•-i M M M N M .r .r .r .r .r .Nr ,fir _ % O! � ai O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O � ,v p, N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 00 7Z�� O 0 Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 • EMAIL planning®city.northampton.ma.us *Conservation Commission *Historical Commission -Planning Board • Housing Partnership -Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Planning Board Minutes of Meeting April 22, 1999 The Northampton Planning Board held a meeting on Thursday, April 22, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Daniel J. Yacuzzo, Kenneth Jodrie, Anne Romano, M. Sanford Weil, Jr. and Associate Members Orlando Isaza and Alton Neal. Staff.. Senior Planner John Bennett and Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. Yacuzzo opened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. At 8:06 p.m., Yacuzzo opened the Public Hearing on a request from Richard Guisto for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval under Sections 5.2,10.10 and 10.11 of the Zoning Ordinance, and for whatever other relief is necessary, to allow outdoor commercial recreation at the Northampton Airport, including events such as musical entertainment, car shows, craft fairs, fireworks, food festivals, etc., also known as Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1,15-19, 53 & 71. Yacuzzo read the legal notice. Richard Guisto posted a plan. He explained that the application was for some temporary events which would be held on a one -day basis only. There will be no rock concerts at the airport, ever, he stated. He said he had worked with the City to come up with events that would work both for the City and for the airport. Guisto noted that he had held events with up to seventeen thousand people. He said he had spoken to Captain Wall and let Wall know that he was in charge of telling him how many [security] people were necessary. All events will be cleared with the Fire Department and Wall, even if they are just small, he assured. Guisto said he had applied for two large events and eight small ones. He said some of the smaller events would only bring up to eight hundred people. The large events would be kept to a maximum 1 ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER of seven thousand five (7,500) people, he said. He said they would have types of events that might all sell out, and tickets for these would be sold through a ticket agency so that a count could be kept of the number sold. The airport has parking for seven thousand, and he was told that the average was three people per car, Guisto noted. Guisto suggested that this meant he was looking at two thousand cars. The airport has more than adequate parking, he concluded. He stressed that parking arrangements would take into consideration the needs of farmers living and working nearby. Guisto said he would have one or two large events. Smaller events would be day -long, probably with a couple thousand people, Guisto estimated. Events would start at 11:00 in the morning and end by 10:00 p.m. He described a potential event as three or four national entertainers, ending at 10:00 p.m. He said he would also like to have fireworks on the Fourth of July. He said he would like to have the ability to have two large events instead of one. Guisto commented that he had gone through the process of gaining approval for special events many different ways, having gone through the City Council many times. Guisto said he was trying to eliminate this step, since it was a hassle. He said he didn't think the City Council should be giving permits; he thought it should be the Planning Board or Zoning Board of Appeals. Weil asked if events could be larger than seven thousand five hundred? Guisto said no, he would limit ticket sales to seven thousand five hundred people. There will be seven thousand five hundred people maximum at the airport at any one time, he confirmed. (He said he might have different events together, such as a car show and fireworks, but there would not be more than seven thousand five hundred people.) Yacuzzo asked Bennett to explain how Guisto had ended up before the Planning Board. Bennett related a brief background of the current application. He noted that Guisto had applied on occasion for temporary events permits from the City Council and had found that process more rigorous than he was inclined to participate in. Subsequently, Guisto filed a Zoning Permit Application with the Building Inspector requesting that there be a determination that he was grandfathered for outdoor recreational events at the airport. This request was denied, and the Building Inspector's determination was appealed to the Zoning Board of Appeals, which held a lengthy hearing process, Bennett related. In the course of the process, it became evident that Mr. Guisto would be able to narrow the scope of what he was requesting and apply for and, receive a permit from the Planning Board so that he wouldn't have to apply for a temporary event permit for each and every event. A lot of people worked long and hard to try to bring an unwieldy situation into a more narrow box, Bennett observed. Isaza asked if the Planning Board had jurisdiction, and Bennett confirmed that the Planning Board had the ability to issue a Special Permit for outdoor recreation. Yacuzzo asked if the use would then be grandfathered as long as the Special Permit was exercised within two years? Bennett said some people had suggested the possibility of putting a one-year review provision on the permit. 2 Weil asked if the special events impacted in any way on the commercial use of the airport itself? Guisto said not really. He said that a smaller event did not have any effects. Large events might close down the airport for several hours, he acknowledged. If all tickets were sold, they would close the airport and use the runway for parking, he said. Romano asked if they could craft a condition saying that they had the right to renege? Yacuzzo said they could put a performance condition on the permit. He elaborated that they could include a condition requiring the permit to be reviewed in one year, and if the applicant was found in violation of any of the conditions, they could revoke the permit. Neal asked if a year was long enough if they wanted it to be a test? He referred to an attachment to the application which referred to two large events and listed fireworks underneath. Bennett explained that the proposed events attachment was submitted with the original Zoning Permit Application and was no longer applicable. Neal asked if it was permissible to shut the airport down for a seven -hour period in case there was an emergency? Guisto said it was. He said many airports did this if they were doing repairs on the runway, and such a closing would be put on a notice list to pilots which they were supposed to check prior to flight. Isaza asked why Guisto would want to exclude a particular type of music? Guisto explained that this stemmed from a problem with a particular event in the past. He expressed his- opinion that City officials did not want rock concerts, and he said he'd prefer not to have them either. He pointed out that he had held the Warped Tour without any incidents. Police Comment Captain Michael Wall informed the Board that he had been discussing the issue with Guisto for about a year off and on. "In 1977, that entire neighborhood was destroyed with a rock concert," he reported. He noted that there was still some feeling in that area that rock concerts might not be appropriate for that region Wall said he was approached in the last few months by [Building Inspector] Anthony Patillo and [Senior Planner] John Bennett to review Guisto's request and to determine what he thought would be an appropriate number of people to have at large events. Wall said he reviewed the matter with the Chief of Police, and they thought that two 7,500 -person events were appropriate and that the Police Department could handle the traffic related to that. Wall related that the airport had hosted two Warped Tours - one with seven thousand five hundred (7,500) people and one with six thousand five hundred (6,500). He commented that they had had a little traffic problem that they had learned from. Wall added that he felt comfortable working with 3 Guisto to the extent that Guisto had no problem with the premise that the Police Department would be in charge of any event, since it was the City of Northampton which would ultimately be [held] responsible if there were any problems or civil liability. Wall said they had discussed all of these issues, and he felt very comfortable that two 7,500 -person events a year could be handled without having any impact on the neighborhood. Obviously there would be some traffic, but they were hoping to minimize that, Wall remarked. He noted that they had learned a lot from the Warped Tour about moving traffic. Wall said one difference between the airport and the fairgrounds was that the fairgrounds had more exits. He noted that the fairgrounds sometimes had attendance of over twenty-four thousand people per day. Wall clarified that the police role was to tell what they thought was appropriate and what they could handle. He said he did not agree with fifteen thousand [at the airport] but thought seven thousand five hundred was appropriate. Wall said one thing discussed was that [police] issues depended on the types of events - whether alcohol was served, whether it would be all -day, etc. All these factors would have a bearing on how they would decide to staff the event, how they would handle traffic on the grounds, etc. An event which would attract a more upscale crowd, i.e. - a craft fair, would present different circumstances than an event serving beer and wine, he elaborated. He said they liked to "up the ante" in terms of security if alcohol was being served. Each event would be looked at individually, he noted. Wall added that the airport had been holding some events over a number of years, and Guisto could estimate within a hundred people how many people might attend, and they were very comfortable with those. He said they were really talking about the larger events. Guisto confirmed that he would talk to Captain Wall before every event. Yacuzzo commented that, having worked with Mr. Wall in the moving of traffic, he was very comfortable knowing he was involved. Building Inspector Comment. Yacuzzo asked Patillo if he had comments or concerns? Patillo commented that he had worked in the past year pretty closely with Guisto trying to resolve these issues. He advised members that the Fire Department had a policy that if an event was over a certain threshold, they wanted an officer present. Patillo said he was concerned that there be some kind of review mechanism to allow the Board to review the permit in a year for compliance, since this was something new, and there were a lot of concerns from the neighbors. Patillo related that one thing that had happened before was blocking the underpass. He stated that that was not going to happen. The farmers could not be blocked off at any time, they had to be able to get to their fields, he stressed. Patillo also said he did not know what mechanism the airport could use so that neighbors would be 4 aware of the scheduled events and able to participate. He commented that he thought the number of seven thousand five hundred was more than adequate with the recommendation of the Fire Department and Police Department. Patillo clarified that, under the Zoning Ordinance, the only way of having outdoor events was the temporary events process or by applying for a Special Permit for outdoor entertainment. Patillo said he requested Guisto do the latter so that neighbors could be involved and their concerns could be taken into consideration. Public Comment. Yacuzzo asked if anyone wished to speak in favor? No one spoke. Yacuzzo asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition? Mary Chetham of Riverbank Road said she had waited hours during past events to be able to get home because of the underpass being blocked. She said this was the only way to get through, and it had been blocked by a ticket line. She confirmed she had been notified about past events and received tickets, but, "You either had to move away or remain in your house as a prisoner." Chetham said she had great reservations about [allowing] seven thousand five hundred [people]. She asserted that they were not contained, they were free to roam. When talking about an event from eleven in the morning to ten at night, "It's like a moving feast," she commented. She also said she had hesitation about giving a permit for a year. The next event could be something despicable, she said. Regarding projected attendance of seven thousand five hundred people, Chetham asked Guisto ifhe would be selling more tickets if people left during the day? He said no. Chetham also suggested that Guisto had been vague about the type of events. She said rock concerts were not the only thing that attracted young people. She said she would like to know in advance before he even got the permit. She asked what kind of country music he was talking about? Guisto named the entertainers he was thinking about this year - Mark Chestnut, Leroy Cornell and Toby Keith. He described them as national entertainers - "not extremist on either side." Guisto confirmed Chetham's observation about the bridge having been blocked. He said this had happened during the Italian Fest, and, "it was horrible." He maintained that [for future events] no one would be parking in the street, they would all be parking on the premises. Guisto explained his plans for parking, noting that he first planned to fill up the sky diver area, then the area labeled `B" on the plan, then area "C" if necessary. He noted the number of cars each section was capable of containing. 5 Chetham pointed out that one area was a corn farm. She asked if cars were going to park on the corn and if the farmer was aware of this? Guisto said he was planning for July of next year. He said he had nothing planned this year except a couple of car shows. Chetham commented that she thought those smaller events never bothered anyone. Wall said they were not allowing tickets to be taken at the bridge anymore. No tickets would be taken, and no cars would be stopped, he assured. From now on, people would go right to their parking spaces. Also, Wall said larger events would be secured with fencing, and Guisto added that no packages or containers would be allowed. Guisto confirmed that there would be a gate. Chetham asked about people who might think they could come and pay at the gate? Wall said they would have to be informed [otherwise]. She asked if they could put signs up on Bridge Street saying `Ticket Holders Only'? Yacuzzo suggested a `Sold Out' sign, agreeing that this was a fine consideration. Under further questioning from Chetham, Guisto confirmed that he was not planning any large events this year. He said he had been planning one, but it got too late. Yacuzzo explained that the review period on the permit would take into consideration when events were planned. The review period might not be one year if Guisto was not planning anything this year, he said. Yacuzzo said he thought a large event would be the acid test as to whether the permit worked. He added that most permits were granted without a term limit. Bruce Shallcross, Treasurer of the Three -County Fair, commented that the fair had no position for or against Guisto's petition but had two areas of concern: 1) that there be some sort of coordination of events so that there not be two large events [at the airport and the fairground] at the same time which might prove a detriment to the City, and 2) that fireworks not be allowed when they had animal events at the fairgrounds. Shallcross commented that if they had a thousand Morgan horses on the grounds, and fireworks were shot over their heads, they would have a lot of damage claims. He suggested that events could be coordinated with Captain Wall. Yacuzzo clarified that fireworks also required a Special Permit from the City Council, so that question could be asked there. Guisto said he attempted with every event not to conflict with another. He noted that [such a conflict] would not be in his best interest. G City Councillor Mary Clare Higgins said she thought it should be a condition that events at the airport not conflict with events at the fairgrounds, as opposed to every attempt being made. She added that she hoped the Planning Board could find a way to include a review so that if there were a real big problem several years down the road, they would have a way of dealing with that. Yacuzzo said that, without seeking a legal opinion, he thought it was possible to put a one-year review on permits. Higgins also said she was concerned that seven thousand five hundred was a pretty high number. Even though the Police Department thought they could handle it, she said she thought this was a large number for a single -entrance, single -exit road. She noted that there were also recreational events on that road, and she thought Guisto should be careful not to conflict with recreational events. She said she thought Guisto should consult with the Recreation Department. She added that the reason [special events] came to City Council was in order to have neighborhood input on a case-by- case basis, and they were not doing that. She said she had heard concerns about that number, although she was willing to be convinced. Chetham asked about fencing, and Guisto said he would use snow fencing, four feet in height. Chetham pointed out that people could jump over this, but Wall said this was very easy to monitor because in a field you could see people coming over that. Yacuzzo asked if there were any further comments from the public? There were none. Member Discussion. Members asked questions about the Police Department's procedure for reviewing events, and whether there was a written contract? Guisto and Wall expressed their mutual understanding that the events would not occur until they had agreed on the amount ofpeople who would be there. Wall elaborated that he met with the organizers of all special events and made a recommendation to them as to how many people could come to the event, and they agreed to it. He said he tried to be fair and even-handed. He said he attempted to determine what would be a safety issue for the City and what would be an appropriate number of officers to have for an event. He acknowledged that there was no formal sign -off on events but said that if someone did not agree to hire police, they would not be able to have the event because they could not get a permit from the Board of Public Works (BPW), City Council, etc. In response to a question from Jodrie, Wall clarified that the BPW would not be involved in an event at the airport but would be involved in an event which closed roads, etc. Yacuzzo commented that it would be nice if it were formalized, and Guisto said he had no problem with it being part of the permit that he had to have police approval. Yacuzzo said the Board would include a condition that Guisto needed sign -off from Captain Wall on police security for any event. 7 Romano commented that there were a lot of conditions in Guisto's narrative for which there was no enforcement. Yacuzzo suggested they could make the narrative part of the permit. Romano expressed concern that they no longer had the failsafe that if he didn't satisfy police concerns, he wouldn't get a permit from the City Council, since he would no longer need a permit from the City Council. Patillo noted that, as the zoning enforcement officer, if the conditions of the Special Permit were not met, he would bring that violation to their attention so that they could revoke the permit. Isaza said he wanted a little more reassurance from Wall that that size crowd was manageable. Wall responded that he thought it was very manageable. He pointed out that the Police Department had managed events of twenty thousand and had the Warped tour with over seventeen thousand people - they had a lot of experience in managing large events in the City. Usually with those types of events, they had police and a concert security force, he noted. The police took care of things on the perimeter while internal security handled internal problems ... He said there was a whole spectrum of security involved in events like those, and he thought they had had pretty good success. He pointed out that they had done the Warped Tour for a number of years, and it had increased from four thousand to seventeen thousand, and they had had no problems. He said he felt comfortable that they could handle events of that nature. Traffic Circulation. Regarding traffic circulation, Wall said what was important was that they continued to keep a lane open for people living in the area. He described his proposed strategy for handling traffic in detail, explaining that he could run [exiting] traffic out Old Ferry Road until they became boxed in and allow other traffic to go out through Fair Street and Ventures Field Road to Hockanum Road. He said he could also run traffic different ways to stop traffic on Old Ferry Road to allow residents to get to their homes. The Department of Public Works' (DPW) only comment was that a detailed traffic management plan must be submitted, Yacuzzo noted. He said he thought something such as what Captain Wall just verbally addressed would be what would be needed to satisfy the DPW. In written comments, the Fire Department said they had no problem with this application and would handle each event on an individual basis. Guisto said that the Fire Department would be notified along with the Police Department for every event. Yacuzzo read letters from Captain Wall and from City Councillor Maria Tymoczko. Regarding Tymoczko's concern about noise levels, Guisto said the only event Tymoczko had been involved with was the Warped Tour, and she did not like the levels of noise of the Warped Tour. He commented that the stage faced the Holyoke Range, so he couldn't understand her concern about 11 the noise level. Higgins commented that the Warped Tour producer had agreed at the last several concerts to have somebody present with a decibel meter, and there was arrangement whereby if the noise limit was exceeded, the volume was adjusted. Yacuzzo clarified that the limit on noise was sixty decibels at the property line. He noted that the Planning Board could include the condition that any event have a decibel meter at the property line and that the sound be required to be reduced if the limit was exceeded. Yacuzzo asked whether members felt that traffic concerns had been addressed? Romano said she felt the informal arrangement between Captain Wall and Guisto addressed their concerns and, based on Wall's comments, she would not demand a full traffic study. Yacuzzo suggested that a full study might not be needed, but a traffic management plan might be desirable. Guisto repeated that cars would not be stopped and charged a parking fee. He commented that one of the problems in the past was that cars had been stopped, and he had had no problems when cars were not stopped. Yacuzzo advised Guisto that the Board would like a narrative outlining what Guisto had said and what Captain Wall had said. He added that, as mentioned by Tymoczko, any narrative should address the intersection of Cross Path and Old Ferry Roads. Regarding scheduling events in coordination with the Recreation Department, Guisto said any maj or event would be scheduled at least a year in advance, and he could notify the Recreation Department. In response to a question from Romano, he said he did not think a rec event could be canceled for a smaller event. Yacuzzo said Guisto could take Tymoczko's suggestion to circulate a printed schedule of events by May V, and Romano said she would like to see this. Attendance. Yacuzzo noted that Tymoczko suggested a limit of five thousand attendees, and Councillor Higgins expressed concerns about seven thousand five hundred. Guisto said he did not think he could raise enough money to hold an event with only five thousand people, and the types of events he was talking about would not be possible with less than seven thousand five hundred. Jodrie and Isaza both said they were satisfied with seven thousand five hundred, and Neal agreed. Romano said she didn't think there was any evidence to contradict Captain Wall. Patillo said it should be pointed that all parking would be on the property. He said Guisto had had 9 discussions with Captain Wall to the effect that any cars which attempted to park on the road would be towed immediately. Guisto said he had no problem with making any of the statements in the application conditions of the permit. He also said all abutters were invited to events and sent tickets. Chetham said that for every event they had people parking in their driveway. Guisto said that shouldn't happen anymore because the parking would be free, and everyone would have a ticket. Bennett said he thought Guisto had addressed most of the salient issues listed on the staff memo. He made a plea to members not to try to write all the conditions of the permit this evening, saying he would like to confer with Captain Wall, the Fire Department, City solicitor, etc. Romano moved to continue the hearing to May 13, 1999 at 8:30 p.m. Jodrie seconded. The motion passed unanimously 6:0. 10 u' Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall - 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 - (413) 587-1266 FAX(413)587-1264-EMAIL planning@city.northampton.ma.us *Conservation Commission •Historical Commission -Planning Board - Housing Partnership -Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Planning Board Minutes of Meeting May 13, 1999 The Northampton Planning Board held a meeting on Thursday, May 13, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Daniel J. Yacuzzo, Paul Diemand, Kenneth Jodrie, Richard Marquis, Anne Romano, Sanford Weil, Jr. and Associate Members Orlando Isaza and Alton Neal. Staff. Planning Director Wayne Feiden, Senior Planner John Bennett and Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. From 7:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., Wayne Feiden discussed issues related to long-range planning with the Board. At 7: m.,, Yacuzzo opened the Continuation of a Public Hearing on a request m the North amp Community Music Center for Site Plan Approval to allow a s d curb cut under Sections . 6) and 10.11 of the Zoning Ordinance for property locat 39 South Street, also known as Asses 's Map 38B, Parcel 32. Bill Feinstein ofthe music cent e orted that he had met wi Bennett and, subsequently, with abutters to identify specific concern ated to the pro' . Feinstein noted that every abutter was notified of the meeting and that he had on and -delivered notices. He said the meeting outlined the following four concerns: 1) Outdoor security ' is on the back of th ilding were shining in the windows of one of the n ors. Feinstein related that the ad adjusted these, but it turned out still to an issue. He reported that they had hir electrician to put a baffle on jg,efight, and Joe Bluementhal was following up. The neighbors were concerned that the speed of the cars using t�riveway was 1 ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Rom o said she was not satisfied with the site plan but was not sure it made a big difference. he said th �otlon�oine lto her was whether they had enough parking. She said she couldn't thi f any more inftin she could possibly need, and you were either for it or against it at this oint. The motio%psed unanimously 7:0. Weil moved to apove the request from John W. Ksieniewicz and Charles . Ksieniewicz for a Special Permit wi Site Plan Approval under Section 8.7, 10.10 and 0.11 of the Zoning Ordinance, and for w tever other relief is necessary, to allow off-si parking spaces at 24 Bright Street for prope located at 10 Bright Street, also known s Assessor's Map 31B, Parce1143. Bennett said he thought they alsoNeeded to cite Section 8.9 (10) ch allowed the Planning Board to grant a Special Permit for a priv a driveway serving a p g lot for non-residential use in a residential district. Weil accepted as an amendment t s motion. Romano suggested the following condition • 1) that thr e of the parking spots be at 24 Bright Street and that the spaces be used by the employees the JXsiness on the lower level, and 2) that there be a two-year review for the Planning Board to re ' the arrangement for neighborhood impact. After discussion, Romano changed the review$erioc%o one year from the date of renting to the new tenant. / \ Yacuzzo suggested that if less than a spaces were need or the first -floor tenant, then only two spaces would be occupied at 24 B i t Street. Bennett said thought they could have language to reserve those spaces for the iness office - i.e. - the three aces are reserved for use by the downstairs office. The Board said it wo notify abutters at the end of the one -ye review period. Charles Ksieniewicz said he w Id notify the Board when he had a lease. Members cha fi that they wanted to restrict the use of the spaces to th employees of the downstairs offi , not clients or visitors. Yacuzzo p anted out that there were requests for waivers, and Weil said he included the' acceptance as parthis motion. Isaxa seconded. The motion passed unanimously 6:0. At 11:50 p.m., Yacuzzo opened the Continuation of a Public Hearing on a request from Richard Guisto for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval under Sections 5.2, 10.10 and 10.11 of the W Zoning Ordinance, and for whatever other relief is necessary, to allow outdoor commercial recreation at the Northampton Airport, including events such as musical entertainment, car shows, craft fairs, fireworks, food festivals, etc., also known as Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1, 15-19, 53 & 71. Yacuzzo said that Guisto had appeared earlier that evening and requested a continuation. Marquis moved to continue the public hearing to June 10, 1999 at 7:30 p.m. Isaza seconded. The motion passed unanimously 7:0. Changes proved Plans for Pathways Cohousing. Doug Kohl was presen discuss whether changes to the approved plans for ways Cohousing required reopemng the public ng on the Special Permit. Kohl sho members the changes, explaining that the final layout of th es had changed as the f rints of the houses grew. He said that they were still in compliance with .r he was before the Conservation Commission on said the houses had moved a little closer to the N ;m for open space. Kohl reported that and they had approved the changes. He Isaza moved to approve the fie�cha as proposed. Romano sec ed. The motion passed unanimously 7:0. The meeting was ad' reed at 12:00 p.m. 21 Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall - 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 - (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 • EMAIL planning@city.northampton.ma.us *Conservation Commission *Historical Commission -Planning Board - Housing Partnership -Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Planning Board Minutes of Meeting June 10, 1999 The Northampton Planning Board held a meeting on Thursday, June 10, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Daniel J. Yacuzzo, Paul Diemand, Kenneth Jodrie, Anne Romano, M. Sanford Weil, Jr. Staff Planning Director Wayne Feiden, Senior Planner John Bennett and Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. At 7:08 p.m., Yacuzzo opened the meeting. At 7:44 p.m., Yacuzzo opened the Continuation of a Public Hearing on a request from Richard Guisto for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval under Sections 5.2, 10.10 and 10.11 of the Zoning Ordinance, and for whatever other relief is necessary, to allow outdoor commercial recreation at the Northampton Airport, including events such as musical entertainment, car shows, craft fairs, fireworks, food festivals, etc., also known as Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1, 15-19, 53 & 71. Yacuzzo read the legal notice. Richard Guisto represented himself. Members reviewed draft conditions prepared by Senior Planner John Bennett (See Exhibit A). Yacuzzo noted that the only thing left out was a requirement that all trash be picked up within twenty-four hours, so this would be an additional condition. Bennett said he had written the conditions with comments from City Councillor Maria Tymoczko in front of him, so the proposed conditions incorporated her suggestions. He said he was confident that all of the issues raised in Tymoczko's letter [dated April 20, 19991 were addressed, with the exception of her request that events larger than seven thousand five hundred (7,500) be required to 2 ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER obtain a Special Events Permit, since no events over seven thousand five hundred (7,500) are proposed. Krutzler noted that everyone but Paul Diemand was eligible to vote. Yacuzzo read the letter from Maria Tymoczko dated June 3, 1999 into the record. Guisto commented that this was the first he had heard of this letter. He pointed out that Tymoczko objected to five thousand [attendees) last time, and this time she was objecting to three thousand. He suggested facetiously that if he were to offer the City a million dollars, Tymoczko would have objections to it. Members discussed the proposed conditions one by one. With regard to the permit's enforceability, Bennett commented that he was trying to spell out requirements as clearly as possible so that if there were a problem, the permit could become null and void. Romano suggested removing the requirement that a complaint be "written." Review Period. Bennett confirmed that the Zoning Act empowered the Planning Board to set a renewal period for the permit. Members discussed how long this period should be. Romano asked whether they could reduce the review period to one year if they initially set it for two years, and Bennett said they could. Bennett pointed out that Tymoczko would prefer to see it be one year. Bennett explained that he had included language specifying the specific items to be reviewed at the advice of Don Schmidt, who said the Board needed to specify the time frame and the issues they were going to be reviewing. Romano suggested including "all issues addressed at the initial public hearing and contained in the applicant's narrative." However, Bennett said Schmidt's advice was that the condition needed to have some specificity and that it could not just say the Board was going to review everything having to do with the permit. After further discussion, members reached the consensus that the review would include "all issues related to the instant conditions." Limit of Attendance. Members agreed to allow a maximum attendance of seven thousand five hundred, rather than the lower number advocated by Tymoczko. Guisto said he had no problem with limiting smaller events to three thousand, and members agreed to use this ceiling. Romano raised a concern about more than one event being held at a time and exceeding the maximum attendance of seven thousand five hundred. Guisto suggested an addition to specify that 2 any combination of events could never exceed an attendance of seven thousand five hundred and to specify that any combination of small events would not exceed three thousand, and members agreed. Regarding Attendance/Crowd Control, members agreed to require advance ticket sales for major events. They clarified that large events were defined as those events for which more than three thousand tickets would be sold. Romano asked if Guisto would put up a fence for small events, too? Guisto said they usually did. Romano said she wanted the smaller events fenced too so people would not go into the field. Guisto pointed out that the field would be blocked off in any case. He said the north side faced the runway and that side would be fenced, but the other side of the field would not be. Romano suggested the wording, "The applicant shall take measures to keep the audience out of the field for all events." Diemand said he thought they were right in doing that. Romano clarified that the paragraph on ticket sales/publicity should only apply to large events. Yacuzzo suggested adding that "Advance ticket sales shall include notice that ticket sales will not be available the day of the event" for these events. Alcohol. Bennett commented that the question of whether to allow the sale and service of alcohol had not been resolved. He said he did not think the Board had reached a consensus on the issue, so he wanted to make sure it was included in their discussion. Captain Wali said he would provide enhanced security for events where alcohol would be served, he reminded. Romano said she would leave [the matter] to the police. She said she thought that once they heard there was alcohol, they would do what they needed to do. Guisto said he had a licensed bartender who was required to check i.d.'s, and officers stood by the fenced area where the alcohol was served. He said alcohol would only be served at the two large events, and none of the smaller events would serve alcohol. Romano suggested saying, "The applicant shall comply with all recommendations of the police and the License Commission with regard to alcohol." Other members agreed. Notification. Members noted that Councillor Tymoczko had recommended that a schedule be made up by May 1 st of each year and mailed to all residents. 9 Guisto related that, in the past, he had gone to everyone on Old Ferry Road and Cross Path Road down to Riverbank Road and given them passes and permits in advance and schedules of events. He said he had always notified [abutters]. Fireworks had to be noticed in the paper by law, and that would only be once a year, he said. Small events would most likely be between five hundred and a thousand people, he added. Romano asked if Guisto could get a schedule out by May 1st? Guisto said he could get large events by May 1st, but he might have to amend the list if he were approached for another [small] event. In response to a question from Yacuzzo, Bennett indicated that he felt it would be reasonable to require Guisto to notify residents of Riverbank Road, Cross Path Road, Fair Street and Old Ferry Road of upcoming events. Yacuzzo suggested that Guisto ask the organizer to mail out notice if an additional event were scheduled after May 1 st. Diemand asked why the Board was requiring Guisto to mail out notices? He asked if the Three - County Fair was required to send out notices? Bennett said not that he was aware of. Yacuzzo suggested having a disclaimer at the bottom saying that some [additional] minor events may occur. He said he thought giving notice of major events and any events scheduled by that time would be reasonable. Members decided not to require posting notice in public places. Next, members discussed how much notice to require to the Police Department, Fire Department and Medical Services. Guisto suggested forty-five days for large events and fifteen for small. Regarding the proposed condition to hold the applicant responsible for obtaining necessary licenses, Bennett explained that this condition placed the burden on the applicant so that if a vendor failed to get a license, the Building Inspector would not have to chase after that individual. He commented that this had come up at another venue where the owner had insisted that it was the vendor's responsibility to obtain licenses. Guisto said he was very familiar with the requirement that anything bigger than a ten -by -ten foot tent must have a license, etc. Traffic and Parking Management. Yacuzzo commented that the condition as proposed was not much different than applying for a permit for each and every event. Romano suggested simply saying, "The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the .19 Northampton police with regard to traffic." She pointed out that it was hard to be specific and asked, "Why dictate when he's got to comply to the Police Department?" Bennett suggested the submittal of a security and traffic control plan to the Zoning Enforcement Officer. Diemand asked if Guisto was sensitive to the road area heading down to the fields so that vehicles exiting any events could not go down there? Guisto said he would love to do that, but the City would not allow them to block the roads. Members decided to just say that a security and traffic control plan had to be approved by the Police Department "in advance of the event" rather than specifying a time frame. Romano said she didn't think they needed anything else beyond the first bullet. Yacuzzo said he didn't think there was anything wrong with having a sign on Bridge Street. Bennett advocated for the requirement that, "All public roads are to remain unobstructed at all times to residents and farmers." Romano said she thought that as long as the police signed off [on the traffic plan] and did their job as they specified at the last public hearing, [this would be enough]. However, Yacuzzo said he thought they at least wanted to specify that the public roads must remain unobstructed. Guisto suggested that Captain Wall be the person to coordinate the scheduling of events at the airport and other venues to avoid conflicts, since everyone had to go to him anyway. Romano suggested the wording, "The applicant shall make all efforts to avoid conflicts in the scheduling of events," and no one expressed disagreement. Public Comments. Yacuzzo asked if there were any public comments? Cynthia Kochan commented that she lived within a stone's throw of the airport and had always lived near the airport since she had lived in Northampton. She said she had never objected to any of the events which took place at the airport. Kochan related that when she had gone to the first meeting for Vision 20/20, grandfathering the airport for entertainment purposes was so important that it had made the list of priorities for her group. "How could anyone object to a group of young people having a good time between noon and eight p.m.?" she asked. Kochan remarked that she was really concerned about where these perceptions were coming from. 5 She said she thought that sometimes a few people made so much noise that it seemed as if everyone was against [something]. She said she didn't know where this survey information came from, but certainly not everyone in the area was against it. Kochan also observed that the City seemed to be inordinately stringent with airport events. She questioned whether the City limited the number of people who could get into the Taste of Northampton or the Brewery or the Paradise City Arts Festival? She noted that the last "taste" was so crowded that it was impossible to move around. Yacuzzo explained that the Planning Board had no authority over the events Kochan referred to. He pointed out that this was a new permitting process, so thoroughness was appropriate because there had been concerns raised by the ward councillor and some neighbors. Yacuzzo said he didn't think they were being overly stringent - he thought they were being thorough to address the concerns of the neighbors in a public forum. Kochan stressed that at the 20/20 Vision meeting, the majority of people were in favor of airport events. She noted that Yacuzzo had made a point of saying that he owned a building and had the right to do what he wanted in business - Kochan said she was concerned because she would not like to see the Northampton Airport not able to sustain itself, since it was a great resource for Northampton. David Gengler commented that in his previous experience on the Conservation Commission as a member and as Chair, there were circumstances where they had City ordinances and state laws, and the enforcement officer was the Building Inspector, but the Building Inspector did not comply with the ordinance that was on the books. He pointed out that the Building Inspector was a mayoral appointment. Gengler noted that he had great respect for the current Building Inspector, but he wondered if they could put another back-up in so that if someone called to complain and the Building Inspector came down and said he didn't see a problem, there would be another step? Gengler continued that he didn't see the permitting process as over -regulation or as a constriction. He commented that what Guisto was doing was "bringing a new player into the field." He pointed out that the airport was a place where these things had not been allowed. Now [City officials] were saying they would be allowed, but they were having to be very thorough, he observed. Gengler agreed that the airport was a valuable asset to Northampton. Gengler also commented that it seemed to him that the Tri -County Fair should have preference when it came to coordinating the scheduling of events. He referred to discussion in the minutes of the previous hearing about the possibility of Morgan horses being present at some times. And, Gengler pointed out that if he read in the newspaper that there was going to be a fireworks display, he would get down there to see it. He said he would be there somewhere in the neighborhood to see it even if he couldn't get in, so he thought members should take that into consideration. Gengler revealed that he was present because he had been one of the people who for many years had been very irritated by the noise of the sky -diver planes. He said he knew that if he took that to the Zoning Board, Guisto would say that was a normal airport use... 2 Yacuzzo interrupted Gengler to point out that this was not an issue before the Board this evening. Gengler agreed that it was a stretch. However, he said that in opening the barn door to allow some new uses, he thought they might be able to open the discussion of some of the other events taking place at the airport. Board members expressed the consensus that they did not have the desire to address other events taking place at the airport. Jodrie moved to close the Public Hearing. Diemand seconded. The motion passed unanimously 6:0. Romano moved to approve the request from Richard Guisto for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval under Sections 5.2,10.10 and 10.11 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow outdoor commercial recreation at the Northampton Airport, including events such as musical entertainment, car shows, craft fairs, fireworks, food festivals, etc., also known as Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1,15-19, 53 & 71, because it meets the requirements of our zoning. Romano specifically incorporated by reference into the permit all the conditions the board had discussed in the document entitled, "Northampton Airport, Inc., Special Permit for Outdoor Entertainment Events," dated June 2,1999, as amended this evening. Diemand seconded. The motion passed unanimously 5:0. 7 • v, V - To Northampton Police Depa=,--including Prior notification (# of days or a request for development, review and approval of a traffic management (and public safety?) plan. - To Northampton Fire Department- .3 - Prior notification (# of days or weeks with prior approval required for events with anticipated attendance > 4,000 - To Emergency Medical Services bo` - Prior notification (# of days 6r weeks) License responsibility: It shall be the applicants responsibility to ensure that all other necessary permits for the Entertainment Events are in place, including but not limited to the securing of appropriate permits from the Building and Health Departments by/for all participants and vendors. Traffic (and Parking) Management/Event Security The PB has requested a copy of the letter from Giusto to NPD regarding detail hiring. The PB has requested narratives be submitted regarding traffic management from Giusto for on site and from NPD (Capt Wall) for off-site- - Each event is to be reviewed Aepe e ' h a sign off on the security and traffic control plan by the NPD submitted to the ZOE, advance of the event -F B' t. - All public roads are to remain unobstructed at all times to residents and farmers - There shall be no parking for airport entertainment events allowed on public roads or unaffiliated Private property. Aggressive towing shall be implemented, if necessary, at the expense of the applicant. Noise - Noise levels from entertainment events shall comply with the environmental standards in the Northampton Zoning Ordinance, to be measured at the property line and lowered if too loud. This sballpe self -monitored by the applicant, with enforcement by the ZOE. Coordination of events to avoid Zntlicts with: 3(-2 Fair - Avoid conflicts of large events - Avoid fireworks when livestock are present Recreation Department - Activities at Sheldon Field How is thisI to be accomplished? Protocol (I" come, Ig served, etc.)? Who will referee? Northampton Airport, Inc., Special Permit for Outdoor Entertainment Events 6/2/99 DRAFT Special Permit Conditions The Special Permit application and the applicant's narrative are hereby incorporated by reference. As conditions of granting a Special Permit for Outdoor Entertainment Use the Planning Board hereby establishes the following requirements: Enforceability: All conditions specified herein must be complied with at all times. If the conditions of this permit are violated, the Special Permit shall become null and void. Enforcement, if necessary, shall be through vwi#m complaint filed with the Zoning Enforcement Officer, the Building Commissioner. Review period or renewal date: This Special Permit shall lapse W, after two years from the date of issuance, the applicant has not submitted a renewal application and received Planning Board approval for another (2,) year term The renewal procedure shall follow the Special Permit application process. Specific concerns to be reviewed Wade (but are not necessarily limited to): Traffic manaieement at the fiate site a roads kept kee and for resr ts, farmers visitors to meado and at other or int ons, ch 'I Bridge at Fair St. at Old F d., V ers Field/14 ockan C. Other pubh issues wd contro ergen rvices); er borhoodcts, such oise; and 1- Number of Events: As the applicant has represented in the applicati there shall be no more than 840 events per calendar year, of which no more than tw hall have attendance of () 7,500, maximum. All remaining "Small Events" shall have attendance of nnm c m.. maximum �vt�,,,,co64& -2'moo G -e Attendance)C;Wde ntrsol: There shall be advance ticket sales only4 i V • its?). The audience shall be restricted to the fenced/secured area for la`events. There shall be one time entry, no re-entry allowed, for large events (Attendees shall not be allowed to re-enter the event grounds after leaving.). All and ticket prices shall include any parking fees. Event publicity shall include notice tha there will be no ticket sales the day of the event or at the event.✓ —nu UAAJ lcohol t' as o c secured events, no bottles or cans allowed at i e e ts, etc.? J�5�/f/�i� Notification: -To residents (How defined? All addresses in the Meadows, in the Ward, in the City?) By mailing noticelprinted schedule for all events by May 1 of each year Said notice to include date of event,da of wee time e. 11 AM -7P d °P ��� Y � ( g-, M), expected � ' � s �� attendance, and contact #s for complaints or concerns , N ` ��(J 2 3 � ' Z 14 3k Northampton Airport, Inc., Special Permit for Outdoor Entertainment Events 6/2/99 DRAFT Special Permit Conditions The Special Permit application and the applicant's narrative are hereby incorporated by reference. As conditions of granting a Special Permit for Outdoor Entertainment Use the Planning Board hereby establishes the following requirements: Enforceability: All conditions specified herein must be complied with at all times. If the conditions of this permit are violated, the Special Permit shall become null and void. Enforcement, if necessary, shall be through vai#vp complaint filed with the Zoning Enforcement Officer, the Building Commissioner. Review period or renewal date: This Special Permit shall lapse W, after two years from the date of issuance, the applicant has not submitted a renewal application and received Planning Board approval for another (2,3,x) year term. The renewal procedure shall ` follow the Special Permit application process. Specific concerns to be reviewed itw6de ov (but are not necessarily limited to): Tftffic manamement, at the ' e site a roads kept ee and for �o resi , farmers visitors to meado and at other 'or int fo r. Bridge at Fair St. at Old F d., Ven Field/H ockanuc. er Immmmul bh issues owd contro gen 'ces); e1 b rh s such ise; and 1n VW Number of Events: As the applicant has represented in the applicaZiore shall be no more than 840 events per calendar year, of which no more than twave attendance of () 7,500, maximum. All remaining "Small Events" shall have attendance of 3j (3�, maximum / A -a Atten4ia'nce)C; dwd control: There shall be advance ticket sales only its?). The audience shall be restricted to the fenced/secured area for events. There shall be one time entry, no re-entry allowed, for large events (Attendees shall not be allowed to re-enter the event grounds after leaving.). All and ticket prices shall include any parking fees. Event publicity shall include notice tha there will be no ticket sales the da of the event or at the evetrt A" coh ol as o ured events, no bottles or cans allowed at 1 e e s, etc.? Notification:- - To residents (How defined? All addresses in the Meadows, in the Ward, in the City?) By mailing noticelprinted schedule for all events by May 1 of each year GV04 s PAJ By -posting said "tiee in (" pubfiefW6. Said notice to include date of event, day of wee time e. I I AM 7PM) � (g-, ,expected � `�. attendance, and contact #s for complaints or concerns $94135e` 64 NORTHAMPTON, MA Post -Ir Fax Note 7671 �� pages► To From Jr' 1.. coMept. Z co. 3—* -7,_ -7 Northampton Airport, Inc., Special Permit for Outdoor Entertainment Events 6/2/99 DRAFT_ Special Permit Conditions The Special Permit application and the applicant's narrative are hereby incorporated by reference. As conditions of granting a Special Permit for Outdoor Entertainment Use the Planning Board hereby establishes the following requirements: Enforceability: All conditions specified herein must be complied with at all times, conditions of this permit are violated, the Special Permit shall become null and void. Enforcement, if necessary, shall be through written complaint filed with the Zo Enforcement Officer, the Building Commissioner. Review period or renewal date: This Special Permit shall lapse ' er two years fium the date of issuance, the applicant has not submitted a r applic-won and received Planning Board approval for another (2,/^ year term a renewal procedure shall follow the Special Permit application process. Specific concerns to be reviewed include (but are not necessarily limited to): Traffic mwagtment, at the immediate site (are roads kept free and clear for passage by residents, farmers and visitors to the meadows) and at other. major intersections, such ass) Bridge St. at Fair St. and at Old Ferry Rd., Venturers Field/Heruy/Hockanum; etc. i Other mbfic safe issues (crowd control, emergency services); Neighborhood impacts, such as noise; and ,,DD Number of Events: As the applicant has represented in the application, there shall be no mor 80 events per calendar year, of which no more than two shall have attendance 0 sem, 5 0 to) 7,500, maximum. All remaining "Small Events" shall have attendance of (ut Z- ,000? , maximum. Attendance/Crowd control: There shall be advance ticket sales only for large eventsW'--, The audience shall be restricted to the fenced/secured area for large events," here shall be one time entry, no re-entry allowed, for large events (Attendees shall not be allowed to re -eater the event -grounds after leaving.). All ticket sales shag be in advance and ticket prices shall include any parking fees. Event publicity shall include notice that there will be no ticket sales the day of the event or at the event. Alcohol - Any limitations, such as no alcohol at unsecured events, no bottles or cans allowed at large events, etc,? Notification: - To residents (How defined? All addresses in the Meadows, in the Ward, in the City?) By mailing notice/printed schedule for all events by May 1 of each year By posting said notice in (X?) public places Said notice to include date of event, day of week, time (e.g., 11AM-7PM), expected attendance, and contact #s for comlaints nr c 4 w 4 — --- 06/03/99 12:24$9413264 NORTHAMPTON, MA f002 r4e,a To NortA nt n Police Department• / Prior notification (# of days or weeks), including a request for development, review and approval of a traffic management (and -public safety?) Plan. P ? - To Tort ha pton Fire D_gpartL - Prior notification (# of days or weeks), with prior approval required for events with anticipated attendance > 4 '3ara - To Emergency Medical Services.. - Prior notification (# of days or weeks) License responsibility: It shall be the applicants responsibility to ensure that all other necessary permits for the Entertainment Events are in place, including but not limited to the securing of appropriate permits from the Building and Health Departments by/for all participants and vendors. TrafTic (and Parking) Management/Event Security The PB has requested a copy of the letter from Giusto to NPD regarding detail hiring. The PB has requested narratives be submitted regarding bu is management, from Giusto for on-site and from NPD (Capt Wallj for qff-site- �h event is to be reviewed and planned for individually by the Northampton Police Ament, with a sign off on the security and traffic control plan by the NPD submitted to the PB, ZOE, OPD? X weeks in advance of the event (2X for large events?). - For large events, traffic direction shall be provided at critical intersections, such ash Bridge St./Old Ferry Rd. beginning at least 2(7) hours before the - For large events, the applicant shall cause signage to be posted on Bridge St. indicating that the event is sold out, that there are no ticket sales the day of the event or at the event. - All public roads are to remain unobstructed at all times to residents and farmers - There shall be no parking for airport entertainment events allowed on public roads or unaffiliated private property. Aggressive towing shall be implemented, if necessary, at the expense of the applicant. Noise - Noise levels from entertainment events shalt comply the Northampton Zoning Ordinance to be measurat the with the rape�onmental standards in property line and lowered if � too loud. This shall be self -monitored by the applicant, with enforcement by the ZOE " Coordination of events to avoid conflicts with: Fay mc j t) Avoid conflicts of l .rge events - Avoid fireworks ,ien livestock are present4 RM ft i no Dema ; - Activities at Sheldon Field How is this to be agm fished? 1 far, S Pro col (l� come, 1g served, etc.)? riAW!r i� e�2S� NORTHAMPTON POLICE DEPARTMENT tZussell T. Sienhieuvicz CHIEF OF POLICE NORTHAMPTON POLICE COMMITTEE NORTHAMPTON ORDINANCE COMMITTEE OFFICIAL MEETING NOTICE DATE: 7 JUNE 1999 TIME: 9:30 AM PLACE: John F Kennedy Middle School (Room TBA). AGENDA: ITEM #1: CO 19-14 Amending Prohibition of Certain Activities on Streets and Sidewalks; paragraphs 1 & 2 as described in 6 MAY City Council referral. ITEM #2: Any Other Business. Submitted, ,(J Russell P Sienkiewicz Chief of Police 29 CENTER STREET, NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060-3090 (413) 587-1100 FAX: (413) 587-1137 Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 • EMAIL planning@city.northampton.ma.us -Conservation Commission -Historical Commission -Planning Board • Housing Partnership -Zoning Board of Appeals May 10, 1999 Richard Guisto Northampton Airport, Inc. P.O. Box 221 Northampton, MA 01061 Dear Dick: This letter is to confirm that the Public Hearing on your application for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval to allow outdoor commercial recreation at the Northampton Airport, including events such as musical entertainment, car shows, craft fairs, fireworks, food festivals, etc. for property located on Old Ferry Road has been continued by the Northampton Planning Board to its meeting scheduled for May 13, 1999 at 8:30 P.M. in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton. You and/or your representative(s) are required to attend this meeting to explain the application and discuss the merits of the application. If you have any questions, please contact the Office of Planning and Development, City Hall, Telephone 587-1262. Sincerely, Laura H. Krutzler Board Secretary enclosure ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT 4135845614 05/04 110 08:13 NO NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT IN PO. BOX :2:21 NORTHAMPTON MA. 01 O 413-584-7984 FAX 413-585-1614 5/4/99 Tony Patillo Building Commissioner City of Northampton, MA Dear Tony; Please be advised that the article in the Morning Union on 5/4/99 is incorrect. I have no plans for the near or distant future to build a restaurant at the Northampton Airport. The trailer that is there now is not operated by me or pays any rent, we let him operate for convenience of food at the airport. I made a statement that "It would be great to have a first class restaurant, with an aviation theme like some other airports." But I am not the one who is going to build or operate one nor do I know of anyone who plans to at this time. Tony, as usual, the paper has taken everything out of context please advise everyone with interest THE AIRPORT HAS NO PLANS TO CONSTRUCT A RESTARUANT. NORTHAMPTON POLICE'DEPARTMENT Allssell-T cSierr6kwzi z CHIEF OF POLICE Date: April 21, 1999 To: Planning Board —Ad, From: Captain Michael B. Wall Re: Northampton Airport Be advised that I have had numerous conversations with Mr. Giusto concerning the planning process for outdoor entertainment at the airport. I am satisfied that he will meet all police department requests. I have also reviewed his addendum to the permit application and concur with his proposals to manage the events. 29 CENTER STREET, NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060-3090 (413) 587-1100 FAX: (413) 587-1137 COUNCILORS AT LARGE Mary Clare Higgins Phillip L. Sullivan WARD 1 William H. Dwight 2 Frances C. Volkmann 3 Maria Tymoczko 4 Michael R. Bardsley 5 Alex D. Ghiselin 6 Marianne L. LaBarge 7 George E. Quinn Mr. Daniel Yacuzzo, Chair Planning Board City of Northampton Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. Yacuzzo, ti sit CITY COUNCIL CITY OF NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS April 20, 1999 Because of a previous professional commitment in Boston on April 22, 1999, I am unable to attend the hearing regarding the application of Richard Giusto for a permit for outdoor entertainment events at the airport. There- fore, as City Councilor for Ward 3, I am writing this letter to give some response to the permit application. My constituents are not unanimous on this issue. A small number of people (approximately 3) have spoken to me supporting outdoor events at the airport. A much larger number (approximately 30) have spoken to me about either their opposition to such events or their grave reservations about such events. The following are the con- cerns raised. Events at the airport in the past have been very noisy. There should be a stipulation that the airport will follow city ordinances regulating sound levels. Traffic is a great concern, and residents suggest the following. There should be traffic direction at the intersec- tion of Bridge Street and Old Ferry Road beginning at 8 a.m. any day of an event (the last time the Warped Tour was held, the direction began about 10 --after an accident had already occurred that ended up tying up Route 9 for 45 minutes!). There should be traffic control at Cross Path Road going toward Riverbank to prevent any cars from turning in that direction as they exit from the events at the airport; this has been a particular problem with events ending after dark. The underpass at I-91 should never be blocked up with ticket gates or the like pertaining to the event, as has happened in the past, preventing residents of Riverbank Road from having easy access to their homes. Access to all streets in the area should be maintained at all times. Old Ferry Road should always have two-way traffic, such that residents can come and go at will. Important provisions need to be specified to protect the fields --2000 acres of prime agricultural land, one of the economic mainstays of Northampton. The traffic direction and parking should be such that agricultural machines are able to access fields and barns at all times (unlike problems that occurred during one concert). There should be no simultaneous events at the Fair/airport and Sheldon Field/airport. Airport events should be cleared with the Recreation Department so as to prevent cancellation of recreation events as has happened in the past. A printed schedule of all airport events should be distributed on May 1 of every year, indicating to residents which days they can expect entertainment activities at the airport and what expected attendance will be. This schedule should indicate all expected events between May 1 and November 1. In general the rights of residents to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness should be respected. People buy houses on Riverbank Road because of the quiet and isolation. They pay taxes to the City; they deserve to have their living conditions respected and protected by the City departments and boards. These considerations should be built into any permit conditions. Most importantly, from my own perspective as City Councilor, I would ask you to cap attendance under the permit at 5000. We have not yet had a successful event at the airport with attendance greater than 5000 that was conducted with consideration for residents. The Fairgrounds can hold events of about 15,000 people successfully with no undue impact on residents, but the Fair has three access roads, not one access road. This suggests that the optimum maximum size at the airport is about 5000. I feel that for the next 3 years, any events over 7500 should be licensed through Temporary Events permits, where there can be close oversight of specifics. Should the air- port develop a successful track record for such large events, I would then support a more general permit allowing 2 such events per year at the airport. To date, however, in my experience there have been great problems every time a crowd of this size used the airport and there is every counterindication to permitting such events on a regu- lar and by right basis. Finally, I would ask that periodic annual reviews of the general entertainment permit at the airport be built in, or that the permit be only for one or two years. This would allow for evaluations of the situation to see that entertainment events as proposed can be conducted compatibly with the residential activities in the neighborhood, as well as the agricultural ones. Many thanks for your consideration of these concerns. If I can be of any further help, please let me know. Should this hearing be continued, I would appreciate it being scheduled for May 27, so that I can be in attendance. Sincerely yours, l7iVY Maria ymoczko City Councilor for Ward 3 u u 1 a-Lire]\1 111 TO: Ck NeJame, Chair, Zoning Board of Appeals FR: uel B. Brindis, P.E., Director, Department of Public Works DA: April 13, 1999 RE: File # Unknown CC: file The Department of Public Works has reviewed the above referenced application for the following items: Traffic: —X—Volume Volume & Impact on City Street —Roadway Capacity Adequacy of City Road Construction Site Distances Parking Driveway Openings Utilities: Drainage Into City Stormwater System Capacity of Stormwater Line Sanitary Sewer Water Other: The Department of Public Works has the following comments: No Concerns, project will not have an impact on any items reviewed Traffic Study is required Roadway does not have adequate capacity to handle the additional traffic Roadway is not adequately constructed to handle proposed increase in traffic Site Distances are not adequate for proposed project Parking spaces do not meet minimum requirements Parking spaces are too close to driveway opening Driveway openings are not adequate for proposed use City stormwater system is not adequate to handle increase in drainage Stormwater system does not meet minimum requirements for reduction of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Sanitary Sewer line is not adequately sized for proposed use Sewer line connection is not properly shown Water line is not adequately sized for proposed use Water line connection is not properly shown X Other Comments: A detailed traffic management plan must be submitted. \OPD\Airport �R' Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 • EMAIL planning®city.northampton.ma.us *Conservation Commission -Historical Commission -Planning Board • Housing Partnership -Zoning Board of Appeals April 8, 1999 Richard Guisto Northampton Airport, Inc. P.O. Box 221 Northampton, MA 01061 Dear Dick: Your application for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval to allow outdoor commercial recreation at the Northampton Airport, including events such as musical entertainment, car shows, craft fairs, fireworks, food festivals, etc. for property located on Old Ferry Road has been accepted by the Northampton Planning Board, and the Public Hearing will be conducted at its meeting scheduled for April 22,1999 at 7:30 P.M. in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton. You and/or your representative(s) are required to attend this meeting to explain the application and discuss the merits of the application. Approximately two weeks before the Public Hearing, a legal notice announcing the meeting will be published in the Daily H=shire Gazette (copy attached). All the abutters listed in the application will receive a copy of this notice in the mail. If you have any questions, please contact the Office of Planning and Development, City Hall, Telephone 587-1262. Sincerely, Laura H. Krutzler Board Secretary enclosure ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ti•� .03/10/99 09:32 'x`9413' '1264 NORTHAMPTON, MA 0001 Post4r Fax Note 7671 Del" ► 7b From CITY OF NORTHAMPTON PLANNING BOARD APPLICATION FOR: 1. Type. of Project:: SITE PLAN APPROVAL : IatermMiate Project (Site Plan) Major Projeet (Site Plan Special Permit) .. OR _SPECIAL PFAU%W::.. Iatermeftte'Project (with Site Pian Approval) Major Project (Site Plan Special Permit) 2. Permit is ted under Zonfim Ordinance: Section: Pa e: 3. Applicant's Name: K I t'_ AR 17x I U Address:20 YAT�✓ Telephone: _ N/'3- �� 4. Parcel Identification: Zoning Map # Parcel # Zoning District: Street Address: 5. Status of Applicant: Owner Contract Purclaser Lessee Other (explain) 6. Property Owner: Address: R9 pM lLyL RA Telephone: �g �j - `j 190 k I X 7. Describe Proposed WorklProject: ((Uses additional sheets if necessary): Has the following information been included in the application? Site/Plot Plan List of requested waive=--)(— Fee -_Y_ SignedMcnied Zoning permit Application_____ 8• Site Plan and Special Permit Approval Criteria. (If any permit asteria does not apply, explain why) Use additional sheets if necessary. Assistance for completing this information is available through the Office of Planning & Development, A. How will the requested use protect adjOm jpg prennses against seriously detrimental um? How will the project provide for. surface water drainage - sound and sight buffers: the preservation of views, light and MOM- =�Ikljrl %� 7 �. 03/10/88 08:33 $8413 1264 NORTHAMPTON, MA 01002 B. How will the requested use promote on adjacent streets?_ S rlf N convenience and safety of pedestrian movement within the site and How will the project minimi, traffic his on the streets and roads in the area? S C r- Ae.[ R riyF Where is the location of driveway openings in relation to traffic and adjacent streets? LocAttridS, Akr--- 546wAJ ew 71-1,+A/ What features have been incorporated into the design to allow for: access by emergency vehicles: -Selz A RA r i V r // the safe and convenient arrangement of parldog and loading spaces: provisions for persons with disabilities: / / C. How will the proposed use promote a harmompW relationship of structures and open spaces to: the natural landscape:_ /�/ ,/� r1% p d 12 A lZ y E U >` A/l-S to existing buildings: ! R other community assets in the area: 5 D. What measures are being taken that show the use will not overload the City's resources, including: water supply and distribution system: S 1= E /4,4 R RArd sanitary sewage and storm water conecdon and treatment systems: Fire protection, streets and schools: S E E A14 QR AD 1/F How will the proposed project mitigate any adverse impacts on the City's resources, as listed above? SEF AM R R tea'ri V — E. List the section(s) of the Zoning Ordinance that states what special regulati JSAUiLmd for the _ proposed project (flag lot, common drive, lot size averaging, etc.) 5 APR 6 I : 03/10/88 08:34 'x`8413" 1264 A NORTHAMPTON, MA How does the project meet the ill .re ements? (Use additional sheets if necessary) S ,�� r�wt F. State how the project meets the following technical performance standards: l_ Curbcats are minimized: Tj� F�/i✓illM AO COTS '0 Check off all that apply to the project: of a common driveway for access to more than one business use of an existing side street use of a looped service road 2. Does the project require more than one driveway cut? —,X NO YES (if yes, explain why) TC/ti l? C1jE/U 3. Are pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular tmflic separated on-site? _ ko-- YES NO (if no, expj* why) FOR PROJECTS THAT REQUIRE INTERMEDIATE SITE PLAN APPROVAL. ONLY _ SIGN APPLICATION AND END HERE. - 9. I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. The undersigned owner(s) grant Planning Board permission to enter the property to review this application. Date: Applicant's Signature:. Date: Owner's Signature: (If not the same as applicant's) FOR. PROJECTS -THAT' REQUME A_ SPECIAL PERNIIT OR WHICH. ARE A -MAJOR PROJECT aavlieants MUST also comnietc the followine• F. Explain why the requested use will: not unduly impair the integrity, o character of the district or adjoining zones:_ TIMI FRE ILL BF CiLIZFi�I (-4. CONI RO 1 O v Eta. A!'t"s m p-, 1!V r�u r K not be detrimental to the health, morals or general welfare: V6 W lt.l. 99A,U Aw ibtdii ALL AIE65EIS .RY D97ri be in h rmony with the general purpose and intent of the Ordinance: N 5+- d r u S - I L ERM; 77- , — ) � � � 0 V 9. " s Ai�A 6 1999 t CITY CLERKS OFFICE NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 6 Q003 03/10/88 08:34 e9413F x.264 NORTHAMPTON, MA G. Explain how the requested use will promote City planning objectives to the extent possible and will not adversely ei%ct those objectives, defined in City toaster study plats (Open Space and Recreation Plan; Northampton State Hospital Rezoning Plan; and Downtown Northampton: Today, Tomorrow and the Future). C v- rSR V 1,++A/ r— 15 S A10 0Tt4I_ R 19 Or- C iAIS 9. I certify that the information contained herein is true and ac to th t of my knowledge. The undersigned owner(s) grant the Playni oard p t oper review this application. Date: Applicant's Signature: Date: Owner's Signature: (If not the same as applicant's) MAJOR PROJECTS MUST :ALSO COWL- XTE .1 ME FOLLOWING MAJOR PROJECT -•APPROVAL- . . Does the project incorporate 3 foot sumps into the storm water control system? Yes No (IF NO, explain why) Will the project discharge stormwater into the City's storm drainage system? Yes No (IF NO, answer the following:) Do the drainage calculations submitted demonstrate that the project has been designed so that there is no increase in peak flows from pre- to post -development conditions during the: 1, 2, or 10 year Soil Conservation Service design storm ? Yes No (IF NO, explain why) Will all the runoff from a 4/10 Inch rainstorm (first flush) be detained on-site for an average of 6 hours? Yes No (IF NO, explain why) Is the applicant requesting a reduction in the parking requirements? Yes No If yes, what steps have been taken to reduce the need for parking, and number of trips per day? ITO N fp R n no APR 61999 CLERKS OFFICE APTON, MA 011 7 Q 004 03/10/99 09:35 e9413F"'1264 NORTHAMPTON, MA sewage disposal facilities - water supply facilities 1=X5 JSr1A/G 8. Existing & proposed: landscaping, trees and plantings (size & type of plantings) Q006 awuc WGAW - buffers and/or fencing - B -9. Signs - existing and proposed: - Location dimensions/height a-2 ' WdIrza S I &W c FDR 1?1/�rrSlszeL.S �M i'� color and illumination 4/n B-10. Proyisious for refuse removal, with facilities for when appropriate: FOR MAJOR PROJECT'S ONLY: B-11. An erosion control plan and other measures taken to protect natural resources & water supplies: C. Estimated daily and peak hour vehicles trips generated by the proposed use, traffic pan anis for vehicles and pedestrians showing adequate access to and from the site, and adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulation within the site. Site Plans submitted for major projects shall be prepared and stamped by a: Registered Architect, Landscape Architect, or Professional Engineer APR 6 1999 CITY CLERKS OFFICE NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 9 03/10/99 09:35 e9413r 1264 NORTHAMPTON, MA SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS REQUEST FOR WAIVERS APPLICATI R RR M R APA 6 1999 CITY CLERKS OFFICE NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 The application MUST include a site plan containing the information listed below. The Planning Board may waive the submission of any of the required information, if the Applicant submits this form with a written explanation on why a waiver would be appropriate. To request a waiver on any required information, circle the item number and IM In the reason, for the request. Use additional sheets if necessary. A. Locus plan 'S E r,A if A cyk r p MA 2 DSite plan(s) at a scale of 1"=40' or greateri� pnR]' 1 S 7'wCJ �. �/�GF B-1. Name and address of the owner and the developer, name of project, date and scale plans: 42161ST0 Z280YA/rdJV RO S. IiEERFIEI..p._ AIA 01373 SE's' -H-4A] B-2. Plan showing Location and boundaries of: the lot Amc IEC n adjacent streets or ways + all properties and owners within 300 feet all zoning districts within 300 feet I / B-37 Existing and proposed: -buildings O_ C WA d/I"rF S Al U AlrW zlix /AA;� <; -setbacks from property lines -building elevations -all exterior entrances and exit.4 (elevation plans or all exterior facades structures are encouraged) B4. Present & proposed use of the land buildings: Existing and proposed topography (for intermediate projects the permit granting authority may accept �—� generalized topography instead of requiringMPngr ur lines): at two foot contour intervals 1 S 1•= IAT 123 10. C showing wetlands, streams, surface water bodies i'0 J!VMMLr Tn showing drainage swales and floodplain:_ R M 1r A pP/I C,t_r+e)Al - showing unique natural land features B-6. Location of: parking & loading areas .4T1-.4eNLn RAA - public & private ways -driveways, walkways I I - access & egress points I/ - proposed surfacing:AX/o- r Location and description of- �-� - all stormwater drainageldetention facilities water quality structures t' public & private utilities/easements AIA it 8 005 FAP61999 Narrative: �:�;CTIH�ANSMAF01060Northampton Airport is looking to acquire a permit to hold temporary even Airport. As you all know, the Airport has hosted many events of all types over the last fifty (50) years or so. Our plan is to provide quality entertainment suitable for families. We will restrict all events with a focus on airshows, hot air balloon festivals, craft fairs, car shows, fireworks, ethnic celebrations, dances, musical events, food festivals and the like. Two of the events could bring as many as—but will not exceed—seventy-five hundred (7,500) people, hereinafter referred to as 'large events'. There would be a maximum of two such large events in any calendar year. The Airport hereby agrees to the stipulation that there will be No Rock Concerts. at any time. Any type of musical entertainment planned would be restricted to country western and modem/popular music, all with nationally or locally well known acts. The smaller events will not exceed eight in number in one calendar year. It is anticipated that such events would usually bring in less than three thousand (3000) attendees. All events will be one day events. No event will start earlier than 8:00am and would last no later than 11:00pm. Most events will start at noon and end by 10pm. The police and fire departments will be noted of all events in advance. The large events will have sheriffs, police and private security sufficient to handle traffic and crowd control. The Northampton Police Department would be in charge of overseeing all security versonnel including the sheriffs The Airport has a $1,000,000.00 liability insurance policy in effect at all times. It is agreed that this will be the minimum in effect at all times in the future. The actual show arra for the large events will be fenced off to keep it secure and prevent attendees from leaving the show and returning, thus cutting down on unnecessary traffic. After all events, the Airport will be returned to its original state and all trash picked up and removed as expeditiously as possible. There will be no permanent changes to the airport as a result of this special permit process. 8A All events at the Airport are temporary one day events. The airport and the surrounding area will be returned to normal by the next day, i.e. all trash picked up, all temporary signs and posters removed, etc. Therefore, there would be no detrimental affect on the surrounding area, view or air. 8B Uniformed safety personnel will be at all important intersections and comers (as determined by NPD) to facilitate incoming and outgoing traffic. On site, there will be walkways for pedestrian movement in parking lots and safety personnel to assist walkers crossing at approved intersections. Once a person is on the event grounds, they must remain on site. Should they decide to leave, they will not be allowed to return. The times of the events will be run so as not to conflict with the morning and evening rush hours whenever possible. Emergency vehicles i.e. ambulance/rescue, police cruiser will be in place on the airport at all large events until the event is over. Fire Department personnel will also be on site for any event, whether small or large, that involves the use of fireworks. As shown on the site plan submitted, the back road to Hockinim Road will be kept open, (see attached plan). The Airport has had considerable experience in parking vehicles at events such as those being requested and sufficient parking personnel and parking areas adjacent to the show area will be provided. (see the attached plan) The closest and most convenient parking lot to the show area is assigned for the handicapped and appropriate toilet facilities will be in place for all at convenient, accessible areas at all events. 8C All events are temporary. There will be no new permanent structures of any kind that would atter the natural landscape and the open space will not be affected. Nor would there be any changes affecting any of the pre-existing permanent structures on the airport grounds. All events will be planned so as not to conflict with the Taste of Northampton nor the Three County Fair. All necessary precautions will be taken to protect Sheldon Field and Rainbow Beach. These precautions may include, but are not limited to, sheriff and police patrols. It should be noted here there will be no cost to the City of Northampton for any extra police or security at any Airport events. The expenses for all police, fire, sheriffs, etc. will be the sole responsibility of the Airport. 8D The water supply will be the existing service at the Airport. Past events have proven that the current system is sufficient and there is no need to expand same. The Airport has no sewer system. We normally use just our septic system, but in the past, during all events, large or small, we have installed port -a -potties and this practice will continue. The Airport is not located close enough to Bridge Street School to pq Fire protection is as explained above in a previous paragraph and�i li T 6e stationed at strategic comers to facilitate all traffic. a All events will be in compliance with Health, Building, Police, Fire an an other necessary department odes. 331110 203.13 rrI0 03010 AM AOMMAHM111 U - / I have tried to answer all the required questions on this application honestly and completely. If I have omitted anything significant, please advise and I will do whatever I can to resolve the matter in a prompt and professional manner. Thank you. APR 6 �ggg OFFICECITY CLERKS NORTHAMPTON. MA1060 FFR 2 41999 _ Fite No. _ ;7APR 6%1999 "EPI Of SI.I1111"?, PEGTIOdS ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION §1 O 1 E KS OFFICE PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT ALL INFORMATION PION, 01060 1. Name of Applicant: Owner of Property:, orfrfrocc• �Prl Telephone:'T?y- % Cleo 3. Status of Applicant: Owner Contract Purchaser Lessee Other (explainj: 4. Job Location: \c. Parcel Id: Zoning Map# Parcel# �� District(s):_ (TO BE FILLED IN BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT) 5. Existing Use of Structure/Property 6. Description of Proposed UseNVork/Project/Occupation: (Use additional sheets if necessary): 4:g,ee WA:�-jg � 7. Attached Plans: Sketch Plan Site Plan Engineered/Surveyed Plans Answers to the following 2 questions may be obtained by checking with the Building Dept or Planning Department Files. 8. Has a Special PermiWariance/Finding ever been issued for/on the site? NO DONT KNOW YES IF YES, date issued: IF YES: Was the permit recorded at the Registry of Deeds? NO DONT KNOW YES IF YES: enter Book Page and/or Document # 9. Does the site contain a brook, body of water or wetlands? NO DON'T KNOW_ YES IF YES, has a permit been or ne d to be obtained from the Conservation Commission? Needs to be obtained Obtained , date issued: (FORM CONTINUES ON OTHER SIDE) #APB� EVENTS AT THE NORTHAMPTON 60 1999 2 Large Events- up to 7,500 people Fireworks Events The following are small events- less than 3,000 people: Craft Fairs Car Shows Airshows-Airport? Balloon Festivals -Airport? Ethnic Celebrations Dances Food Festivals CITY CLERKS 0-FFI E - RNAMPTON. MA 01060 All events are one day except perhaps the circus. This would be limited to two days. All events are over by 10:00 P.M. Events to be held between April 1 Ot to October 31 o`. SECURITY- All small events (under 3,000) have never been a problem for police. All events over 3,000- coverage depends on the size of the event. For example, a large, 15,000 person event would have 6 local police officers, and 30 Sherriffs Deputies for a total of 36 in uniform. Additionally show security would average approximately 100 people. All large events will have an ambulance on the premises. An event with fireworks would also have a fire truck. The emergency entrance and exit is Hockanum Rd. All parking would be on the airport and property owned by Gary Haggerty. Combined these properties will hold over 7,000 cars. t� FEB 2 41999 i 4 „ EP10FSU KD �.� „PECTIONS Nor-,., `n41 `34'444trwould total no more then 8 events per year, some events may include multiples, like an air show with a crafts fair and hot air balloon. A car show with a food festival, etc. The Fire Dept. and Police Dept. will be kept informed of all events no matter what size the event. The airport has in effect an $1,000,000.00 airport premises insurance policy. This policy has been in effect since we have been here, and will remain in effect as long as we are here. The airport has a lot of experience in parking cars, all cars will be directed to the end of Old Ferry Rd. turned onto Cross Path Rd. to the runway, out the runway for parking on both sides of the runway. NO CARS WILL BE STOPPED ON THE RD. FOR ANY REASON. The show areas will all be fenced in and secure. After the show, all areas will be cleaned, policed and returned to original condition within 24 hours. No permanent changes will be made to the airport without the proper permit processes. I have honestly tried to ss all of the city and your concerns, if I have omitted anything pl eel o contact me and we can adjust what is necessary. Yo Richard APA 6 1999 CITY CLERKS OFFICE NORTHAMPTON, MA 0100 File # MP -1999-0087 APPLICANT/CONTACT PERSON NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC. ADDRESS/PHONE P.O. BOX 221 RICHARD GIUSTO 584-7980 PROPERTY LOCATION 152 CROSS PATH RD MAP 25 PARCEL 015 ZONE SC APR 6 1999 NO TITYNAMP ONSMAF0 060 THIS SECTION FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY: PERMIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST ZONING FORM FILLED OUT ENCLOSED REQUIRED DATE Fee Paid Building Permit Filled out Fee Paid Tvoeof Consftuction: EVENTS - SEE ATTACHED SHEETS New Construction Non Structural interior renovations— Addition en va ' nsAddition to Idgin AgggiM Structure Building Plans Included: Owner/ Statement or License 3 sets of Plans / Plot Plan THE FOLLOWING ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN ON THIS APPLICATION: /Approved as presented/based on information presented. v Denied as presented: _ &)4f &ma-cl-k Special Permit and/or Site Plan Required under: § �^ V S� �ems{ `k ", ose— _PLANNING BOARD ZONING BOARD Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed Finding Required under: § w/ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed Variance Required under: § ­w/ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed Other Permits Required: Curb Cut from DPW Water Availability Sewer Availability Septic Approval Board of Health Well Water Potability Board of Health Permit from �2-Sk om Conserv n Commission 2 Signature of B ding fficial Date Note: Issuance of a Zoning permit does not relieve a applicant's burden to comply with all zoning requirements and obtain all required permits from Board of Health, Conservation Commission, Department of public works and other applicable permit granting authorities. i I �D I [@Row[ [I APR 6 1999 CITY CLERKS OFFICE NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 O G C °` ` r+ ` J, O �� EAP7R i 1J d �` co 0 tQ� RAtNb�W , j oFoo 401, 1� 140 II 14 ID X I HSL ;t gig .vc� �• =fir --- _ o = , �-/ 4 - CPO No (n ol Sts "►� t �� .��• �+ •'' 7�: o �.. - ._..%� 0'�` �` ;,tJv .� rr+`' '��O Y) ,:.� ic';7� 1s► .t 6 4�i6, v;� Q� Lv _•_ CJ�� � 7N ' � �; o CT �TN..i S� Ft oc?' z zw s ' T A t f ' t�, _ T -,� Cir _ • • +$ 7�'~r . "•�l ti i%air Ofpl d�yt S S A'pS d� M , N w a YiP w LDRICH++ffi ST -44J Type of 2. Permit is CITY OF NORTHAMPTON PLANNING BOARD APPLICATION FOR: SITE PLAN APPROVAL: Intermediate Project (Site Plan) Major, Project. Plan Special Permit) „ SPECIAL: PERMIT. Intermediate Project (with Site Plan Approval) Major Project (Site Plan Special Permit) :ed under Zoning Ordinance: Section: Paee: S. -2 rt'Cf 3. Applicant's Name: _ Address: 4. Parcel Identification: 5. 6. 7 Status of Applicant: Property O ner: Address: Describe Proposed reiepnone: Zoning aap # '' Parcel # Zoning District:_ Street Address: r - Owner Contract Purchaser Lessee Other : (exnlain). . _ Telephone:_( a 1- Of:tZ necessary): Has the following informatio% been included in the application? Site/Plot Plan VO List of requested waivers�Fee Signed/Denied Zoning Permit Application Cj 8. Site Plan and Special Permit Approval Criteria. (If any permit criteria does not apply, a plaiy) Use additional sheets if necessary. Assistance for completing this information is available through the Office of Planning & Development. A. How will �the_requestteeduse protect adjoining premises against seriously detrimental uses? J`hF� MLLA How will the project provide for: surface water drainage:_ Ila sound and sight buffers: the preservation of views, light and air: 4 iD CITY CLERKS 0-`�' ITHAMP ON. MA 01060 11. Type of 2. Permit is CITY OF NORTHAMPTON PLANNING BOARD APPLICATION FOR: SITE PLAN APPROVAL: Intermediate Project (Site Plan) Major, Project. Plan Special Permit) „ SPECIAL: PERMIT. Intermediate Project (with Site Plan Approval) Major Project (Site Plan Special Permit) :ed under Zoning Ordinance: Section: Paee: S. -2 rt'Cf 3. Applicant's Name: _ Address: 4. Parcel Identification: 5. 6. 7 Status of Applicant: Property O ner: Address: Describe Proposed reiepnone: Zoning aap # '' Parcel # Zoning District:_ Street Address: r - Owner Contract Purchaser Lessee Other : (exnlain). . _ Telephone:_( a 1- Of:tZ necessary): Has the following informatio% been included in the application? Site/Plot Plan VO List of requested waivers�Fee Signed/Denied Zoning Permit Application Cj 8. Site Plan and Special Permit Approval Criteria. (If any permit criteria does not apply, a plaiy) Use additional sheets if necessary. Assistance for completing this information is available through the Office of Planning & Development. A. How will �the_requestteeduse protect adjoining premises against seriously detrimental uses? J`hF� MLLA How will the project provide for: surface water drainage:_ Ila sound and sight buffers: the preservation of views, light and air: 4 iD CITY CLERKS 0-`�' ITHAMP ON. MA 01060 B. How will the requested use promote the convenience and safety of pedestrian movement within the site and on adjacent streets? �p�p How will the project minimize traffic impacts on the streets and roads in the area? -C�o� r g�K� Where is the location of driveway openings in relation to traffic and adjacont streets? What features have been incorporated into the design to allow for: access by emergency vehicles: {- C the safe and convenient arrangemen7F;"kq g and load'ng spaces: Sr -P provisions for persons with disabilities: C. How will the proposed use promote a harmonious xelationship of structures and open spaces to: the natural landscape: A to existing buildings:_ , other community assets in the area: D. What measures are being taken that show the use will not ov r 'a the City's resources, including: water supply and distribution system: sanitary sewage and storm water collecti treatment systems: fire protection, streets and schools: How will the proposed project miti ate any adv rse impacts on the City's resources, as listed above?f �� ,U' 1 / ! l% . E. List the section(s) of the Zoning Ordinance that states what special regulations are required for the proposed project (flag lot, common drive, lot size averaging, etc.) S, .2 )-x,66 CX -Q 5 n� MAR 3 199 NO'In MPTQN, MAFO1060 How does the project meet the spegf�equirements? (Use additional sheets if necessary) F. State how the project meets the following technical performanc standards: 1. Curb cuts are minimized: Check off a apply to the project: use of a common driveway for access ore than one business use of an existing side street use of a looped service road 2. Doe$ t e project require more than one driveway cut? NO YES (if yes, explain why) 3. Are pe strian, bicycle and vehicular traffic separated on-site? YES NO (if no, explain why) FOR PROJECTS THAT REQUIRE INTERMEDIATE SITE PLAN APPROVAL, ONLY, SIGN APPLICATION AND END HERE. 9. I certify that the information contained herein is tr nd acc t best f my knowledge. The undersigned owner(s) grant Planning Board is ion to a opert to review this ap is tion. Date: Applicant's Signature: Date: Owner's Signature: PROJECTS THAT MAJOR PROJECT F. Explain why the requested use will: not unduly impair the integrity or character of the district or adjoining zones: not be detrimental to the health, morals or general welfare: be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Ordinance: R y C I OFFICE MA 011 File # MP -1999-0087 APPLICANT/CONTACT PERSON NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC. ADDRESS/PHONE P.O. BOX 221 RICHARD GIUSTO 584-7980 PROPERTY LOCATION 152 CROSS PATH RD MAP 25 PARCEL 015 ZONE SC THIS SECTION FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY: PERMIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST ENCLOSED REQUIRED DATE ZONING FORM FILLED OUT Fee Paid Buildin¢ Permit Filled out Fee Paid jaeof Construction: EVENTS - SEE ATTACHED SHEETS New Construction Nor. Structural interior renovations Addition to Existing AccessM Structure Building Plans Included: Owner/ Statement or License 3 sets of Plans / Plot Plan THE FOLLOWING ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN ON THIS APPLICATION: /Approved as presentedibased on information presented. v Denied as presented: _ l alvnn trc;^ 1 Special Permit and/or Site Plan Required under: § PLANNING BOARD ZONING BOARD Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof E4closed Finding Required under: § w/ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed Variance Required under: § —w/ZONING BOARD OF Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Other Permits Required: Curb Cut from DPW Water Availability Sewer A' MAR 3 1999 CITY CLERKS OFFICE ility NORTHAMPTON. MA 01060 Septic Approval Board of Health Well Water Potability Board of Health Permit from Conserv n Commission J Z aS Signature of Bui ding` ficial Date Note: Issuance of a Zoning permit does not relieve a applicant's burden to comply with all zoning requirements and obtain all required permits from Board of Health, Conservation Commission, Department of public works and other applicable permit granting authorities. .' FFR 2 41999 File No. EPT OF 8111✓ 1)"11; PFCTIOW; I NO!" 9d .>��! k'A�"+i ,10 y ilZONING PERMIT APPLICATION (§10.2) PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT ALL INFORMATION 1. Name of Applicant: TC 1(—' �czK 67R i, Address: � T 2. Owner of Property: �"4",V r � 3. Status of Applicant: Owner Other (explainj: 4. Job Location: hone:c 15 ��/-� Telephone:__ Contract Purchaser Lessee Parcel Id: Zoning Map# Parcel# District(s):_ C (TO BE FILLED IN BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT) 5. Existing Use of Structure/Property 6. Description of Proposed Use/Work/Project/Occupation: (Use additional sheets if necessary): 7. Attached Plans: Sketch Plan Site Plan Engineered/Surveyed Plans Answers to the following 2 questions may be obtained by checking with the Building Dept or Planning Department Files. 8. Has a Special Permit/Variance/Finding ever been issued for/on the site? NO DON'T KNOW_ YES IF YES, date issued: IF YES: Was the permit recorded at the Registry of Deeds? NO DON'T KNOW__ � YES_________ IF YES: enter Book Page and/or Document # 9. Does the site contain a brook, body of water or wetlands? NO DON'T KNOW___,y YES IF YES, has a permit been or ne d to be obtained from the Conservation Commission? D NfedIV � i ed Obtained , date issued: MAR (FORM CONTINUES ON OTHER SIDE) � 199 CITY CLERKS OFFICE NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 10. Do any signs exist on the property? YES_ NO IF YES, describe size, type and location: Are there any proposed changes to or additions of signs intended for the property? YES NO'A�— IF YES, describe size, type and locatio 11. ALL INFORMATION MUST BE COMPLETED, or PERMIT CAN BE DENIED DUE TO LACK OF INFORMATION. Thia cclu= to be filled in by the Building Department i,ereoy certify that thr2n.forma ' c 'n d erein G is true an accurate to the best of myoled a DATE: APPLICANT's SIGNATURE NOTE: IssuOnoe f a zoning permit does not relieve a plloant' urden to zoning requirem nts and obtain all required Ply with .$11 q permits f m the Board of Health. Conservation Commission. Department of Publio Works and other applioable permit granting authorities. FILE If Existing Proposed IKequired By Zoning Lot size Frontage Setbacks - frnnt - side L: R: L: R: - rear Building height /V Bldg Square footage %Open Space: P -off minus bldg ,# rking Sp BOE` f f aig Hogk l s 3 44nl ��*!J,AIAk, L_ ) i,ereoy certify that thr2n.forma ' c 'n d erein G is true an accurate to the best of myoled a DATE: APPLICANT's SIGNATURE NOTE: IssuOnoe f a zoning permit does not relieve a plloant' urden to zoning requirem nts and obtain all required Ply with .$11 q permits f m the Board of Health. Conservation Commission. Department of Publio Works and other applioable permit granting authorities. FILE If FE _ DOSED EVENTS AT THE NORTHAMPTON F�j3OP, AIRPORT P 2 Large Events- up to 7,500 people Fireworks Events The following are small events- less than 3,000 people: Craft Fairs Car Shows Airshows-Airport? Balloon Festivals -Airport? Ethnic Celebrations Dances Food Festivals All events are one day except perhaps the circus. This would be limited to two days. All events are over by 10:00 P.M. Events to be held between April 1 St to October 31St SECURITY- All small events (under 3,000) have never been a problem for police. All events over 3,000- coverage depends on the size of the event. For example, a large, 15,000 person event would have 6 local police officers, and 30 Sherriff's Deputies for a total of 36 in uniform. Additionally show security would average approximately 100 people. All large events will have an ambulance on the premises. An event with fireworks would also have a fire truck. The emergency entrance and exit is Hockanum Rd. All parking would be on the airport and property owned by Gary Haggerty. Combined these properties will hold over 7,000 cars. MAR 3 1999 CITY CLERKS OFFICE NORTHAMPTON. MA 01060 ' FEB 2 41999 F_PT Of BIiFLD!ra:; J PECTIONS P'OR!':n�ks,'ir4N'�1Afja� ' dents would total no more then 8 events per year, some events may include multiples, like an air show with a crafts fair and hot air balloon. A car show with a food festival, etc. The Fire Dept. and Police Dept. will be kept informed of all events no matter what size the event. The airport has in effect an $1,000,000.00 airport premises insurance policy. This policy has been in effect since we have been here, and will remain in effect as long as we are here. The airport has a lot of experience in parking cars, all cars will be directed to the end of Old Ferry Rd. turned onto Cross Path Rd. to the runway, out the runway for parking on both sides of the runway. NO CARS WILL BE STOPPED ON THE RD. FOR ANY REASON. The show areas will all be fenced in and secure. After the show, all areas will be cleaned, policed and returned to original condition within 24 hours. No permanent changes will be made to the airport without the proper permit processes. I have honestly tried to ad ss all of the city and your concerns, if I have omitted an=Yo;6'� feel fr o contact me and we can adjust what is necessary. Th Richard p �Q�OdC� MAR 3 1999 CITY CLERKS OFFICE NnRTHAMPTON. MA 01060 REPLACE BILLBOARD SIGN STRUCTURE. SEE DETAILS SH 4. . . . . . . ........................ .................... ,.; r __ J _0FAA BUILDING N,-. 4a2h ool 4V -R - CROS _ - ATH__ _ -�:R)o 4s- 79 D o _ 118.5 C + X. QDI i 19, 4711 719 09 117.0 + I00.W Na- 8 7.70 145 4i;z OO*00 + .55'' I" z X'11 4> Ar b49 OT " _ i !f _ X -o PROP BIT.CONC. APRO & TAXIWAYS < blooz blooz C) C) r C14 N51-42 (10) 19.69 231' 11: 781 SF 0 2 b P + F P 0 118.6 X, Q_ '3 X 121,� 4� ED h P(, 11, 9. - IT/T MAR X (0 1 - -,-39.00, 1.0% . 01 0/11 ---------- 1',22.0 ----------- 119.69 41 OF X 5 Lin1 0'x1 0, 2 -NT' MARKINGS S BE + + 120.5 IN ACCORDANCE WITH 32.5' PR P. J %$1- 119.5 AD)MSORY CIRCULAR 150 534 121.5 81T.bONC. APRON /&TAXI -0--7 '+ AMENDED S00,OO'O0w 277.37. 21 37 '4 119.2 In0 f C) k 30 r 00' �19 123.1 1.26 co 118.0 A.75' + 51 x ,187' 7 50 5 - N 42 �,8) 1, 9,,537 SF r1V OPO" ED LO 8 N IT -HANG 123.12, .26 121.26 CIV 5 L 4b I C) C) C 7 j� .0, 2' WTUIIIIMOUS CONI 7W MURSE X 1- .49 4�2 x 119.62 + 12' .5 X 4- BASE COURSE x 9„ Yl- 145 soo*www MHD M2.01.7 -le - w, DENSE -GRADED CRUSHED STONE mss•1. E 4 N 146.45' 0 % -PROP. BIT.CJDNC. APRON & TAXIW PREPARED SUBGRADE "4� N 121. 21 -TYPICAL BIT. CONC, SIDEWALK PAVING NTS X 1_21._44 14- 1 OMIT GRAVEL SUB -BASE FOR STANDARD DUTY PAVING. 122.5 x 21, 75 2. ALL MATERIALS AND METHODS SHALL CONFORM TO THE 25R -13 G X 121,85 MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENTS *STANDARD l�DIL ]IIIj I 1_�__ i 5'R 3n 7 12,` 76 rum MILPIMMATZi ANU t5KIL)ULS , AS TV. AT ALL 12_65r + I AMENDED. UMIT-OF-PAVING CD4 1 1/40 INTUMMUS; CONCRETE 7W COLMSE C:> EDGES - - - - - - 777777771 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1-3/40 ENTLUNIOUS CONCRETE EMBER COURSE - - - - - - - 4 > aAsE COURSE MHD M2.01.7 - DENSE-CRADED CRUSHED STONE 0%00 7 SUBBASE COURSE MHD MI.0&0 - GRAVEL BORROW -TYPE 8 7- 2 x PREPARED SUBGRADE -DUTY 3c: TYPICAL BIT. CO -NC, HEAVY PAVING NTS X 12 25 H ' 4 -JX / FLOOD STORAGE CALCULATIONS 4-J 0 '2 2. 4 01 C) X 22. 8 4 Ul) ILLI Cr ILLI C) M x ILLI U) ....................... . X CD 122 Ek4 CV)/ C) C) M -A cl IV6 t 6 CD PAVEMENT,, MARKINGS SHALL BE CD ;2!IN ACCORDANCE WITH FM CID ADVISORY CIRCULAR 150/5"340-1 X 121, 1�3 AS AMENDED -1:2-312 C) CD 3r. 7G 2-.9' X112'94 LECTRICA, PEDE `)TAS '�,` _ , LL_ L; NORTH AREA M L-) 4- LIJ '� } / / / :3m I DATE (0/ BY 1. 0 CUT (Cy) C) NET VOLLUME CHANGE (CY) ELEVATION RANGE SOUTH -NORTH b49 OT " _ i !f _ X -o PROP BIT.CONC. APRO & TAXIWAYS < blooz blooz C) C) r C14 N51-42 (10) 19.69 231' 11: 781 SF 0 2 b P + F P 0 118.6 X, Q_ '3 X 121,� 4� ED h P(, 11, 9. - IT/T MAR X (0 1 - -,-39.00, 1.0% . 01 0/11 ---------- 1',22.0 ----------- 119.69 41 OF X 5 Lin1 0'x1 0, 2 -NT' MARKINGS S BE + + 120.5 IN ACCORDANCE WITH 32.5' PR P. J %$1- 119.5 AD)MSORY CIRCULAR 150 534 121.5 81T.bONC. APRON /&TAXI -0--7 '+ AMENDED S00,OO'O0w 277.37. 21 37 '4 119.2 In0 f C) k 30 r 00' �19 123.1 1.26 co 118.0 A.75' + 51 x ,187' 7 50 5 - N 42 �,8) 1, 9,,537 SF r1V OPO" ED LO 8 N IT -HANG 123.12, .26 121.26 CIV 5 L 4b I C) C) C 7 j� .0, 2' WTUIIIIMOUS CONI 7W MURSE X 1- .49 4�2 x 119.62 + 12' .5 X 4- BASE COURSE x 9„ Yl- 145 soo*www MHD M2.01.7 -le - w, DENSE -GRADED CRUSHED STONE mss•1. E 4 N 146.45' 0 % -PROP. BIT.CJDNC. APRON & TAXIW PREPARED SUBGRADE "4� N 121. 21 -TYPICAL BIT. CONC, SIDEWALK PAVING NTS X 1_21._44 14- 1 OMIT GRAVEL SUB -BASE FOR STANDARD DUTY PAVING. 122.5 x 21, 75 2. ALL MATERIALS AND METHODS SHALL CONFORM TO THE 25R -13 G X 121,85 MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENTS *STANDARD l�DIL ]IIIj I 1_�__ i 5'R 3n 7 12,` 76 rum MILPIMMATZi ANU t5KIL)ULS , AS TV. AT ALL 12_65r + I AMENDED. UMIT-OF-PAVING CD4 1 1/40 INTUMMUS; CONCRETE 7W COLMSE C:> EDGES - - - - - - 777777771 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1-3/40 ENTLUNIOUS CONCRETE EMBER COURSE - - - - - - - 4 > aAsE COURSE MHD M2.01.7 - DENSE-CRADED CRUSHED STONE 0%00 7 SUBBASE COURSE MHD MI.0&0 - GRAVEL BORROW -TYPE 8 7- 2 x PREPARED SUBGRADE -DUTY 3c: TYPICAL BIT. CO -NC, HEAVY PAVING NTS X 12 25 H ' 4 -JX / FLOOD STORAGE CALCULATIONS 4-J 0 '2 2. 4 01 C) X 22. 8 4 Ul) ILLI Cr ILLI C) M x ILLI U) ....................... . X CD 122 Ek4 CV)/ C) C) M -A cl IV6 t 6 CD PAVEMENT,, MARKINGS SHALL BE CD ;2!IN ACCORDANCE WITH FM CID ADVISORY CIRCULAR 150/5"340-1 X 121, 1�3 AS AMENDED -1:2-312 C) CD 3r. 7G 2-.9' X112'94 LECTRICA, PEDE `)TAS '�,` _ , LL_ L; NORTH AREA M L-) 4- LIJ '� } / / / :3m an No. I DATE GENERAL GRADING BY 1. 103/07/05 CUT (Cy) FILL (CY) NET VOLLUME CHANGE (CY) ELEVATION RANGE SOUTH -NORTH SOUTH NORTH +=FlLL. ( )=CUT 118-119 0 553 0 43 (510) 119-120 426 1121 a 1429 (109) 120-121 1214 1030 133 1644 1 (467) 121-122 839 1176 642 118-1 1 (191) 122-123 9 639 0 458 (190) 123-124 0 4 0 1 4 (1) 123-124 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 BUILDINGS CUT Demolition, CY) FILL (New Construction, CY) ELEVATION RANGE F.B.O. AIRPORT BILL- OFFICES BOARDS REMODELED F.B.O. SKYDIVING BILL - FACILITIES BOARDS 118-119 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 119-120 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 120-121 0 0 0 0, 2 1 3 121-122 33 34 0 24 2 1 (40) 122-123 56 68 0 53 2 1 (67) 123-124 56 E8_ 0 53 2 1 (67) 124-125 56 68 0 53 2 1 (67) SUMMARY ELEVATION RANGE GENERAL GRADING See Above) BUILDINGS See Above NET VOLUME, CY +=Fill. ( )=Cut 118-119 (510) 0 (510) 119-120 (109) 2 (107) 120-121 (467) 3 121-122 (191) (40) -(464) (232) 122-123 (190) (67) (257) 123-124 (1) (67) (68) 124-125 0 (67) --T (67) NET FLOOD STORAGE LOSS/(GAIN)= CUBIC YARDS YARDS an No. I DATE REVISION BY 1. 103/07/05 REDUCED T -HANGARS TEJ 2. 05/11/05 LAYOUT & GRADING CHANGES TEJ F. SCALE JEN:011!--. J R. 1"=30, C VI No. 33553 DATE GRAPHIC SCALE 30 0 25 30 1 inch = 30 ft. LEGEND PROPERTY LINE SETBACKS EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT SILT FENCING EXISTING CONTOURS 11 PROPOSED CONTOURS + PROPOSED SPOT GRADE 119.6 PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE SPECIAL CONSERVANCY (SC) ZONING DISTRICT AND WITHIN THE 100 -YEAR FLOODPLAIN OF THE CONNECTICUT RIVER. THE 100 -YR FLOOD ELEVATION IS 125.0 FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL. PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND LOT SIZE INFORMATION FROM PLAN ENTITLED "PLAN OF LAND IN NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS SURVEYED FOR NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC.", BY ALMER HUNTLEY, JR & ASSOCIATES, INC., REVISED JUNE 25, 1997. BASE PLAN INFORMATION PROVIDED BY GALE ASSOCIATES, INC.. DRAWING No.G1.3, ENTITLED "GENERAL PLAN, SAFETY PLAN AND SAFETY DETAILS INSTALL INFILTRATION SYSTEMS AT TOPOGRAPHICAL LOW POINTS AS NECESSARY. SEE DETAILS ON SHEET 4. SHEET SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS NORTH AREA 1PROJECT AND LOCATION: NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS Northampton, MA I oTW3BAYSTATE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS INC. Civil Engineers Environmental Scientists 296 North Main Street 290 Roberts Street, Suite 207 East Longmeadow, MA 01028 East Hartford, CT 06108 BEC PROJECT No. SHEET No. TL r1`.S IN 04-0418 F. SCALE JEN:011!--. J R. 1"=30, C VI No. 33553 DATE GIST JAN. 2005 DRAWN BY TEJ CHECKED BY TEJ OF 4 SHTS TYPE F, 1 CAT. No. ADJUSTMI (2 COUR 1 STEEL REIN 3+50 124 122 120 0 20 40 60 90 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 3+00 125 - EN01MG BURDING TO BE REM= ED AM FLOOD-PROMW 126 124 - 122 - 120 -� .�• 1 ` TYP I CAL D ETAI L STORMWATER INFILTRATION SYSTEM NTS TO BE INSTALLED AS NECESSARY TO PROMOTE RECHARGE OF STORM RUNOFF. 124 122 120 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 2+50 124 122 120 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 2+00 124 122 120 124 122 120 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 350 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 24 122 en 8»¢ r�rnr r,. ir► 3/4 1 1/2 CRUSHED STONE SECTION THROUGH INFILTRATION TRENCH NTS TER FABRIC tAFI 14ON EQUAL. 1P & SIDES) 48'-0• sign face 4'-0 e'-0" a. 8'-0" 8'-o' 4'-0' frame from* from@ frome framefrorne I I iI I I I I I I I I I 6+50 122 120 tie 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 6+00 122 ,20 tie 0 20 40 60 8o 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 5+50 122 120 11e 1 I 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 190 200 220 240 260 5+00 124 122 120 Rear catwalk 8+00 1 - 122 122 122 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 120 118 7+50 122 120 1,8 1Z2 120 1,8 124 122 0 20 40 6o 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 2E 7+00 124 122 120 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 26 124 122 120 0 20 40 80 80 100 120 140 160 190 200 220 240 260 260 300 320 340 360 360 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 Lateral Drake 4+50 124 122 Rear catwalk 1/4' cap plate 120 welded to pipe at top 18a) 118 124 122 120 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 190 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 360 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 18 4+00 124 122 120 tie 4 2 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 8 3+50 124 122 120 tie 124 122 124 122 17(1 124 122 120 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 116 3+00 124 122 HAMM 120 118 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 ,80 200 220 240 280 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 800 620 2+50 diornetir 128 (See S&WAWe) ELEVATION 126 BILLBOARD REPLACEMENT DETAIL 124 NTS 122 REFERENCE: PLAN PREPARED BY RENAISSANCE tea MEDIA GROUP, INC.; PHOENIX, AZ, No. G-7032, DATED 05/06/04. 18 0 20 40 so 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 350 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 1+50 124 - - 124 122 i-'�/� 122 120 — _..r�..����� 120 118 1,e 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 30D 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600 620 640 660 680 700 720 740 760 780 800 820 1+00 128 1 I F.H.O. I I HANGAR 1 (REM.) I PROP. I � RENAIN* I PROP. PROP. 124 I 1 FF I ( FF FIF+tANICAR ,22 j— J� 120 - - r ,18 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600 620 640 660 680 700 720 740 760 0+50 128 ,26 124 122 ,20 EX Ica 4. EX I HANGAR I I H GAR S PROP. I FF =�1jt I PROP. PROP. _ I I I ��""o� I I � �"r� FIF 121.70 Ar Q 20 40 50 80 100 120 140 180 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600 620 640 660 680 700 720 740 711 SOUTH AREA CROSS SECTIONS 128 126 124 122 120 118 128 126 124 122 ,on ,28 126 124 122 ,20 ,18 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 190 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 360 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 2+00 128 126 124 122 120 118 128 126 124 122 120 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 18 1+50 ,28 36" MINIMUM LENGTH FENCE POST, 126 DRIVEN A MINIMUM OF 12' INTO GROUND ,24 16" MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 122 GEOTDMLE 6" MINIMUM DEPTH IN 120 GROUND 118 128 126 124 122 120 0 20 40 6o 80 100 120 140 160 190 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360ie 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 PERSPECTIVE VIEW 336" MILS FENCES 1 +00 FILTER 130 CLOTH FENCE POST SECTION MINIMUM 20" ABOVE 128 FLA1Al GROUND UNDISTURBED GROUND EMBED GEOTEXTILE A MIN. 126 TOP VIEW OF 6" VERTICALLY INTO FENCE POST DRNEN A THE GROUND MINIMUM OF 12" INTO POSTS THE GROUND 124 SECTK)N 13 CROSS SECTION 122 SECTION A STAPLE, -'120 JOINING TWO ADJACENT SILT FENCE SECTIONS 118 130 128 126 124 122 120 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 160 200 220 240 280 280 30D 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 116 x SILT FENCE DETAIL NORTH AREA NTS CROSS SECTIONS No. DATE REVISION BY 1. 03/07/05 REDUCED T—HANGARS TEJ 2. P5/11/05 REVISED NORTH X—SECTIONS TEJ 01, A � �THnr BEC PROJECT No. 04-0418 SHEET No. /�.�• IAS �, w SCALEr ?ENKIE: ,.4R:\� VERT. 1 "=6' .o No. 33-153 TFJAN. GRAPHIC SCALE 60 0 30 60 1 inch = 60 ft. HORIZONTAL SCALE 6 0 3 6 1 inch = 6 ft. VERTICAL SCALE SHEET TITLE: SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN DETAILS PROJECT AND LOCATION: NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS Northampton, MA BAYSTATE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS INC. Civil Engineers Environmental Scientists 296 North Dain Street 290 Roberts Street, Suite 207 East Longmeadow, MA 01028 East Hartford, CT 06108 01, A � �THnr BEC PROJECT No. 04-0418 SHEET No. /�.�• IAS �, w SCALEr ?ENKIE: ,.4R:\� VERT. 1 "=6' .o No. 33-153 TFJAN. DATE 2005 DRAWN By TEJ d CHECKED BY TEJ OF T SHTS M36%2 OR /5514/0217 12/28/1%,, .42 • r --_ - 310CMR ;99 FEB 2 5 DEP File No. 246-436 (To be provided by DEP) Form 5 City/Town Northampton „_•_ - J~ Applicant Northampton Airport, Inc. Commonwealth Map # 25:26 Parcel #711 of Massachusetts Order of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act G.L. c. 131, §40 and the Northampton Wetlands Protection Ordinance From Northampton Conservation Commission Issuing Authority To: Northampton Airport, Inc. Name of property owner Old Ferry Road, Northampton, MA 01060 Address This Order is issued and delivered as follows: Northampton Airport, Inc. Name of Applicant Old Ferry Road, Northampton, MA 01060 Address [ ] by hand delivery to applicant or representative on (date) [X] by certified mail, return receipt requested on December 16, 1998. This project is located in Northampton at the Northampton Airport on Old Ferry Road. The property is recorded at the Registry of Hampshire County Book 2386 Page 155 Certificate (if registered) NIA The Notice of Intent for this project was filed on November 12, 1998. The public hearing was closed on December 7, 1998. Findings: The Northampton Conservation Commission has reviewed the above -referenced Notice of Intent and plans and has held a public hearing on the project. Based on the information available to the Conservation Commission at this time, the Commission has determined that the area on which the proposed work is to be done is significant to the following interests in accordance with the Presumptions of Significance set forth in the regulations for each Area Subject to Protection Under the Act (check as appropriate): [ ] Public water supply [X] Flood Control [ ] Land containing shellfish [ ] Private water supply [ ] Storm damage prevention [ ] Fisheries [ ] Ground water supply [ ] Prevention of pollution [ ] Protection of Wildlife Habitat Total Filing Fee Submitted $525.00 State Share $275.00 City Share $250.00 (`/2 fee in excess of $25) Total Refund Due $ City Portion $ State Portion $ Scanned (1J2 total) (1/61 ed 1 Checked Doc; 980036562 OR /5514/0278 12{'0'19% 13:42 Therefore, the Northampton Conservation Commission hereby finds that the following conditions are necessary, in accordance with the Performance Standards set forth in the regulations, to protect those interests checked above. The Conservation Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with said conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above. To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall control. General Conditions: 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein, and with all related statutes and other regulatory measures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 2. The Order does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges; it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal, state or local statutes, ordinances, by-laws or regulations. 4. The work authorized hereunder shall be completed within three years from the date of this Order unless either of the following apply: (a) the work is a maintenance dredging project as provided for in the Act; or (b) the time for completion has been extended to a specified date more than three years, but less than five years, from the date of issuance and both that date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth in this Order. 5. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods of up to three years each upon application to the issuing authority at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the Order. 6. Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill, containing no trash, refuse, rubbish or debris, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster, wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe, tires, ashes, refrigerators, motor vehicles or parts of any of the foregoing. The applicant is prohibited from using demolition materials, asphalt, large chunks of concrete, tree stumps and limbs, and general refuse; 7. No work shall be undertaken until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed or, if such an appeal has been filed, until all proceedings, before the Department have been completed. 8. No work shall be undertaken until the Final order has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of 2 Dnc: 980036562 0R /5514/0219 X121281199813:42 - title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of registered land, the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. The recording information shall be proposed work is to be done. The recording information shall be submitted to the Commission on the form at the end of this Order prior to commencement of the work. The Commission usually will record the Order in the Registry of Deeds. It is the applicant's responsibility to insure the Order is properly recorded. 9. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less than two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the works, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, File Number 246436 ." 10. Where the Department of Environmental Protection is requested to make a determination and to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shall be a party to all agency proceedings and hearings before the Department. 11. Upon completion of the work described herein, the applicant shall forthwith request in writing that a Certificate of Compliance be issued stating that the work has been satisfactorily completed. 12. The work shall conform to the following plans and special conditions: PLANS /TITLE DATED SIGNED & STAMPED BY: "Overall Site PlanNortham top n Airport11/11/98 Located in Northampton MA." Prenared by Ahner Huntley Jr & Associates Inc Sheet 2 of 4. "Detailed Site PlanNorthampton Airport02/03/98 Located in Northampton MA," Prepared by Almer Huntley Jr & Associates Inc Sheet 3 of 4. "Construction Details. Northampton Airport02/03/98 Located in Northampton MA." Prepared 3 David L. Loring P.E. David L. Loring P.E. David L. Loring P.E. Docc 9936562 OR /5514/O--.,/ 12/28/199813;42 by Almer Huntley, jr..& Associates Inc Sheet 4 of 4. All Plans and information on file with Northampton Conservation Commission SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 13. The Commission and its agents shall have the right to enter and inspect the property at any time to monitor for compliance with the conditions of this Order, the Act, and Wetlands Protection Regulations: 310 CMR 10.00 and Chapter 24 of the City's Ordinances: "The Wetlands Protection Ordinance". They shall have the right to request and receive any data or documentation that is deemed necessary for evaluation of compliance. 14. This Order of Conditions shall apply to any successor in interest or successor in control; 15. The owner of the property described in this Order, must advise any potential buyer of the property that any construction or alteration to said property, including brush cutting or clearance, may require approval by the Northampton Conservation Commission. Any instrument conveying any or all of the owners' interest in said property or any portion thereof, shall contain language similar to the following: "This property is subject to the Northampton Wetlands Protection Ordinance and/or Wetlands Protection Act. Any construction or maintenance work performed on this property requires an Order of Conditions, and/or a Determination of Applicability from the Northampton Conservation Commission"; 16. The contractor is as responsible as the applicant and property owner for any violations of the Orders of Condition and penalties under the law, while all activities regulated by this Order are being performed. 17. A copy of this Order and associated plans shall remain on site during all construction and/or building activities. The project manager and all equipment operators shall be familiar with the approved plans, and shall be informed of their location on the site. This location shall be accessible to all contractors whenever work is occurring on site. 18. All required permits must be obtained from the Army Corp of Engineers (Section 404, Water Quality Certification), Planning Board, Zoning Board, Department of Public Works, or Building Inspector prior to the start of projects involving fill within any 4 Doc; 980036562 OR /5514/0281 , 2/28/19% 13:42 wetland resource area; 19. No disposal of soils or other materials shall be allowed within: a 100 -year floodplain; 40 feet of the 100 -year floodplain elevation; any wetland; or any area within 100 -feet of a wetland, unless such areas are specifically approved by the Commission, in accordance with 310 CMR 10.00, and City of Northampton Ordinances - Chapter 24; 20. Any change or deviation from the Notice of Intent, plans and/or Order of Conditions approved by the Commission, prior to or during construction, shall require the applicant to file a request for an amendment with the Conservation Commission. It shall include a written inquiry as to whether or not the change is substantial enough to require the filing of a new Notice of Intent. After making a positive determination, the Commission shall conduct a public hearing to amend the Order or to issue a new Order, if a new Notice of Intent is required. 21. In accordance with General Condition 8 on page 5-2 of this Order, this Order shall be recorded at the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds by the Northampton Conservation Commission prior to commencement of work on the site. 22. All revised plans, referenced within this Order of Conditions, shall be approved by the Conservation Commission and incorporated into this Order by reference and shall be followed during the course of construction. 23. Ongoing conditions that shall not expire with the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance are as follows: (None). 24. Erosion and sediment control shall be as shown on plan entitled, "Detailed Site Plan, Northampton Airport, Located in Northampton, Massachusetts," prepared by Almer Huntley, Jr. & Associates, Inc., dated February 3, 1998. 25. All excavated material must be removed to an area outside of the flood plain. PRE -CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS: 26. Prior to the start of any site work, excavation or construction, a preconstruction conference shall be held on the site, between the contractor conducting the work, the site/project engineer, the applicant, and a member or agent of the Conservation Commission, in order to ensure that the requirements of this Order are understood by all parties. Prior to the pre -construction meeting, all erosion control devices must be installed, also. POST CONSTRUCTION SUBMITTALS & WORK IN BUFFER ZONE: 5 Ooc: 980036562 OR /5514/02 12/28/199813:42 27. Upon completion of the project, the Applicant shall submit a certification that all work has been done in conformance with the provisions of the Order of Conditions and request a Certificate of Compliance. If checked: [X ] YES Certification shall be by a Professional Engineer. When requesting the Certificate of Compliance, the applicant shall provide spot grades and a certification that excavated material was moved out of the flood plain as required. C IM: 980036562 OR /5514/0283 12/28/19P 13;42 310 CMR: DRv-,�RTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL P1,-OTECTION 10.99: continued Issued by the Northampton Conservation Commission Signature(s) This ChAer must be signed by a n 7th On this appeared Mason Maronn of the Conservation Commission. day of December 98 19 , before me personally to me known to be the person described in, and who executed, the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she executed the same as his/her free act and deed. Notary Public'�! My Commission Exp' s The applicant, the owner, any person aggrieved by this Order, any owner of land abutting the land upon which the proposed work is to be done, or any ten residents of the city or town in which such land is located, are hereby notified of their right to request the Department of Environmental Protection to issue a Superseding -Order, providing the request is made by certified mail or hand delivery to the Department, with the appropriate filing fee and Fee Transmittal Form as provided in 310 CMR 10.030 within ten days from the date of issuance of this determination. A copy of the request shall at the same time be sent by certified mail or hand delivery to the Conservation Commission and the applicant. Detach on dotted line and submit to the Nort},prior to commencement of work. To I orffia ton f`oncervation C'ommiccion Issuing AuthonlTs-- - Please be advised that the Order of Conditions for the project at File Number has been recorded at the Registry of and has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property in accordance with General Condition 8 on 19 If recorded land, the instrument number which identifies this transaction is If registered land, the document number which identifies this transaction is Signature Applicant 4/1/94 JTTSSTt HJiMP'SIiU, &EGISTEY illA�Rll�i1�E L. 130P10iitIB 310 CMR - 423 423 s Doc; 98001110108 /5419/0013 01/01/1998 r;44 310CMR 10.99 DEP File No. 246-428 (To be provided by DEP) Form 5 City/Town-Northampton Applicant Northampton Airpo Inc Commonwealth of Massachusetts Map # 25 Parcel # 1. 15 - 19, 53 & 71 Order of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act G.L. c. 131, §40 and the Northampton Wetlands Protection Ordinance From Northampton Conservation Commission Issuing Authority To: Northampton AirportInc Northampton Airport, Inc Name of property owner Name of Applicant Old Ferry Road. Northampton Old Ferry Road. Northampton, MA 01060 Address Address This Order is issued and delivered as follows: [ ] by hand delivery to applicant or representative on (date) [X] by certified mail, return receipt requested on _June 26, 1998. (date) This project is located in Northampton at the Northampton Airport off Old Ferry Road The property is recorded at the Registry of Hampshire County Book 2386 Page 155 Certificate (if registered) NIA The Notice of Intent for this project was filed on April 22, 1998. (date) The public hearing was closed on June 22, 1998. (date) Findings: The Northampton Conservation Commission has reviewed the above -referenced Notice of Intent and plans and has held a public hearing on the project. Based on the information available to the Conservation Commission at this time, the Commission has determined that the area on which the proposed work is to be done is significant to the following interests in accordance with the Presumptions of Significance set forth in the regulations for each Area Subject to Protection Under the Act (check as appropriate): [ ] Public water supply [X] Flood Control Land [ ] Private water supply [X] Storm damage prevention [ ] Fisheries containing shellfish [ ] Ground water supply [X] Prevention of pollution [ ] Protection of Wildlife Habitat Total Filing Fee Submitted 525 + $35.00 State Share $250.00 City Share $275.00 + 35.00 (`/2 fee in excess of $25) Total Refund Due $ City Portion $ State Portion $ (1/2 total) (1/2 total) 1 I%c; 980 R01 OR /5419/0014 01/01/199812 4444 Therefore, the Northampton Conservation Commission hereby finds that the following conditions are necessary, in accordance with the Performance Standards set forth in the regulations, to protect those interests checked above. The Conservation Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with said conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above. To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall control. General Conditions: 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein, and with all related statutes and other regulatory measures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 2. The Order does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges; it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal, state or local statutes, ordinances, by-laws or regulations. 4. The work authorized hereunder shall be completed within three years from the date of this Order unless either of the following apply: (a) the work is a maintenance dredging project as provided for in the Act; or (b) the time for completion has been extended to a specified date more than three years, but less than five years, from the date of issuance and both that date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth in this Order. 5. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods of up to three years each upon application to the issuing authority at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the Order. 6. Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill, containing no trash, refuse, rubbish or debris, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster, wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe, tires, ashes, refrigerators, motor vehicles or parts of any of the foregoing. The applicant is prohibited from using demolition materials, asphalt, large chunks of concrete, tree stumps and limbs, and general refuse; 2 98001110108 /5419/0015 0]/01/199812:44 7. No work shall be undertaken until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed or, if such an appeal has been filed, until all proceedings, before the Department have been completed. No work shall be undertaken until the Final order has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of registered land, the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. The recording information shall be proposed work is to be done. The recording information shall be submitted to the Commission on the form at the end of this Order prior to commencement of the work. The Commission usually will record the Order in the Registry of Deeds. It is the applicant's responsibility to insure the Order is properly recorded. 9. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less than two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the works, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, File Number 246-428 ." 10. Where the Department of Environmental Protection is requested to make a determination and to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shall be a party to all agency proceedings and hearings before the Department. 11. Upon completion of the work described herein, the applicant shall forthwith request in writing that a Certificate of Compliance be issued stating that the work has been satisfactorily completed. 12. The work shall conform to the following plans and special conditions: PLANS /TITLE DATED SIGNED & STAMPED BY: "Proposed Building Site Northampton 04/13/98 _David L. Loring P.E. Rev. 06/22/98 Massachusetts Prepared for Northampton Airnort. Inc.." by Almer Huntley Jr & Associates. Inc. All Plans and information on file with Northampton Conservation Commission 3 Doc; 980011101 OR /5419/0016 0]/01/199812,44 SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 13. The Commission and its agents shall have the right to enter and inspect the property at any time to monitor for compliance with the conditions of this Order, the Act, and Wetlands Protection Regulations: 310 CMR 10.00 and Chapter 24 of the City's Ordinances: "The Wetlands Protection Ordinance". They shall have the right to request and receive any data or documentation that is deemed necessary for evaluation of compliance. 14. This Order of Conditions shall apply to any successor in interest or successor in control; 15. The owner of the property described in this Order, must advise any potential buyer of the property that any construction or alteration to said property, including brush cutting or clearance, may require approval by the Northampton Conservation Commission. Any instrument conveying any or all of the owners' interest in said property or any portion thereof, shall contain language similar to the following: "This property is subject to the Northampton Wetlands Protection Ordinance and/or Wetlands Protection Act. Any construction or maintenance work performed on this property requires an Order of Conditions, and/or a Determination of Applicability from the Northampton Conservation Commission"; 16. The contractor is as responsible as the applicant and property owner for any violations of the Orders of Condition and penalties under the law, while all activities regulated by this Order are being performed. 17. A copy of this Order and associated plans shall remain on site during all construction and/or building activities. The project manager and all equipment operators shall be familiar with the approved plans, and shall be informed of their location on the site. This location shall be accessible to all contractors whenever work is occurring on site. 18. All required permits must be obtained from the Army Corp of Engineers (Section 404, Water Quality Certification), Planning Board, Zoning Board, Department of Public Works, or Building Inspector prior to the start of projects involving fill within any wetland resource area; 19. No disposal of soils or other materials shall be allowed within: a 100 -year floodplain; 40 feet of the 100 -year floodplain elevation; any wetland; or any area within 100 -feet of a wetland, unless such areas are specifically approved by the Commission, in accordance with 310 CMR 10. 00, and City of Northampton Ordinances - Chapter 24; 4 Doc: 98001110108 /5419/0011 0]/01/199812:44 20. Any change or deviation from the Notice of Intent, plans and/or Order of Conditions approved by the Commission, prior to or during construction, shall require the applicant to file a request for an amendment with the Conservation Commission. It shall include a written inquiry as to whether or not the change is substantial enough to require the filing of a new Notice of Intent. After making a positive determination, the Commission shall conduct a public hearing to amend the Order or to issue a new Order, if a new Notice of Intent is required. 21 In accordance with General Condition 8 on page 5-2 of this Order, this Order shall be recorded at the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds by the Northampton Conservation Commission prior to commencement of work on the site. 22. All revised plans, referenced within this Order of Conditions, shall be approved by the Conservation Commission and incorporated into this Order by reference and shall be followed during the course of construction. 23. Ongoing conditions that shall not expire with the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance are as follows: (None). POST CONSTRUCTION SUBMITTALS & WORK IN BUFFER ZONE: 24. Upon completion of the project, the Applicant shall submit a certification that all work has been done in conformance with the provisions of the Order of Conditions and request a Certificate of Compliance. If checked: [ X] YES Certification shall be by a Professional Engineer. 310 CMR: DEPAk-rMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PRO' ACTION 10.99: continued D'' 9W01 OR /5419/0078 07/M 1998 12:44 Issued by the Nadhampion Conservation Commission ,-,, V6&t— BOC This Order must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission. On `� da of S , this Y 19 before me personally = ; appeared S</fti�i %j .. to me known to be the person described in, and who execute X01 the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she executed the same as his/her free act and deed. P1.ni Notary Public;i�s Dec 27,20W My Commission Expires it_ / r Thea applicant, the owner, an M y CD/1n �� '�' �'Pi PP , y person aggrieved by this Order, any owner of land abutting the land '' g upon. proposed work is to be done, or any ten residents of the city or town in which such land is located, are hereby�itottfiecr' of their right to request the Department of Environmental Protection to issue a Superseding -Order, providing request is made by certified mail or hand delivery to the Department, with the appropriate filing fee and Fee Transmittal Form as provided in 310 CMR 10.030 within ten days from the date of issuance of this determination. A copy of the request shall at the same time be sent by certified mail or hand delivery to the Conservation Commission and the applicant. ATTEST: EWSHM., %✓ t/x�o� �REGISTES. Detach on dotted line and submit to the *T'namnionn2?IE1RZnA�1Q on i DnONOcI>;UE prior to commencement of work. To No ha ion Issuing Authonayw -- Please be advised that the Order of Conditions for the project at File Number has been recorded at the Registry of has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property in accordance with General Condition'8 on If recorded land, the instrument number which identifies this transaction is If registered land, the document number which identifies'this transaction is Signature Applicant and 19— Applicant 9 . 4/1/94 310 CMR - 423 423 HLi-NTLEY ALMER HUNTLEY, JR. & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHTTECI'S June 23, 1998 Ms. Karen Hirschberg Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Western Regional Office 436 Dwight Street, State House West Springfield, MA 01103 RE: Northampton Airport, Inc. - DEP file No. 246-428 Huntley No. 97-250 Dear Ms. Hirschberg: On May 5,1998, you requested additional detailed information regarding compensatory storage for the addition of a building at the Northampton Airport. The airport plan view drawing #97250 was updated to address this issue. On June 22, 1998 at a Conservation Commission -- public hearing, drawing #97250 revision 1 dated 6/22/98 was reviewed by the Commission. The contents of the drawing was determined to be representative of site conditions and accurately reflected the proposed project. Orders of Conditions were drafted on June 22, 1998 with final Orders of Conditions expected June 26, 1998. The purpose of this letter is to transmit two (2) sets of revised drawings for your files reflecting the compensatory storage details requested. Sincerely, ALMER HUNTLEY, JR. & ASSOCIATES, INC. drew J. KKawcz7W\ Environmental Scientist cc: Northampton Conservation Commission huntleyt\projinfo\project\97-250\dep-xmit 1 t JW (800) 227-7723 • (413) 584-7444 - FAX (413) 586-9159 0 30 INDusr iAL DRtvE EAsr • P.O. Box 568 • NORTHAMPTON, MA 01061 u HISTORICAL RESEARCH OF AIRPORT PERMITS IN OPD FILES: CONSERVATION COMMISSION RELATED (Wetlands, etc.) (Generally, from most recent to least) PLANNING + ZONING + OTHERS attached in xerox copies Summary below (xeroxes attached of first pages) *June 23, 1998: DEP file #246-248 re. Compensatory storage for building addition) * NOI; June 8, 1998 for 24'x 60' building within floodplain of CT. River * NOI; April, 1998 (Huntley Assoc.) for building construction *Superseding Determination of Applicability under Wetlands Act; DEP, Aug. 26, 1996 *Determination of Applicability under Wetlands Act; DEP, July 5, 1996 *Determination of Applicability; DEP, Applicant: Mass Concerts, June 25, 1996 *Determination of Applicability; DEP, Applicant: Noho Airport, Inc., Feb. 2, 1995 to remove sumac brush except within 100' of riverbank *Certificate of Compliance, Oct., 1987 *Certificate of Compliance, Jan., 1988 *Determination of Applicability, March, 1991 *Certificate of Emergency, Nov., 1984 * Enforcement Order, May, 1989 *NOI, #246-181, Oct., 1987 *Order of Conditions, #246-190, Nov., 1987 *Enforcement Order, #246-134, 178, 181, 190, May, 1989 *Certificate of Compliance, #246-178, July, 1990 *Order of Conditions; #246-178, Sept., 1987 *NOI, #246-178, Sept., 1987 *Order of Conditions, #246-134, June, 1985- *NOI, 985*NOI, #246-134, May, 1985 *Enforcement Order, #246-134, May, 1985 *Enforcement Order #246-134, June, 1985 *compiled by Nanci Bateman for John Bennett upon request C:\MyFiles\airport.wpd on Aleta's PC OPD files, permit history of airport as of 2/18/98 List of documents regarding the airport in chronological order, beginning with oldest documents; Zoning Board of Appeals, Planning Board and Conservation Commission documents denoted with asterisks: * = Zoning Board of Appeals document ** = Planning Board document *** = Conservation Commission document Packet containing: - May 16, 1928: Application to board of aldermen for a license to establish a gas station - April 15, 1961: Application to Dept. of Public Safety for the use of a building as an airplane hanger - June 2, 1980: Application to Dept. of Public Safety for the use of a building as an airplane hanger *Packet containing: - December 24, 1975: Zoning permit application re: demolition of hanger on airport property - April 25, 1978: Zoning permit #128 re: demolition of hanger on airport property - October 7 1980: Building permit #614 re: construction to connect hangers on airport property - October 7, 1980: Application for building permit re: construction to connect hangers on airport property **March 6, 1985: Application to planning board for endorsement of plan believed not to require approval re: 15 unit airport hanger ***July 5, 1985: Application for criminal complaint re: airport violation of Ch. 131, Section 40 MGL. ***August 15, 1985: Letter from Conservation Commission to Clerk of Courts re: decision to withdraw Application for criminal complain against airport. **March 27, 1987: Memorandum to City Council regarding zoning compliance by airport *October 7, 1987: Notice of zoning ordinance violation re: auction on airport property November 3, 1987: Complaint #239-87 to Office of Building Inspection re: expansion of airport; noise/safety concerns. *December 21, 1987: Zoning permit application #831 re: construction of new hanger on airport Property (rejected) *Packet containing: - March 28, 1988: Decision of Zoning Board re: construction of five -plane hanger on airport property - June 8, 1989: Decision of Zoning Board re: auctions on airport property - December 21, 1987: Zoning permit application #831 re: construction of airplane hanger on airport property (denied) *August 23, 1988: Zoning permit application #628 re: auctions on airport property *September 29, 1988: Rejection of application #628 **April 28, 1989: Memorandum to Zoning Board of Appeals re: findings on airport *Packet containing: - December 8, 1995: Memorandum to mayor re: history of firing range on airport property - October 7, 1987: Notice of zoning ordinance violation re: auction on airport property - April 12, 1990: City ordinance re: temporary events April 25, 1996: Temporary event permit application re: Western Mass. Highland Games and Celtic Festival on airport property May 4, 1996: Application for permit to operate a food service establishment re: charity event May 31, 1996: Temporary event permit re: outdoor concert/sporting demonstrations on airport property *Packet containing: - August 1, 1997: Finding application 97-F-42 re: construction of storage building/balloon loft/meeting rooms on airport property - June 25, 1997: Zoning permit application #962443 re: construction of storage building/balloon loft/meeting rooms on airport property (denied) **August 1, 1997: Planning Board application re: construction of storage building/balloon loft/meeting rooms on airport property *March 13, 1998: Appeal application #98-A-19 re: denial of "grandfather" exemption from zoning laws for airport ALMER HUNTLEY JR, & ASSOCIATES via �vxzak June 18, 1998 sh. 1 of 2 Northampton Airport, Inc. Responses to Planning Board Concerns Regarding Section 13.5 and 13.6 of the Northampton Zoning Regulations 1. Site plan to show elevation above sea level and 100 year floodplain level and ................. 2.... Provide certification from a registered professional engineer that the building is structurally sound and designed to withstand velocity flooding ......... The Notice of Intent included a site pian drawing (97250 sheet 1 of 1) that showed topography. Note 2 on the drawing listed the 100 year floodplain elevation value of 125' Attached is a letter from the building architect (-Tris-Metcalf) that- certifies- the - structural integrity of the building 3..... Provide 1" equals 40' site detail The Notice of Intent included a localized site drawing to show topographic contours ..... plan drawing (97250 sheet 1 of 1) that was drawn to a larger scale of 1" equals 10' with contour lines and elevations shown. 4..... Provide a statement indicating what Site Plan Approval, Conservation other permits are required ....... Commission Orders of Conditions and Building permit are required. Other permit requirements are being evaluated by the I omuung owner. ALMER HUNTLEY & ASSOCIATES via AJx;wmk June 18, 1998 sh. 2 of 2 Northampton Airport, Inc. Responses to Planning Board Concerns Regarding Section 13.5 and 13.6 of the Northampton Zoning Regulations 1..... Provide data indicating residential This building is not for residential usage usage floor areas at or above the 100 year -r- 2. ... Provide data indicating non residential floor areas at or above the 100 year floodplain or flood proofed ....... The poured concrete pad will be at elevation 120.55'. The associated building is a two story structure that is fastened to poured frost walls at the pad elevation. The flood plain elevation is 125' thus 4.45 feet of the wooden structure building is within the 100 year flood plain. Attached is a letter from the building architect (Tris Metcalf) that certifies the structural integrity of the 3..... Provide data indicating the building is Attached is a letter from the building properly designed to with stand flooding architect (Tris Metcalf) that certifies the structural integrity of the building 4..... Provide data indicating there shall be This building will not include bathroom no pollution due to the location .... facilities nor is it near any water supplies used by the public 5..... Provide data indicating utilities shall be located to minimize flood damage . 6..... Provide data indicating adequate methods shall be provided to dispose of sewage, refuse and other wastes ..... Overhead power and telephone utilities will be used. Again, no bathrooms will be installed in this building. Small volumes of waste generated will be disposed in existing waste dumpsters on site 7..... Provide data on drainage The 24' x 60' building creates a small roof surface area that will not generate sufficient quantities of water to damage any structure in the area 8..... Provide safe vehicular and pedestrian The poured concrete pad will be installed at mov t ... driveways at grade level .... I grade level and will not create a bermed area Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall - 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 - (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 - EMAIL planning®city.northampton.ma.us *Conservation Commission *Historical Commission -Planning Board • Housing Partnership -Zoning Board of Appeals June 16, 1998 Northampton Airport, Inc. Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. Guisto: This letter is to confirm that the Public Hearing on the Notice of Intent filed by the Northampton Airport, Inc. to construct a 24' by 60', two-story, metal building with a concrete slab, including associated filling and grading within the floodplain of the Connecticut River at the Northampton Airport off Old Ferry Road has been continued by the Northampton Conservation Commission to its meeting scheduled for June 22, 1998 at 8:10 P.M. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton. You and/or your representative(s) are required to attend this meeting to present the application. One week before the Public Hearing is scheduled, a legal notice announcing the meeting will be published in the Daily Hampshire Gazette (copy attached). Please post the enclosed yellow notice where it will be visible from a public right-of-way. If you have any questions, please contact the Office of Planning and Development, City Hall, Telephone 587-1262. c Sincerely, A�r Laura Krutzler Board Secretary enclosure cc: Almer Huntley, Jr. & Associates, Inc., Attention: David Loring, 30 Industrial Drive East, P.O. Box 568, Northampton, MA 01061. ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Cl a E m. O C O h N � N Cn V� O e�- O UQ O �C co i� n � CL p: VMI II J O O � w � x H Com„ W pi W ' _ O to 1-1A a o vb LA A H H II II � � O H � (J1 (9 2 r+ x M � th V � x K N C (J1 6I y II W %1 N A O Ch n� O 6 � K � O C K Cn � O A�i Oo + 7C' Cl a E m. O C O h N � N Cn V� O e�- O O i� VMI J O O 310CMR 10.99 r -- DEP File No. 246-428 Form 5 (To be provided by DEP) City/Town Northampton Commonwealth Applicant Northampton Airoor_k Inc of Massachusetts Map # 25 Parcel #-1-1-5--19-,53 & 71 Order of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act G.L. c. 131, §40 and the Northampton Wetlands Protection Ordinance From Northampton Conservation Commission Issuing Authority To: Northampton Airport, Inc Northampton Aimort, Inc Name of property owner Name of Applicant Old Ferry Road. Northampton Old Ferry Road, Northampton, MA 01060 Address Address This Order is issued and delivered as follows: [ ] by hand delivery to applicant or representative on (date) [X] by certified mail, return receipt requested on _June 26, 1998. (date) This project is located in Northampton at the apton Airport off Oldf2mLltoad. The property is recorded at the Registry of Hampshire County Book 2386 Page 155 Certificate (if registered) N/A The Notice of Intent for this project was filed on Apri122. 1998 (date) The public hearing was closed on June 22. 1998. (date) Findings: The Northampton Conservation Commission has reviewed the above -referenced Notice of Intent and plans and has held a public hearing on the project Based on the information available to the Conservation Commission at this time, the Commission has determined that the area on which the proposed work is to be done is signifieWt to the following interests in accordance with the Presumptions of Significance set forth in the regulations for each Subject to Protection Under the Act (check as appropriate): Area [ ] Public water supply [X] Flood Control [ ] Private water supply [X] Storm damage prevention [ ] Ground water supply [X] Prevention of pollution Total Filing Fee Submitted525 + 35.00 State Share $250.00 Total Refund Due $ Ci Portion $ C'/Z fee in excess of $25) City State Portion $_ (1/2 total) 1 [ ] Land containing shellfish [ ] Fisheries [ ] Protection of Wildlife Habitat City Share $275.00 + 35.00 (1/2 total) Therefore, the Northampton Conservation Commission hereby finds that the following conditions are necessary, in accordance with the Performance Standards set forth in the regulations, to protect those interests checked above. The Conservation Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with said conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above. To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from theplans, specifications or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall control. General Conditions: 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein, and with all related statutes and other regulatory measures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 2. The Order does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges; it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal, state or local statutes, ordinances, by-laws or regulations. 4. The work authorized hereunder shall be completed within three years from the date of this Order unless either of the following apply; (a) the work is a maintenance dredging project as provided for in the Act; or (b) the time for completion has been extended to a specified date more than three years, but less than five years, from the date of issuance and both that date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth in this Order. 5. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods of up to three years each upon application to the issuing authority at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the Order. 6. Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill, containing no trash, refuse, rubbish or debris, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster, wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe, tires, ashes, refrigerators, motor vehicles or parts of anygf the foregoing. The applicant is prohibited from using demolition materials, asphalt, large chunks of concrete, tree stumps and limbs, and general refuse; 2 7. No work shall be undertaken until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed or, if such an appeal has been filed, until all proceedings, before the Department have been completed. 8. No work shall be undertaken until the Final order has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of registered land, the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. The recording information shall be proposed work is to be done. The recording information shall be submitted to the Commission on the form at the end of this Order prior to commencement of the work. The Commission usually will record the Order in the Registry of Deeds. It is the applicant's responsibility to insure the Order is properly recorded. 9. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less than two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the works, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, File Number 246-428 ." 10. Where the Department of Environmental Protection is requested to make a determination and to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shall be a party to all agency proceedings and hearings before the Department. 11. Upon completion of the work described herein, the applicant shall forthwith request in writing that a Certificate of Compliance be issued stating that the work has been satisfactorily completed. 12. The work shall conform to the following plans and special conditions: PLANS /TITLE DATED SIGNED & STAMPED BY: "Proposed Building Site Northam ton 04/13/98 David L. Loring P E Rev. 06/22/98 Massachusetts Prepared for Northam ton - Airport. Inc.." by Almer Huntley Jr & Associates Inc. All Plans and information on file with Northampton Conservation Commission 3 SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 13. The Commission and its agents shall have the right to enter and inspect the property at any time to monitor for compliance with the conditions of this Order, the Act, and Wetlands Protection Regulations: 310 CMR 10.00 and Chapter 24 of the City's Ordinances: "The Wetlands Protection Ordinance". They shall have the right to request and receive any data or documentation that is deemed necessary for evaluation of compliance. 14. This Order of Conditions shall apply to any successor in interest or successor in control; 15. The owner of the property described in this Order, must advise any potential buyer of the property that any construction or alteration to said property, including brush cutting or clearance, may require approval by the Northampton Conservation Commission. Any instrument conveying any or all of the owners' interest in said property or any portion thereof, shall contain language similar to the following: "This property is subject to the Northampton Wetlands Protection Ordinance and/or Wetlands Protection Act. Any construction or maintenance work performed on this property requires an Order of Conditions, and/or a Determination of Applicability from the Northampton Conservation Commission"; 16. The contractor is as responsible as the applicant and property owner for any violations of the Orders of Condition and penalties under the law, while all activities regulated by this Order are being performed. 17. A copy of this Order and associated plans shall remain on site during all construction and/or building activities. The project manager and all equipment operators shall be familiar with the approved plans, and shall be informed of their location on the site. This location shall be accessible to all contractors whenever work is occurring on site. 18. All required permits must be obtained from the Army Corp of En Water Quality Certification), Planning Board, Zoning Board, Department of Public ion 04, Works, or Building Inspector prior to the start of projects involving fill within any wetland resource area; 19. No disposal of soils or other materials shall be allowed within: a 100 -year floodplain; 40 feet of the 100 -year floodplain elevation; any wetland; or any area within 100 -feet of a wetland, unless such areas are specifically approved by the Commission, in accordance with 310 CMR 10. 00, and City of Northampton Ordinances - Chapter 24; 4 �.i 20. Any change or deviation from the Notice of Intent, plans and/or Order of Conditions approved by the Commission, prior to or during construction, shall require the applicant to file a request for an amendment with the Conservation Commission. It shall include a written inquiry as to whether or not the change is substantial enough to require the filing of a new Notice of Intent. After making a positive determination, the Commission shall conduct a public hearing to amend the Order or to issue a new Order, if a new Notice of Intent is required. 21 In accordance with General Condition 8 on page 5-2 of this Order, this Order shall be recorded at the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds by the Northampton Conservation Commission prior to commencement of work on the site. 22. All revised plans, referenced within this Order of Conditions, shall be approved by the Conservation Commission and incorporated into this Order by reference and shall be followed during the course of construction. 23• Ongoing conditions that shall not expire with the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance are as follows: (None). POST CONSTRUCTION SUBMITTALS & WORK IN BUFFER ZONE: 24. Upon completion of the project, the Applicant shall submit a certification that all work has been done in conformance with the provisions of the Order of Conditions and request a Certificate of Compliance. If checked: [ X] YES Certification shall be by a Professional Engineer. E 310 CMR: DEPAIrIENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PRO'1�CTION 10.99: continued Issued by the Northamplon Conservation Commission This Order must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission. On this d )I - appeared day of 19 —, before me personally to me known to be the person described in, and who executed, the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she executed the same as his/her free act and deed. Notary Public Y My Commission Expires y t+-���c%fir BOG The applicant, the owner, anyperson aggrieved by this Order, any owner of land abutting the land upon which the proposed work is to be done, or any ten residents of the city or town in which such land is located, are hereby notified of their right to request the Department of Environmental Protection to issue a Superseding -Order, providing the request is made by certified mail or hand delivery to the Department, with the appropriate filing fee and Fee Transmittal Form as provided in 310 CMR 10.030 within ten days from the date of issuance of this determination. A copy of the request shall at the same time be sent by certified mail or hand delivery to the Conservation Commission and the applicant. Detach on dotted line and submit to the prior to commencement of work. ............................................................................................. To NorthamPiMC013selmation Commission Issuing Authonf7-- — Please be advised that the Order of Conditions for the project at File Number has been recorded at the Registry of has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property in accordance with General Condition 8 on _ If recorded land, the instrument number which identifies this transaction is If registered land, the document number which identifies this transaction is Signature Applicant 19 4/l/94 310 CMR - 423 423 142 Main Street Northampton MA I 01060 4135865775 Architecture Tristram W Metcalfe III, AIA Interior Design AR�f�i t'J a eey � �o��Fgr PSSA�� '►.\TN OF M� Metcalfe Associates Richard Giusto 72 Boynton Rd S Deerfield Ma 01373 RE: Airport Storage building Flood control issues Dear Dick, February 9,1998 The project drawings Al & A2 show the wall construction method and the anchoring means to enable this building to both produce a minimum of flood dispersion in addition to having both the means to prevent dislodging of the structure and an inability to even float without being totally reduced to a loose pile of material. The floor and roof trusses are well above the lower level where only a concrete slab exists. The building would not float if torn from the anchors as it has no lower floor to create buoyancy. The anchors are sufficient to withstand the type and velocity of flood waters that could reach the building. As long as the diagonal bracing is created as awn, the building will withstand the horizontal water pressure over 5 feet above slab level. The volume of water dispersion is minimal due to the fact that the wall materials including the insulation are thin. The wall will fill up with water leaving the displacement to only the plywood sheet rock and siding thicknesses that are below a potential water level. The amount is +-28 sq. ft. of area and it therefore =28 cu. ft. for every foot of water depth above slab in its displacement. If you need any more help please can. Sincerely, I;? -- Tris Metcalfe 04/23/98 13:11 V941.' '71264 NORTHAMPTON. 31A STATEMENT INDICATING HOW FEES ARE CALCULATED For The Wetlands Protection Act and the Northapton Wetlands Ordinance Write ill the number of each activi the total fee, using worksheet on last page, in a resource area or buffer zone. Add up Cate--:°ry1-- (SSS.00 each activity) a• Any work on a single g family residential lot including a house addition, deck, garage, garden, pool, shed, or driveway. Activities excluded from Cate o reviewable under 3I0 CMR 10.53 (3)(e) (See Category g r` I include driveways or single family house, and construction of a de ry 2 ' co Schon of an unattached stricture, k, pier, or other coastal engineering b. Site preparation of each single family house Iot; including remtion, oval of vegeta excavation and grading, where actual construction of the house is not proposed under the Notice of Intent C. Control of nuisance vegetation by removal, herbicide treatment or other means from resource area, on each single family lot; as allowable under 3I0 CMR 10.53 (4). a d• Resource improvement allowed under 310 CMR 10.53 (4), other than removal of aquatic nuisance vegetation, as allowed under 310 10.53 (4). e• Construction, repair, replacement or upgrading of a subsurface septic system or any part of such a system f. Activities associated with installation of a monitoring well, other than construction of an access roadway thereto. g• New agriculture, including forestry on land in forest use (3 10 CMR d s and aquacultura10.533r)an ( l projects. ()( )), Subtotal Category 1 2- "Cat or 2: ($250,00 each activity) a• Construction of each single fancily house (including single family houses in a subdivision), any part of which is in a buffer zone or resource area. Any activities associated with the construction of said house(s), including associated site preparation and construction of retention/ detention basins, utilities, septic systems, roadways and driveways and other than roadways and driveways reviewable under 310 CMR 10.53 (3)(e)(see category 2f), shall not be subject to additional fees if all said activities are reviewed under a single Notice of Intent. (For apartment/condominium type buildings see Category 3.) Q002 04/23/98 13:11 '&941),,—/71264 NORTHAMPTON, MA -11 � X003 Cate or 2 (continued): ($250,00 each activity) b• Parking lot of any size. C. The placement of sand for purposes of beach nourishment. d• Any project reviewable under 310 CMR 1024 a through (c). e• Any activities reviewable under 310 CMR I0.53(3xd) and 310 CMR 10.53(3)(t) 0), except for those subject to 310 CMR 10-047)(04-b. Where more than oeis proposed within an identical footprint (e.g., construction of a sewer within the footprint of a new roadway), only one fee shall be payable. f. Construction of each crossing for a driveway associated with an unattached single family house, reviewable under 310 CMR 10.53(3)(e). g• Any point source discharge. h. Control of nuisance vegetation, other than on a single family lot, by removal, herbicide treatment or other means, reviewable under 310 CMR 10.53(4). i. Raising or lowering of surface water levels for flood control or any other purpose. -- . -- J Any other activity not described in Categories 1,3,4 or 5. k The exploration for (but not development, construction, expansion, maintenance, operation or replacement of) public water supply wells or wellfields derived from groundwater, reviewable under 310 CMR 10.53(3)(0). Subtotal Category 2 3. Category 3: ($525.00 each activity) a. Site preparation, for development other than an unattached single family house(s), including the removal of vegetation; excavation"and grading, where actual construction is not proposed in the Notice of Intent Xb. Construction of each building for any commercial, industrial, institutional, or apartment( condominium/ townhouse -type development, any part of which is in a buffer zone or resource area. Any activities associated with the construction of said building, including associated site preparation and construction of retention/ detention basins, septic systems, parking lots, utilities, point source discharges, package sewage treatment plants, and roadways and driveways other than those roadways or driveways reviewable under 310 CMR 10.53(3)(e), Shall not be subject to additional fees if all said activities are reviewed under a single Notice of Intent. C. Construction of each roadway or driveway, not reviewable under 310 CMR 10.53 (3)(e), and not associated with construction of an unattached single family house. d. Any activity associated with the clean up of hazardous waste, except as otherwise noted in Category 4, including excavation, destruction of vegetation, change in surface hydrology, placement of collection wells or other structures for collection and treatment of contaminated soil and/or water C to ory 3 (coaliaued). ($525.00 each activity) e• The development, construction, ex Pion' maintenance, operation, or replacement of (but not exploration for) public water supply wells or wellfields derived from groundwater, reviewable under 310 CMR 10.53(3xo). Subtotal Category 3 4• Cate,. �ory q• ($725,00 each activity) a. Construction of each crossing for a limited project access roadway or driveway reviewable under 310 CMR 10.53(3)(e) associated with a commercial, industrial, or institutional development or with any residential construction (other than a roadway or driveway associated with construction of an unattached single family house). b. Construction, modification, or repair of a flood control structure such as a dam, reservoir, tidegate, sluiceway, or appurtenant works. C. Creption, operation, maintenance or expansion of a public or private landfill. d. Creation, operation, maintenance or expansion of a public or private sand and/or gravel operation including but not limited to excavation, filling, and stockpiling. e. Construction of new railroad lines or extensions of existing lines, including ballast area, placement of track, signals and switches and other related structures. f. Construction, reconstruction, expansion, or maintenance of any bridge, except to gain access to a single family house lot g. Any alteration of a resource area(s) to divert water for the clean up of a hazardous waste site, for non-exempt mosquito control project, or for any other purpose not expressly identified elsewhere in this fee schedule. h. Any activities, including the construction of structures, associated with a dredging operation conducted on land under a waterbody; waterway, or the ocean. If the dredging is directly associated with the construction of a new dock Pier or other structure identified in Category 5, only the Category 5 fee shall apply. i. Construction of, or the discharge from, a package sewage treatment plant - Airport vegetation removal projects reviewable under 310 CMR 10.24(7)(c)S and 10.53(3)(n). k. Landfill closure projects reviewable under 310 CMR 1024(7)(c)4 and 10.53(3)(n). 1. Any activities, including the construction of structures, associated with the assessment, monitoring, containment, mitigation, and remediation of, or other response to , a release or threat of release of oil and /or hazardous material reviewable under 310 CMR 10.24(7)(c)6, or 310 CMR 10.53(3ft. Subtotal Category 4 \V./ S. Category 5: ($20.00 linear foot, Min. 550.00, Max. $1,000) a• Construction, reconstruction, repair or replacement of docks, piers, revetments, dikes, or other engineering structures on coastal or inland resource areas, including the placement of rip rap or other material on coastal or inland resource areas. Subtotal Category 5 6. Category 6: (51.00 linear foot (single family project), Max. $250.00; 51,000.00 for any other activity) a Delineation of bordering vegetated wetlands. (For single family house projects) Subtotal Category 6 7. Category 7• a• Work in river front area, 5001* of fee calculated for activities in another resource area(s). Subtotal Category 7 &• Category 8: Notices filed under the Northampton Wetlands Ordinance WITHOUT FILING UNDER WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT a• Any work on a single building lot or housing unit 525.00 b. Each additional lot or housing unit $50.00 C. Commercial, industrial, institutional projects..... . $100.00 Plus $0.10 square foot of resource area activity Plus $0.02 square foot of buffer zone activity. Subtotal Category 8 9. Catery 9: Fee for permit under the Northampton Wetlands Ordinance in add_ ition to fee for permit under the Wetlands Protection Act: a• Request for Determination: $20.00 b• Notice of Intent (including requests for amendments / ) $35.00 ✓ C. Extension of an Notice of Intent/Order of Conditions permit $50.00 d• Certificate of Compliance: $ Subtotal Category 9 Complete the summary fee worksheet page and submit with Permit to Conservation Commission 04/23/98 13:13 494135871264 NORTHAMPTON, )Q FEE WORKSHEETS N(MARy PAGE to be su miffed # Category I activities x $55.00 k_Category 2 activities x $250.oo *—Category 3 activities x $525.00 # Category 4 activities x S725.00 if Category 5 activiti es x S2.00/ft (min $50) .....................$ #_if Category 6 activities x S1-00/ft(max S250orS1000) T__� #— Cate gory 7 activities 50%Offee for other resource areas..S--- SUBTOTAL............................................................................... ONE HALF SUBTOTAL Check #1 to: Minus: $ 12.50 The Commonwealth Of Massachusetts" 50, 0 SUBTOTAL........... $ <Jc; /2 = $ o26d , 570 ONE HALF SUBTOTAL PLUS: CPlus: $ 12.50 O) Category 8 activities @ () $ I 6 X? 5 PLUS Category 9 activities @ TOTAL FEE: S-3-0, 00 S—J-5— Check #2 to: "The City of Northampton" Z004 t N WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT MASSACHUSETTS G.L.C. 131, §40 NOTICE OF INTENT BUILDING CONSTRUCTION NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT NORTHAMPTON, MA 9T-250 APIUL,1998 PREPARED FOR: Northampton Airport, Inc. Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA. 01060 PREPARED BY: HUNTLEY Almer Huntley, Jr. & Associates 30 Industrial Drive East Northampton, MA 01061 (413) 584-7444 • FAX (413) 586-9159 SECTION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Appendix A 97-250 %�'-/ 1-1, TABLE OF CONTENTS ITEM Cover Letter USGS Locus Map Completed Notice of Intent Application Form Filing Fee Calculation Worksheet/Fee Transmittal Form/Copies of Checks Notification to Abutters/Affidavit of Service/Abutters List Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Atlas Maps FIRM Floodplain Map SCS Soil Survey Map Narrative Site Plans, Details and Notes SECTION 1 Cover Letter :Q •e+i •a:t11:»• HU1,4TLEY ALMER HUNTLEY, JR. & ASSOCIATES, INC. "- April 13, 1998 SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS Robert -McCollum, Section Chief Wetlands Division Dept. Of Environmental Protection, Western Region 436 Dwight Street Springfield, MA 01103 RE: Notice of Intent. Northampton Airport Building Construction Northampton, Massachusetts (Huntley Project No. 97-250) Dear Mr. McCollum: On behalf of Northampton Airport, Inc., we are submitting two copies of a Notice of Intent for proposed work to construct a two-story metal sided building. As noted in the accompanying Notice of Intent, the work proposed for this project will take place within the 100 -year flood zone of the Connecticut River. -------We-are-simultaneousiy-making a submission to the Northampton Conservation Commission. -- ` If you have any questions upon review of the enclosed information, please call our office. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Very truly yours, R HUNTLEY, JR. & ASSOCIATES, INC. David L. Loring, E. Director of Engineering DLL:ajm enclosures cc: Northampton Conservation Commission Northampton Airport, Inc. 97-250 (800) 227-7723 - (413) 584-7444 - FAX (413) 586-9159 0 30 INDUSTRIAL DRrvE EAsr • P.O. Box 568 - NoRTHAmFmN, MA 01061 SECTION 2 USGS Locus Map Old HaAX-Cern p BM. 122 `-Hadley Hop i Aeademy 12,9; •° �- �/ well, BM \ � � •. Z • �',` --'nrnP�-y+ve—"-:-,f--�— Aand\\\ 1 33 I` ^ �— .a r 1 ��"• 4� 14 , ' a 1 _ I, Bridge \ RO\.' u i 91 c ` ONS ^ Y Beach .( C4 •y 1 s�grag—Rf Di eldop BOUNDARY J • � it '�Fai gr un el •, ; 119OR I IV j1°Nor hampton .ISc 1 for Girls" _ i \ / 11 t/7�• 1. �� a �\ Willi n+s sr a ���%\\ SMsepher n w I \q \a yr Isla Almer Huntley. Jr. & Associates, Inc. 30 Industrial Drive East PO Box 568 Northampton, MA 01061 USGS Locus Map MT. Holyoke Quadrangle Scale: V= 2,083' SECTION 3 Completed Notice of Intent Application Form 3 -- 310 CMR 10.99 L DEP File No. Form 3 (To be provided by DEP) City/Town Northampton Applicant Northampton Airport. Inc Commonwealth ofMassachusetts Notice of Intent Under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 The City of Northampton's Wetland Protection Ordinance, Ch.24 and Application for a Department of the Army Permit Part I: General Information 1. Location: Street Address Northampton Airport off Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA Lot Number: N/A Department of Defense United States of America 2. Project: Type Building Construction. Description The work will involve the grading and filling of land as well as the construction of a 24' x 60' two story metal building with concrete slab 3. Registry: County Hampshire Current Books & Pages 2386/155 Certificate (if Registered Land) N/A 4. Applicant Northampton Airport. Inc. Tel. (413) 584-7980 Address Old Ferry Road. Northampton, MA 01060 5. Property Owner Northampton Airport. Inc. Tel. (413) 584-7980 Address Old Ferry Road Northampton. MA 01060 6. Representative . Almer Huntley, Jr. & Associates, Inc Tel._. (413) 584-7444 Address 30 Industrial Drive East, P.O. Box 568 Northampton MA 01061 7. a. Has the DEP's Western Regional Office been sent, by certified mail or hand delivery, 2 copies of comleted Notice of Intent, with supporting plans and documents? Yes No ❑ Has the Northampton Conservation Commission Office been sent, by certified mail or hand delivery, 9 copies of completed Notice of Intent, with supporting plans and documents? Yes® No 3-1 b. Has the fee been submitted? Yes o No ❑ `J c. Total filing fee submitted? $55.00 d. City/Town Share of Filing Fee $30.00 State Share of Filing Fee $25.00 (1/2 of fee in exceu of $25, nut to DEP) e. Is a brief statement attached indicating how the applicant calculated the fee? Yes ® No ❑ f. Under which laws is this permit being requested? Mass. Wetland Protection Act ® Northampton's Wetland Protection Ord. 8. Have all obtainable permits, variances and approvals required by local by-law been obtained? Yes ❑ No ._ Obtained Applied For: Not Applied For: Order of Conditions Building Permit 9. Is any portion of the site subject to a Wetlands Restriction order pursuant to G.L. c. 131, S40A or G.L. c. 130, S105? Yes ❑ No 10. List all plans and supporting documents submitted with this Notice of Intent. Identifying Title, Date Number/Letter §1 Cover Letter §2 Locus Map §3 Notice of Intent Application /Stormwater Management Form §4 Fee Computation Forms §5 Abutters List/Notification to Abutters/Affidavit of Service §6 Estimated Habitat Maps §7 Federal Insurance Rate Map §8 SCS Soil Survey Maps §9 Narrative Appendix A Plans, Erosion Control Plans and Details 3-2 11. Check those resource areas within v�h work is proposed: (a) ❑ Buffer Zone (b) Inland: ❑ Bim* Land Subject to Flooding ❑ Bordering Vegetated Wetland* ® Bordering ❑ Land under Water Body & Waterway* ❑ Isolated * Likely to involve U. S. Army Corps of Engineers concurrent jurisdiction. See General Instructions for completing Notice of Intent. 12. Is the project within estimated habitat which is indicated on the most recent Estimated Habitat Map of State - Listed Rare Wetlands Wildlife (if any) published by the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program? Yes ❑ No ® Date printed on the Estimated Habitat Map No Map Available ❑ (if any) 1997-98 ( See Section 6) If yes, have you sent a copy of the Notice of Intent to the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program via the U.S. Postal Service by certified or priority mail (or otherwise sent in a manner that guarantees delivery within two days) no later than the date of the filing of this Notice of Intent within the conservation commission and the DEP regional office? Yes ❑ No ❑ If yes, please attach evidence of timely mailing or other delivery to the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program. Part H: Site Description Indicate which of the following information has been provided (on a plan, in narrative description or calculations) to clearly, completely and accurately describe existing site conditions. Identifying Number/Letter (of plan, narrative or calculations) Natural Features §8 Soils — Appendix A Vegetation 12, Appendix A Topography §2, 6, 7, 8, Appendix A Open water bodies (including ponds and lakes) §2, 6, 7, 8, Appendix A Flowing water bodies (including streams and rivers) Public and private surface water and ground water supplies on or within 100 feet of site 3-3 MaxlM6rn annual ground water elevations 'Vvith date and location of test Boundaries of resource areas checked under Part 1, item 11 §7 above Other Appendix A Appendix A Appendix A Part III: Work Description Man-made Features Structures (such as buildings, piers, towers and headwalls) Drainage and flood control facilities at and immediately off the site, including culverts and open channels (with inverts), dams and dikes and open channels (with inverts), dams and dikes Subsurface sewage disposal systems Underground utilities Roadways and parking areas Property boundaries, estimates and rights-of-way Other Indicate which of the following information has been provided (on a plan, in narrative description or calculations) to clearly, completely and accurately describe work proposed within each of the resource areas checked in Part I, Item 11 above. Identifying Number/I,etter (of plan, narrative or calculations) Appendix A '- Appendix A Planview and Cross Section of Structures (such as buildings, piers, towers and headwalls) Drainage and flood control facilities, including culverts and open channels (with inverts), dams and dikes Subsurface sewage disposal systems and underground utilities Filling, dredging and excavating, indicating volume and Composition of material 3-4 Compensatory store areas, where required in accordance.,,lh part III, §9, Appendix A Section 10.57 (4) of the regulations. Wildlife habitat restoration or replication areas Other Point Source Discharee Description of characteristics of discharge from point source (both closed and Open channel), when point of discharge falls within resource area under Part I, item 11 above, as supported by standard engineering calculations, data and plans, including but not limited to the following: 1. Delineation of the drainage area contributing to the point of discharge; 2. Pre- and post -development peak run-off from the drainage area, year and 100 -year frequency storm; at the point of discharge, for at least the 10- 3. Pre- and post -development rate of infiltration contributing to the resource area checked under Part I, Item 11 above; 4. Estimated water quality characteristics of pre- and post -development run-off at the point of discharge. 3-5 L Part IV: Mitigating Measures I. Clearly, completely and accurately describe, with reference to supporting plans and calculations where necessary: (a) All measures and design proposed to meet the performance standards set forth under each resource area specified in Part II or Part III of the regulations; or (b) Why the presumptions set forth under each resource area specified in Part II or Part III of the regulations do not apply. ❑ Coastal Resource Area Type: Identifying number ® Inland Land Subject to Flooding or letter of support documents Work to be performed under this Notice includes the relocation §9, Appendix A of soil in order to establish grading for a 24' x 60' concrete slab (see Appendix A). The areas of soil disturbance will be regraded, loamed and seeded to existing grade. No change in flood storage is proposed (see §9 ). Also under this notice is the construction of a 24' x 60' two story, metal building which will be located on the concrete slab. Work area will be contained within erosion control barriers and will remain so until the area is stabilized. 3-6 -- 2. Clearly, completely and accurately de: !e, with reference to supporting plans calculations where necessary: (a) all measures and designs to regulate work within the Buffer Zone so as to ensure that said work does not alter an area specified in Part I, Section 10.02(l)(a) of these regulations; or (b) if work in the buffer Zone will alter such an area, all measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards established for the adjacent resource area, specified in Part H or Part III if these regulations. 3-7 Part V: Additional Information for a 4ye"partment of the Army Permit 1. COE Applications No. (to be provided by COE) 2. (name of waterway) -- 3. Names and addresses of property owners adjoining your property: 4. Document other project alternatives (i.e., other locations and/or construction methods, particular) those that w eliminate the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters or wetlands). Y would S. 8 1/2" x 11" drawings in planview and cross-section, showing the resource area and the proposedactivity within the resource area. Drawings must be to scale and should be clear enough for photocopying. Certification is required from the Division of Water Pollution Control before the Federal permit can be issued. Certi may be obtained by contacting the Division of Water Pollution Control,1 Winter Street, Bosto Massachusetts 02108. ton Where the activity will take Place within the area under the Massachusetts approved Coastal Zone Management Program, the applicant certifies that his proposed activity complies with and will be conducted in a approved program. manner that is consistent with the Information provided will be used in evaluating the application for a issuance of a public notice. Disclosure of this information is voluntary; and is made a matter of public record through the application cannot be however, if necessary information is not provided, processed nor can apermit be issued. I hereby under e d cets and s of perjury that the foregoing Notice of Intent and accompanying plans, e and complete, to the best of my knowledg . Si f App / Si re Of ppli is Representative Date FORM `Exception to ENG Form 4345 MED 100 (TEST) approved by Housace, 6 May 1982" 1 MAY 82 "This document contains a joint Department of the Army and State of Massachusetts application for a permit to obtain permission to perform activities in United States waters. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved those questions required by the US Army Corps of Engineers. OMB Number 0702-0036 and expiration date of 30 September 1983 applies". This statement will be set in 6 point type. 3-8 L L SECTION 4 Filing Fee Calculation Worksheet FILING FEE CALCULATION WORKSHEET -ATEGORY 1$55 PER ACTIVITY CATEGORY 4 $725 PER ACTIVITY r.+ Existing House/residential lot (addition, deck, gara$e, pool, A. EACH WETLAND FILLING/ CROSSING LIMITED and, or DRIVEWAY) PROJECT ACCESS ROADWAY/ DRIVEWAY under 310 1 55 Site Preparation (removal of vegetation, excavation grading CMR 10—r3(3e) associated with COMMERCIAL„ INDUSTRIAL, INMITUT'IONAL DEVELOPMENT OR where home construction is not proposed under this NO]) `—category RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION CONSTRUCTION (-see 2g for SFH driveways') C. Control of nuisance vegetation by removal, herbicides, etc within a Resource Area PER LOT pursuant to 310 CMR B. Flood Control Structures (construction, REPAIR, and/or 10.53(4) modification) D. Resource Area Improvement pursuant to 310 CMR 10 S3(4) C LANDFU IS- public & private other than IC above D. SAND & GRAVEL OPERATIONS SEPTIC SYSTEM or arty part thereof, repair, replacement, UPGRADING E. NEW railroad lines or EXTENSIONS of EXISTING lines F• Monitoringwells/well F. Control of NUISANCE VEGETATION under 310 CMR 'OTAL CATEGORY 1 ACTIVITIES 10.53(4) other than on a SFH lot 1 $55 G. BRIDGES (constructiom reconstructior,expansion, P°10n rATEGORY 2 $250 PER ACTIVITY )MATED with • SFH eat EACH NEW single family house (SEH) INCLUDING site IL Raising or lowering WATER LEVELS Preparation, raiention/ detention basins, uah", SEPTIC SYSTEM, roadway/ driveway other than these pursuant to 310 CMR 1053(3e) if reviewed under a SINGLE NOI L ALTERATION OF RESOURCE AREA & diversion of water associated with HAZARDOUS WASTE CLEANUP Parking lot/ ANY size nonmosyuito control projects, or for ANY OTHER PURPOSE NOT EXPRESSLY IDENTIFIED ELSEWHERE IN THIS C. Beach Nourishment FEE SCHEDULE '�. Coastal Activities pursuant to 310 CMR 10.24 (7a -c) including 7a-Ekctrk Generation J• DREDGING ACTIVITIES not associated with a NEW dock, Facllities, 7b•Public Utilities, 7a Coastal Limited pier or other structure described in category 5 Projects REPA'R/MATENANCE of EX6TING piers, buildings including IN TOTAL CATEGORY 4 ACTIVITIES culverts, etc. LIMITED PROJECT ACTIVITIES Pursuant to 310 CMR �-- CATEGORY 5 $2 PER LINEAR FOOT; TOTAL FEEL' NOT TO BE 10.53(") and 310 CMR 10.53 (f-1) per footprint LESS THAN $50 NOR MORE THAN $1000 1? NEW agricultuml/squacuuldrral projects A. Construction, reconstructiom REPAIR, or replacement of EACH WETLAND DRIVEWAY CROSSING associated with �- a SFH DOCKS, PIERS, REVETMENTS, DIMS, or other engineering structures on COASTAL or INLAND pursuant to 310 CMR 1053 (3e) RESOURCE AREAS including the placement of RIP -RAP or FL ANY point source disclarga other material on coastal or inland resource areas ANY OTHER ACTIVITY not described in categories 1,3,4 & 5 TOTAL CATEGORYS ACTIVITIES TOTAL CATEGORY 2 ACTIVITIESTOTAL FILING FEE CALCULATED $65 'ATF.GORY a $525 PER ACTIVITY A- SITE PREPARATION for ANY development other than for a SFH INCLUDING removal of vegetation, excavation & grading when actual construction is NOT proposed under this NOI B. CONSTRUCTION OF EACH BUILDING widen commercial, industrial institutional, or apartment/condo/townhouse development ANY PART of which is in a BUFFER ZONE or L_ RESOURCE AREA. Associated activities site preparation, retention/detention basin constructiM septic systems, Parking lots, utilities, point source disdarges, sewage treatment plants, roadways/driveways NOT subject to 310 CMR 10.53(3e) SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL FEE'S if said activities are reviewed under a SINGLE NOI Construction of EACH ROADWAY/ DRIVEWAY within the Buffer Zone of Ceastai Floodzone Not reviewable under 310 CMR 10.53 (3e) and NOT associated with a SFH D. HAZARDOUS WASTE CLEANUP (except as noted in category 4) 40TAL CATEGORY 3 ACTIVITIES PERSON CALCULATING FEE SCHEDULE (print Name) RICHARD GWSTO ADDRESS NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC.. P.O. BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 TELEPHONE NUMBER (413151td7aon JIVLV Al DATE. d NOTICE OF INTENT FEE TRANSMITTAL FORM DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION OF WETLANDS AND WATERWAYS NOTICE OF INTENT (NOI) APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER Name: Airyort Inc Name: Same Street: Old Ferry Road Street: City/Town: nten City/Town: State: MA Zip Code: 01060 State: Zip Code: Phone Number. (413)584-7980 phone Number. PROJECT LOCATION: Streedt of Number. Northampton Airport off Old Ferry Road City/Town: No ton DEP FILE NUMBER (if available): NOI FII.ING FEE DISPUTED FEE Total NOI Filing Fee: $55.00 Total Disputed Fee: $ -- - - - - (as determined in Notice of Insufficient Fee State Share of Filing Fee: $25.00 letter from conservation commission) State Share of Fee: (%2 of fee inexcess Of $25.00) (%2 Of total disputed fee) City/Town Share of Filing Fee: $30.00 City/Town Share of Fee: $ _ (%2 oftotal disputed fee) INSTRUCTIONS 1. Send this Fee Transmittal form and a check or money order, payable to the CommonwMIth of Massachusetts, to the DEP Lock Box at: Dept. of Environmental Protection Box 4062 Boston, MA 02211 2. Attach a coy of this form to the Notice of Intent submitted to the local Conservation Commission. 3. Attach a cry of this form and a cry of the DEP check to each of the Notice of Intent forms submitted to the DEP regional office. 11/20/92 RICHARD GIUSTO 358 72 BOYNTON RD. DEERFIELD, MA 01373 / /118 DATE PAY TQ THE ORD OF s 56' ce LLARS 0 5""""• .... HE BANK OF WE RN MASSACHUS ----- SPRINGFIELD, MAS ACHUSETTS FOR Mr 1:0 11130 241381: 09 00 20 2 l 50u■ 0 3 58 _ RICHARD GIUSTO 3,57 72 BOYNTON RD. _ DEERFIELD, MA 01373 48/118 DATE $,�/ v DOLLARS 0 THE BAFPNR MASSA HUS SPRINGFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS r FOR �, f. l:0 L 1130 2413131: 09 00 20 2 l 50u■ 0 Zp SECTION 5 Notification to Abutters/ - Affidavit of Service/ Abutter's List NOTIFICATION TO ABUTTERS Under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act In accordance with the second paragraph of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 131, Section 40, you are hereby notified of the following- A. ollowing A. The name of the applicant is Northampton Airport, Inc.. B. The applicant has filed a Notice of Intent with the Conservation Commission for the municipality of Northampton, seeking permission to remove, fill, dredge or alter an Area Subject to Protection or within 100 feet of an area Subject to Protection, Under the Wetlands Protection Act (General Laws Chapter 131, Section 40). The applicant proposes construction of a two-story metal sided building. The proposed work will take place in a Bordering Land Subject to Flooding. C. The address of the lot where the activity is proposed is The Northampton Airport. D. -Copies of the Notice of Intent may be examined at Almer Huntley, Jr. & Associates, Inc., 30 Industrial Park Drive, Northampton, MA 01061 between the hours of 9:00 AM and 4:30 PM, Monday through Friday. For more information on the filing or proposed work, call: David Loring, P.E. (413) 584-7444. Check One: This is the applicant Q, representative ®, or other ❑ (specify): E. Copies of the Notice of Intent may be obtained from either (check one) the applicant Q, or the applicant's representative ®, by calling (413) 584-7444 between the hours of 9:00 AM and 4:30 PM, Monday through Friday. There is a $40.00 copying charge for copies of the Notice of Intent, including plans. F. Information regarding the date, time and place of the public hearing may be obtained from Almer Huntley, Jr. & Associates, Inc., 30 Industrial Park Drive, Northampton, MA 01061, by calling (413) 5847444 between the hours of 9:00 AM and 4:30 PM, Monday through Friday. Check One: This is the applicant 0, representative ®, or other ❑ (specify): • Notice of the Public hearing, including its date, time and place, will be published at least five(S) days in advance in the Daily Hampshire Gazette, legal ads section of the newspaper. • Notice of the public meeting, listing all hearings, including the date, time and Place, will be posted in the Town Hall not less than forty-eight (48) hours in advance of the meeting date. • You also may contact the Department of Environmental Protection Western Regional Office for more information about this application or the Wetlands Protection Act at (413) 784-11o0. 97-230 - AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE Under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (to be submitted to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and the Conservation Commission when filing a Notice of Intent) I, David Loring, hereby certify under the pains and penalties of perjury that on April 15, 1998 I gave notification to abutters in compliance with the second paragraph of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 131, Section 40, and the DEP Guide to Abutter Notification, dated April 8, 1994, in connection with the following matter: ` A Notice of Intent filed under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act by Northampton Airport, Inc. with the Northampton Conservation Commission on April 15, 1998 for property '— located at The Northampton Airport, where work is proposed to construct a two-story metal sided building with concrete slab. The form of the notification, and a list of the abutters to whom it was given and their addresses, are attached to this Affidavit of Service. Name 97-2M Date NORTHAHP`1'ON ASSESSOR'S LABELS Owners anti PARCEL PARCEL ADDRESS Owners' bailing Address ` 15 -011-001 RIVERBANK RD '-PHIBAULT WAYNE U & I'IlANCES I1 �u C-''HES' ERI'lELD PD NORTHAI4P'PON 01060 25 ` -012-001 147 RIVERBANK RD FELL SANDRA L 147 RIVERBANK RD NORTHAMPTON 01060 25 -013-001 2 RIVERBANK RD BRETON CLAUDE B & LISA A 573 PIPER RD W SPRINGFIELD 01089 25 -014-001 RIVERBANK RD GYGIIONT JOHN ` 60 NEST STREET HADLEY 010:35 25 -015-001 152 CROSS PATH RD NORTHAtIP`I'ON AIRPORT, INC. P 0 BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON 01060 25 -016-001 RIVERBANK RD NOR`l'HAMP`I'ON AIRPORT, INC. P 0 BOX 221 ` NOR`I'HAI-tPTON_ 010bO 25 -017-001 RIVERBANK RD 14ORTHAIIPTON AIRPORT I'NC. P 0 BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON 01060 25 -018-001 CROSS PATH RD NORTHAI-fPTON AIRPORT, INC. P 0 BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON 01060 02/19/98 — Page 1 NORTHAMPTON ASSESSOR'S LABELS Owners and PARCEL PARCEL ADDRESS Owners' Hailing Address 25 -019-001 MEADOWS RIVERBANK RD NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC. P 0 BOX 221 `- NORTHAMPTON 25 -020-001 S6 CROSS PATH RD 25 -035-001 CROSS PATH RD 25--036-001 CROSS PATH RD 25 -037-OUl CROSS PATH RD 25 -038-001 CROSS PATH RD 5 -039-001 CROSS PATH RD 25 -040-001 CROS PATH RD 02/19/98 01060 110ORE HOWARD T & STEPHANIE BUR HOORE 56 CROSS PATH RD NORTHAMPTON 01060 ifUZYKA NARY TRUSTEE 359 BRIDGE; ST NORTHAt1PTON 01060 JASINSKI WILLIAM S & VICTORIA 29 I'AIR STREET NORTHAMPTON 01060 JASINSKI WILLIAM S & VICTORIA 29 I'AIR STREET NORTHAMPTON 01060 JASINSKI WILLIAM S & VICTORIA 29 FAIR STREET NORTHAMPTON 01060 BOBALA JOHN J & KAREN A 1'/ OLD PERRY RD NORTHAMPTON 01060 ZURAW ROBERT 321 BRIDGE ST NORTHAMPTON 01060 Page 2 NORTHAMPTON ASSESSOR'S LABELS PARCEL PARCEL ADDRESS Owners and Owners' Mailing Address .... 25 -041-001 OLD FERRY RD JASINSKI WILLIAM S & VICTORIA 29 PAIR ST �-- NOR`1'HAMPTON 01060 25 ._ -042-001 CROSS PATH RD GNA`1'EK FRANK A 80 WEST ST AMHERS`i' 01002 25 -044-001 OLD PERRY RD HAMPSHIRE FRANKLIN & HAMPDEN �- AGRICULTURE SOCIE`1'Y P.O. BOX 305 NORTHAMPTON 01061 25 -045-001 STRONGS RD BOROWSKI BERNARD S & IRENE T HOYNOSKI -- 26 WILLIAMS STREET NORTHAMPTON - 01060 '— 25 -046-001 CROSS PATH RD BOROWSKI CHESTER J & NANCY E 5 HENRY S111REET NORTHAHP'1'ON 01060 25 -047-001 STRONGS RD BOROWSKI CHESTER J & NANCY E BOROWSKI 5 HENRY S`I'REET NORTHAMPTON 01060 25 -052-001 S`1'RONGS RD JAESCKE IRENE J & ~' RICHARD J JAESCKE & SANDRA J 782 BRIDGE RD NORTHAMPTON 01060 25 -053-001 YOUNG RAINBOW RD NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC. .r P.O. BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON 01060 02/19/98 — Page 3 NORTHAI-IPTON ASSESSOR'S LABELS Owners and PARCEL PARCEL ADDRESS Owners' !failing Address 25 -054-001 RIVERBANK RD SZAWLOWSKI JOHN R 126 NORTH MAPLE ST FLORENCE 01060 25 -056-001 CROSS PA'T'H RD BOROWSKI CHESTER J & NANCY E 5 HENRY STREET NORTHAMPTON 01060 25 -058-001 CROSS PATH RD BOROWSKI CHESTER J & NANCY E 5 HENRY STREET NORTHAMPTON �- 01060 25 -059-001 CROSS PATH RD REMING`1'ON MARY E C/O CURTIS PETER 23 FAIR S'T' NORTHAMPTON 01060 25 -063-001 CROSS PATH RD BOBALA JOHN J & KAREN A 17 OLD FERRY RD NORTHAMPTON 01060 25 -071-001 CROSS PATH RD #1 DAVE'S ELECTRIC 40 MOUNTAIN RD -- NORTH HATFIELD 01066 25 -071-002 CROSS PATH RD #? WHITE KEVIN & PRANK J TOItRE 12 BARRETT PL NORTHAMPTON 01060 25 -071-003 CROSS PATH RD #3 PERL14AN DENIS 1 KING ST NOR`1'HAIIPTON 01060 02/19/98 '-- Page 4 NORTHAMPTON ASSESSOR'S LABELS Owners and PARCEL PARCEL ADDRESS Owners' Mailing Address ,-- 25 -071-004 CROSS PATH RD #4 WEEBER CHARLES H III 108 NO VALLEY RD �- PELHAM 01002-9729 25 -071-005 CROSS PATH RD #5 CHILDS THOMAS r' 145 MAIN RD WESTHAMPTON 01027 25 -071-006 CROSS PATH RD #6 ALLCROFT ROGER 69 ADAMS RD HAYDENVILLE 01039 25 -071-007 CROSS PATH RD #7 BENOIT MARK `-- _ 76 BLOKLAND DR LONGMEADOW 01106 25 -071-008 CROSS PATH RD #8 BENOIT MARK 76 BLOKLAND DR LONGMEADOW 01106 25 -071-009 CROSS PATH RD #9 BENOIT MARK 76 BLOKLAND DR LONGMEADOW 01106 25 -071-010 CROSS PA'T'H RD #10 SURNER BENJAHIN JR & MARK E BE 156 WASON AVE SPRINGFIELD �- 01107 25 -071-011 CROSS PATH RD #11 SURNER BENJAMIN JR & STEPHEN G FELLERS 156 WASON AVE SPRINGFIELD 01107 02/19/98 — Page 5 -- NORTHAMPTON ASSESSOR'S LABELS Owners and PARCEL PARCEL ADDRESS Owners' (Mailing Address —25 -071-012 CROSS PATH RD #12 SURNER BENJAMIN A JR & STEPHEN FELLERS 156 WASON AVE `- SPRINGFIELD 25 -071-013 CROSS PATH RD #13 25 -071-014 CROSS PATH RD #14 25 -071-015 CROSS PATH RD #15 25 -071-016 CROSS PATH RD #16 25 -071-017 CROSS PATH RD #17 25 -071-018 CROSS PATH RD #18 25 -071-019 CROSS PATH RD #19 02/19/98 01107 SURNER BENJAMIN S JR & STEPHEN FELLERS 156 WASON AVE SPRINGFIELD 01107 SURNER BENJAMIN A JR & STEPHEN FELLERS 156 WASON AVE SPRINVYIELD 0110'7 SURNER BENJAMIN A JR & STEPHEN YELLERS 156 WASON AVE SPRINGFIELD 01107 SURNER BENJAMIN A JR & STEPHEN YELLERS 156 WASON AVE SPRINGFIELD 01107 SURNER BENJAMIN A JR & STEPHEN FELLERS 156 WASON AVE SPRINGFIELD 01107 SURNER BENJAMIN A JR & STEPHEN YELLERS 156 WASON AVE SPRINGFIELD 01107 SURNER BENJAMIN A JR & STEPHEN E'ELLERS 156 WASON AVE SPRINGFIELD 01107 Page 6 ti _02/19/98 01060 Page 7 NORTHAMPTON ASSESSOR'S LABELS Owners and PARCEL PARCEL ADDRESS Owners' Hailing Address 25 -071-020 CROSS PATH RD #20 SURNER BENJAi,-1IN A JR & STEPHEN FELLERS 156 WASON AVE SPRINGFIELD 01107 `:25 -071-021 164 CROSS PATH RD NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC. P.O. BOX 211 a, NORTHAMPTON 01060 25 -071-021 164 CROSS PATH RD NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC. P.O. BOX =221 NORTHAMPTON '-� 01060 -25 -071-021 164 CROSS PATH RD NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC. P.O. BOX 221 NOR'PHAMPTON 01060 25 -071-021 164 CROSS PATH RD NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC. P.O. BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON 01060 x-25 -071-021 164 CROSS PATH RD NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC. P.O. BOX 211 - NORTHAMPTON 01060- �25 -071-021 164 CROSS PATH RD NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT 11.1C. P.O. BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON 01060 25 -011-021 164 CROSS PATH RD NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC. P.O. BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON ti _02/19/98 01060 Page 7 NORTHAMPTON ASSESSOR'S LABELS Owners and PARCEL PARCEL ADDRESS Owners' Mailing Address `-25 -071-021 164 CROSS PATH RD NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT TNC P.O. BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON 25 -071-021 164 CROSS PATH RD 25 -071-021 164 CROSS PATH RD L 25 -071-021 164 CROSS PATH RD 25 -071-021 164 CROSS PATH RD 25 -071-022 CROSS PATH RD #EEX1 25 -071-023 CROSS PATH RD #EX2 25 -071-024 CROSS PATH RD #EX3 02/19/98 EASTHAN KEVIN 320 RIVERSIDE DR NORTHAMPTON 01060 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC RIVER RD LEEDS 01053 Page t3 01060 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC. P.O. BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON 01060 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC. P.O. BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON 01060 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC. P.O. BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON 01060 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC. P.O. BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON 01060 ARMSTRONG ROBERT D & SANDRA BOX 76, SHEPHERD RD BUCKLAND 01338 EASTHAN KEVIN 320 RIVERSIDE DR NORTHAMPTON 01060 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC RIVER RD LEEDS 01053 Page t3 NORTHAMPTON ASSESSOR'S LABELS Owners and PARCEL PARCEL ADDRESS Owners' Mailing Address 6^25 -071-025 CROSS PATH RD #EX4 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC MAIL: F KEEFE & M LONG 1 GEER HILL RD WILLIAMSBURG 25 -071-026 CROSS PATH RD #EX5 25C-082-001 BRIDGE ST L 25C-083-001 319 BRIDGE ST 26 -001-001 RAINBOW RD 26 -002-001 RAINBOW RD 32 -005-001 170 FAIR ST Assessor's Certification: Date: 02/19/98 HAGGERTY GARY NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT INC NORTHAMPTON 0106U ZURAW ROBERT 321 BRIDGE ST NORTHAMPTON 01060 KIELEC JOSEPH W & ANNA M 319 BRIDGE ST NOR`1'HAMPTON 01060 NORTHAMPTON AIRPOR`, INC. P 0 BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON 01060 JASINSKI WILLIAM S & VIC"1'ORIA 29 FAIR ST NORTHAMPTON 01060 CZARNIECKI NARY & ADAM & JOSEP 291 RIVERSIDE DRIVE MOPTHAMPIVOM Page 9 SECTION 6 Habitat Maps MT. Holyoke Quadrangle Natural Heritage Atlas 1997-1998 I— I Almer Huntley. Jr. & Associates Inc 30 Industrial Drive East P.O. Box 568 Northampton, MA 01061 Estimated Habitats of Rare Wildlife and Certified Vernal Pools Mass. Natural Heritage Atlas: 1997 - 1998 MT. Holyoke Quadrangle Scale: 1" = 5,000' u SECTION 7 FIRM Floodplain Map Almer Huntley. Jr. & Associates Inc 30 Industrial Drive East P.O. Box 568 Northampton, MA 01061 ►A 9 Flood Insurance Rate Map April 1978 City of Northampton Scale: 1" = 1000, Almer Huntley. Jr. & Associates Inc 30 Industrial Drive East P.O. Box 568 Northampton, MA 01061 Flood Insurance Rate Map April 1978 City of Northampton Scale: 1" = 1000, SECTIONS SCS Soil Survey Hampshire County L 97-2% I., IV Ha H Hd -Ha ot4 t4 V 1,05 -rto) . iA Ha WS 2PELAb AU Ha U51 WS Ha WS Ha WS j7. 15- S Vft ift NPI Ha WS ...... A wSw Ha :WS. Hd -Ha Ha WS 2PELAb AU Ha U51 WS WS Haa ift Ws Ha kd Ha Ha 91 yds WS Vs Ha Ha Ha L Almer Huntley, Jr. & Associates. Inc. 30 Industrial Drive East PO Box 568 Northampton, MA 01061 BEACH Jul .......... . U HIS Ha Ha w Lk Ws /"2 SCS SOILS MAP Soil Survey of Hampshire County, MA Central Part: Sheet #14 Scale: 1" = 1300't SECTION 9 Narrative �, The work proposed under this project is within an area subject to the Massachuset -W' etland Protection Act (310CMR10.00). The work is within the 100 -year floodplain of the Connecticut River. The 100 -year flood u plain elevation in the work area is 125' as shown on the Federal Insurance Rate Map for the City of Northampton. The 100 -year flood plain area encompasses a majority of the entire airport site. The work to be performed under this project consists of the grading for a 24' x 60' concrete slab for the purpose of constructing a two-story metal sided building. The grading required for the concrete slab and building will be done to assure that the flood storage will not change. L ' - APPENDIX A Site Plans Erosion Control Details & Notes L- L.. r 310 CMR: DEPAk I$AENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL- pID�r,,,_,CTION MOM �''"" � X35 continued 10.99.• coni 190 DEP File No. 246- (To be provided by DEP) Form 8 Commonwealth of Massachusetts City/Town Northampton Northampton Airport Applicant Certificate of Compliance Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 and The City of Northampton's Wetlands Protection Ordinance From Northamp`o ion Commission Issuing Authority TO Northampton Airport, Inc. P.O. Box 221, Northampton, MA 01061 (Name) (Address) Date Issuance May 19, 1998 of This Certificate is issued for work regulated by any Order of Conditions issued to Northampton Airport, Inc. dated January 6, 1988 issued by the Northam ton Consation Commission and 1. Cxl It is hereby certified that the work regulated by the above -referenced Order of Conditions has been satisfactorily completed. 2. ❑ It is hereby certified that only the following portions of the work regulated by the above -referenced Order of Conditions have been satisfactorily completed: (If the Certificate of Compliance does not include the entire project, specify what portions are included.) 3. ❑ It is hereby certified that the work regulated by the above -re e"R�ces' Order of Conditions was never commenced. The Order of Conditions has lapsed and is therefore no longer valid. No future work subject to regulation under the Act may be commenced without filing a new Notice of Intent and receiving a new Order of Conditions. (Leave Space Blank) 4/1/94 310 CMR - 429 429 AutoCAD File: S:\Protects\04 Prols\04-0418 Northampton Airport\14autcad\14acadwn\04-0418 WHO Airport\PLANNING BOARD DWGS\PR0P0SED1-REV4 dwg Plotted at- Tue Jun 13 13:23:28 2006 BEC, Inc yZ-UX Z�mD f- <>OK r=o mom, O K f �zC7 Dm mO�m - r CROSS PATH ROAD m ZDX* ZAN Z ` - JAO Z= / M S / PA KING Sp) A r, � � 1 n .;�; �� m -- CD Z "M - / �/ C) _ m / M/ D 0�a MO 00 al y» .. -rt -0 O D O / , / C;U, z Z-OZX O -U , rM0 m D�>� ( z �mM _ �� Dm / z0 D O V) r*1� X O I G7 V) C j r—LAJ �� Ily J / ' II on C/)_C�t �°CN� i "t`" / 'Ile (( D G7 Z i //+ C )� o > , C7 � CJ1 F- rri �- c , v, Cn / /� ,/ r rn _ , / C:) -T7_ - l i - 1 C)C C �w^Zm C/) I IJ F J -C) L4 > Y 00 �\ M i � / 1 n ,'/ /'� C c) tr �� C/) ��� �j �, Ki C � � M -I C)'0 fel-i % C O / C v DD Mo y / D z Z r � % //moo C C) (n C r�--I F -- n - - --- -- ODS DO Z n>0 F-Z0M mm0 �0 Z7 O N O O N i D M 00D �=z K02 = D {(n irp-I D<Z (n om W N rn o D o = C D C� D C C O D��� Z _ Z- r D m Z m m �U)Z�n_ 0 -1 rUDi Z ZX W 0 0 I DZDMT 0> O m IC X X 0 0 0 0 0 m O O� � m m m�� Ln D Z7 I Z p= O Z z < O —i =< rn rn cn A S m O �l U) r r= D fTl --1 I C Z7�O� Z- D< :..' �bo z �:"\� 3 �n �% O 0700��� D m D� SMD npD r I I m��mOm�'a r CMZ Dom= ; z �� ,, o cnr _ I I = r�cn �� ooD o �� m Z••� o �DZZpZZ � -00Z �L� �z0 I I j r mMZCJ��GO �Z70� r o�m o n o #' '" D O= z O ZG7Z7 �_ fOTI n ��O fTl Z O I I I fTl ZU)f�l r N< I j poo o c o p is r D Z Z� Z I G7 O n y JVD �0� Z OJ = M-<(')> o. y v >��M DD- �Xcn=KD i I o ���U) ���vo �N o Z K F^ + o D U) ZJ D = U) N v .. r� a °o M r -0 C X IM �m Dry;00 m i 0 z D mo nm r D cn0 �D� �� Ox ox m cn �D rn �z avv D < _ m Ui z O mx Z CK;0 po o, a p v, -� � Dz ,� in o O o V-1 U) M �� r A 0�--i r np n� m�D D o -a x� Co� C) CoO iL/) -OZ Amo o z ` a ii' i C `/ -0 -,n 0-0 D D- m- z m -U 0U) -ir D10O = o� o 0 0 o n oo � m �O �7D �Zm Z Z mZ pOH Z �m DO mo x Z �Z K 070M- Z o i m m z "�Z ZO ��D�� �� (nC� Z �� Zm �m O G) �Xm- O-0 O I rU) MM0 o M 0 0 0 0 o D� G Z �mZM> D 0 -'0p -10 CC7Z C 0- D C m� Z�� m�D�f=T1 `oczia a m a 0 0 o Z7J Z� mDz�m mZ< z �� m o mo_ < z �m =z ��ZC) vDz z c z mO ���0 � G�0 n� m U) O Z Oz K m Z� p N D�O� 0. ;0 umi CA U) -< o N C) C) m � r � z u, o � 3� � m 00 -0 o O � D m c� U) O o p O z o� Z n N a V Zz a� �>� Z. M < D o o omoD a nZ o c,. o Z oo: D y f- o -O m C) R.D O DX 'C) Co �" , D i J 0 ✓ —1 O Ori J �r � V)> DO > O mZm 0-1 Or Ln Go 0o �O \\ � M o z �om G7 F� -r 1 �, O< D i Z M z D Gym l 00 _r z J� �m 0. . ,' C) z� �= CROSS PATH ROAD m ZDX* ZAN Z ` - JAO Z= / M S / PA KING Sp) A r, � � 1 n .;�; �� m -- CD Z "M - / �/ C) _ m / M/ D 0�a MO 00 al y» .. -rt -0 O D O / , / C;U, z Z-OZX O -U , rM0 m D�>� ( z �mM _ �� Dm / z0 D O V) r*1� X O I G7 V) C j r—LAJ �� Ily J / ' II on C/)_C�t �°CN� i "t`" / 'Ile (( D G7 Z i //+ C )� o > , C7 � CJ1 F- rri �- c , v, Cn / /� ,/ r rn _ , / C:) -T7_ - l i - 1 C)C C �w^Zm C/) I IJ F J -C) L4 > Y 00 �\ M i � / 1 n ,'/ /'� C c) tr �� C/) ��� �j �, Ki C � � M -I C)'0 fel-i % C O / C v DD Mo y / D z Z r � % //moo C C) (n C r�--I F -- n - - --- -- ODS DO Z n>0 F-Z0M mm0 �0 Z7 O N O O N i D M 00D �=z K02 = D {(n irp-I D<Z (n om W N rn o D o = C D C� D C C O D��� Z _ Z- r D m Z m m �U)Z�n_ 0 -1 rUDi Z ZX W 0 0 I DZDMT 0> O m IC X X 0 0 0 0 0 m O O� � m m m�� Ln D Z7 I Z p= O Z z < O —i =< rn rn cn A S m O �l U) r r= D fTl --1 I C Z7�O� Z- D< :..' �bo z �:"\� 3 �n �% O 0700��� D m D� SMD npD r I I m��mOm�'a r CMZ Dom= ; z �� ,, o cnr _ I I = r�cn �� ooD o �� m Z••� o �DZZpZZ � -00Z �L� �z0 I I j r mMZCJ��GO �Z70� r o�m o n o #' '" D O= z O ZG7Z7 �_ fOTI n ��O fTl Z O I I I fTl ZU)f�l r N< I j poo o c o p is r D Z Z� Z I G7 O n y JVD �0� Z OJ = M-<(')> o. y v >��M DD- �Xcn=KD i I o ���U) ���vo �N o Z K F^ + o D U) ZJ D = U) N v .. r� a °o M r -0 C X IM �m Dry;00 m i 0 z D mo nm r D cn0 �D� �� Ox ox m cn �D rn �z avv D < _ m Ui z O mx Z CK;0 po o, a p v, -� � Dz ,� in o O o V-1 U) M �� r A 0�--i r np n� m�D D o -a x� Co� C) CoO iL/) -OZ Amo o z ` a ii' i C `/ -0 -,n 0-0 D D- m- z m -U 0U) -ir D10O = o� o 0 0 o n oo � m �O �7D �Zm Z Z mZ pOH Z �m DO mo x Z �Z K 070M- Z o i m m z "�Z ZO ��D�� �� (nC� Z �� Zm �m O G) �Xm- O-0 O I rU) MM0 o M 0 0 0 0 o D� G Z �mZM> D 0 -'0p -10 CC7Z C 0- D C m� Z�� m�D�f=T1 `oczia a m a 0 0 o Z7J Z� mDz�m mZ< z �� m o mo_ < z �m =z ��ZC) vDz z c z mO ���0 � G�0 n� m U) O Z Oz K m Z� p N D�O� 0. ;0 umi CA U) -< o N C) C) m � r � z u, o � 3� � m 00 -0 o O � D m c� U) O o p O z o� Z n N a V Zz a� �>� Z. M < D o o omoD a nZ o c,. o Z oo: D y f- o -O m C) R.D O DX 'C) Co �" U) O M D i J 0 ✓ —1 O CROSS PATH ROAD m ZDX* ZAN Z ` - JAO Z= / M S / PA KING Sp) A r, � � 1 n .;�; �� m -- CD Z "M - / �/ C) _ m / M/ D 0�a MO 00 al y» .. -rt -0 O D O / , / C;U, z Z-OZX O -U , rM0 m D�>� ( z �mM _ �� Dm / z0 D O V) r*1� X O I G7 V) C j r—LAJ �� Ily J / ' II on C/)_C�t �°CN� i "t`" / 'Ile (( D G7 Z i //+ C )� o > , C7 � CJ1 F- rri �- c , v, Cn / /� ,/ r rn _ , / C:) -T7_ - l i - 1 C)C C �w^Zm C/) I IJ F J -C) L4 > Y 00 �\ M i � / 1 n ,'/ /'� C c) tr �� C/) ��� �j �, Ki C � � M -I C)'0 fel-i % C O / C v DD Mo y / D z Z r � % //moo C C) (n C r�--I F -- n - - --- -- ODS DO Z n>0 F-Z0M mm0 �0 Z7 O N O O N i D M 00D �=z K02 = D {(n irp-I D<Z (n om W N rn o D o = C D C� D C C O D��� Z _ Z- r D m Z m m �U)Z�n_ 0 -1 rUDi Z ZX W 0 0 I DZDMT 0> O m IC X X 0 0 0 0 0 m O O� � m m m�� Ln D Z7 I Z p= O Z z < O —i =< rn rn cn A S m O �l U) r r= D fTl --1 I C Z7�O� Z- D< :..' �bo z �:"\� 3 �n �% O 0700��� D m D� SMD npD r I I m��mOm�'a r CMZ Dom= ; z �� ,, o cnr _ I I = r�cn �� ooD o �� m Z••� o �DZZpZZ � -00Z �L� �z0 I I j r mMZCJ��GO �Z70� r o�m o n o #' '" D O= z O ZG7Z7 �_ fOTI n ��O fTl Z O I I I fTl ZU)f�l r N< I j poo o c o p is r D Z Z� Z I G7 O n y JVD �0� Z OJ = M-<(')> o. y v >��M DD- �Xcn=KD i I o ���U) ���vo �N o Z K F^ + o D U) ZJ D = U) N v .. r� a °o M r -0 C X IM �m Dry;00 m i 0 z D mo nm r D cn0 �D� �� Ox ox m cn �D rn �z avv D < _ m Ui z O mx Z CK;0 po o, a p v, -� � Dz ,� in o O o V-1 U) M �� r A 0�--i r np n� m�D D o -a x� Co� C) CoO iL/) -OZ Amo o z ` a ii' i C `/ -0 -,n 0-0 D D- m- z m -U 0U) -ir D10O = o� o 0 0 o n oo � m �O �7D �Zm Z Z mZ pOH Z �m DO mo x Z �Z K 070M- Z o i m m z "�Z ZO ��D�� �� (nC� Z �� Zm �m O G) �Xm- O-0 O I rU) MM0 o M 0 0 0 0 o D� G Z �mZM> D 0 -'0p -10 CC7Z C 0- D C m� Z�� m�D�f=T1 `oczia a m a 0 0 o Z7J Z� mDz�m mZ< z �� m o mo_ < z �m =z ��ZC) vDz z c z mO ���0 � G�0 n� m U) O Z Oz K m Z� p N D�O� 0. ;0 umi CA U) -< o N C) C) m � r � z u, o � 3� � m 00 -0 o O � D m c� U) O o p O z o� Z n N a V Zz a� �>� Z. M < D o o omoD a nZ o c,. o Z oo: D y ` 20 yAos�O .. ._ GSF r6p" pLF \ o PRD�0c ON,oy QFC OUSE I AGRICULTURAL \ nCGr Pa�PEaT. IS LOCATED 1Mwe'ds�c-CI L Conscnvn _ R/SFRCONEC—T 10 �D��µE ATAXPRONS a & \ \ `\ \ -nµ 11 OE MNI OE ...-PTON IOND CE MILL Bf CON0.1ED MM EOR -1. PRWKOa . . O\ . > ECMSunIN WUSEr15 LAND-TECTIO KTT ROI c DIN: «,NE LEND E HANGERS (2) �.�,.. 1 .� ... ( PROPwn uNc � CURB CUT \ \ `\ \ AGRICULTURAL USE \ To RE RENom RELOCATE FBd OFFICE TO EXISTING BWLDING 1 4 '7 11' \ •� \ J \ U. _ ... c «'.°T, \ ❑ .o ONE (i) REMOVE BALLOON BLD,� REPUCE TM1T1 LAWN `�� \ BEmNrmDCTm Bu �! PROPOSED REMOVE BLDG (I -C FUELING PAD RE ATE •\ \`.. . REMOVE BLDG (I A PROPOSED..-`' _ _ _ - APRON AREA ` AGRICULTURAL QO U$E �O FERRY ROA D + REMOVE BLDG r_A NORTHAMpTON NR -�- BB/ RT, qi upi Iy IS INC. rBNc. BLDG FOR \�\ REMOVE', BLDG. b/2 & ASS--p- PAVEMENT PARACHUTISTS Ncs � sso>a Bzsl ..r' ` ` \ \ �\ `\ �` \ \ AGRICULTURAL USE wroRu.noNwmN r LOT szE DE LAND m NDaTHA;IPrDIi"nncD -AN ASM AAuvTOnTTNRPOPI£�EOR Aurta REPLACE WITH PAVED,APRON, PROPOSED 120'.80 HANGAR \ \ \`\ nis evA ASKIC-SINC NEW HANGAR, - - AND UWN AREA 1DO' X 80' ` HANGARS (2) OLD F -.a'[ •.^, W APRON ERRY / RDgp Ih� \ \`\ `\ REFUGE $ICN T5 D M.D RNY ROAD E Clry -Al ` ` \\�\ \ `\\� CASE 0.N, INFORNAnON� —OLD By El-D'CEN RN RAN SNE tt R D SNFtt DEiNLS' MIs Pun NAS � PREaN+m ro BEFORE ME AaDUPANY APPUCA-1 Oi -SIN —.INSBC. ANOK aF N�BOARDT T5 D U ANYOTHER PURPOSE IS O }; AGRICULTURAL �I USE "�.�.`\.o-•y��, +°w' \� \y \ .+'avy O ''OCr'aWo \ '= PROPOSED CONDMONE PLAN NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT NORTHAMPTON.KA BAVSTATE ENVIRONMENTAL OONSLILTANB INC `-"TIC SCALE AN -- i AGRICULTURAL i USE \ r .2- City of Northampton, Massachusetts o 4/pe X— o Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 �wr FAX (413) 586-3726 0-0 c ('3 e� • community and Economic Deveiopment • conservation • Historic Preservation • Pianning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals • Northampton Parkipq CWqqMS VARIANCES & ZBA SPECIAL PERMITS I Permit Issued by: 1 ,- i9/ Zoning Board of Appeals ��s?1 Map ID —�3 File # _.—� Date Submitted ,&"44 a1 Ar OPD Staff Review for fee and completeness Planner Review Set up Public File Folder Legal Notice Gazette �✓� �.,%�� °- r��� (Notice 7 and 14 dayg before hearing) Legal Notice Posted Letter to Owner Letter to Abutters/Towns &xOr COPY OF to B . I . ial afi�9,Q APPLICATIONS Copy to DPW is/a�198 SENT TO: Copy to B of H Copy to C.C. Copy to Fire Dept. e_-4ey'W Copy to P.B. Members Planning Board Meeting Copy to ZBA members P.B. recommendations to ZBA members & B.I. signa ZBA Hearing ZBA Decision '7 1"k Decision filed with City Clerk �le�lgf Decision mailed to: Owner/Abutters/Towns Decision to DPW jino Decision to B.I. 6/t"pq Permit entered on computer Decision filed OPD��Q1 (Memorex: ZBAInstr 4/3/92) Filed in the City Clerk's office March 18, 1999. The Board voted unanimously 3:0 on February 25, 1999 to accept the request from Richard Guisto to withdraw his appeal application. DATE: February 25, 1999 TO: ZONING BOARD -OF APPEALS Appeal I hereby request that I be allowed to withdraw my application xfm=xx appealing the Building Inspector's determination that the Northampton Airport is not Y.*'grandfathered" for outdoor entertainment uses which was filed on December 21, 1998 - See Attached Letter for Signature Applicant 3 --< 14ORTHAMPTON AIRPORT 4135045614 --02-/24 '10 14•'S NO.981 01 U � To: The Zoning Board of Appeals, City of Northampton From: Richard Giusto, Northampton Airport Date: 2/24/99 Subject: Withdrawal of request To wham it may concent. Please be advised that I am Board of Appeals. Thank you. MY request currently in front of the Zoning Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 - (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 - EMAIL planning®city.northampton.ma.us *Conservation Commission *Historical Commission *Planning Board - Housing Partnership -Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of Meeting January 28, 1999 The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals held a meeting on Thursday, January 28, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. in Hearing Room 18, Second Floor City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Mark NeJame, Robert Riddle and Larry Snyder. Staff. Senior Planner John Bennett and Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. At 6:37 p.m., NeJame opened the Public Hearing on an Appeal of the Building Inspector's decision determining that the Northampton Airport is not "grandfathered" for outdoor entertainment uses filed by Northampton Airport, Inc. for property on Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1,15 -19, 53 & 71. NeJame read the legal notice. Dick Guisto was present. NeJame disclosed for the record that the law firm he worked for had represented the Northampton Airport at some point in the past. He said he did not think they did anything for them now, and Guisto confirmed that this was correct. Guisto stated that he was there to ask the Board to pass on a new application to grandfather outdoor entertainment uses at the airport. He reminded members that, as they knew, a similar application was considered by the Board last year when Guisto unsuccessfully appealed the [Building Inspector's] determination that the airport was not grandfathered. Guisto commented that it was apparent at that time that the Board was not passing on the merits of the case but on the decision of the Building Inspector. He noted that the Building Inspector was present for those proceedings and heard testimony from witnesses,, but he had not had the benefit of hearing those witnesses prior to making his original determination. Guisto acknowledged that the Building Inspector's original decision could therefore have been correct, and the Zoning Board of Appeal's decision correct, since the Building Inspector did not have the benefit of the witness's testimony. 1 ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1_�_/ __1/ Guisto indicated that he was now asking the Board to pass on a new application and determine whether [the decision denying the grandfathering rights] was correct in the totality of the testimony. Guisto said his legal counsel had advised him that the Board's reconsideration was a procedural necessity. Guisto said he would then feel members had passed on the merits of the testimony and not on "a procedural technicality." NeJame pointed out that he and Snyder had sat on the original hearing, but Riddle had not had the benefit of hearing the testimony. NeJame commented that his recollection was that one of the reasons for the denial was that Guisto's application was for "broad -brush" grandfathering as far as outdoor entertainment uses. One of the things that seemed consistent in the testimony was that there were particular types of outdoor activities that seemed to be consistent, some of those consistent with an airport use, and others which were part of the history of the airport, NeJame continued. NeJame asked whether, when reapplying to the Building Inspector, Guisto had framed his request for grandfathering in narrower terms? Guisto said that he had expressed to Tony [Patillo] his willingness to restrict attendance to fifteen thousand (15,000) people and not to have heavy rock concerts, etc. He said he was looking at Country -Western [bands], etc. - things he had had in the past. Snyder said he was concerned that Riddle had no background in the case, commenting that it seemed as if they would have to go through the same procedure all over again so that Bob could hear it. He asked if minutes of the previous hearings could be made available so that Bob could review them? Guisto said he had no problem with that, and staff said minutes would be sent out. NeJame asked if the Building Inspector was going to attend? Bennett said he didn't know, but that he had been informed of the hearing. NeJame said he was not sure how to handle the issue raised by Snyder. He noted that he would have liked to see the request to the Building Inspector framed in a narrower way so that it would be more consistent with the testimony heard and with what Guisto was proposing as far as the types of events to be held. Guisto said there had been dances, carnivals, etc. at the airport, and he was looking for Springfests, car shows - basically one -day events. One event he was currently planning for the Fourth of July was to have three national Country -Western acts and a fireworks display, he said. Guisto said the event would be limited to fifteen thousand (15,000) people. He noted that he had had seventeen thousand (17,000) there before with no problem. Snyder asked if Guisto could do that now with permission from the City? Guisto said he could, but [the permit process] was very difficult. Guisto pointed out that the fairgrounds was grandfathered [for entertainment uses] and now had an indoor soccer arena. He 2 remarked that it was "only what the Northampton Airport does that is a problem." In support, Guisto referred to the fact that certain outdoor recreational activities are held downtown without permits, such as the Taste of Northampton and the Tour of Northampton. He said the law [requiring detailed information to be provided regarding outdoor entertainment events] only applied to him since it was put into place, since everything else was exempt. "It should have been named the Northampton Airport Law," Guisto observed. Guisto listed some of the events which had been held at the airport from 1925 on, including carnivals, fairs and dances. He said he was not looking to expand his facility and change [its use]. "Aviation is my love," he stressed. Guisto said that the events held at the airport earned an extra $15,000 a year and helped to supplement his income and pay his taxes and mortgage. He charged that he had been shut down "because of certain political people" and that events formerly held at the airport now went to the fairgrounds instead. Guisto said he had been here last year and provided members with witnesses and written and spoken testimony that outdoor entertainment had continually occurred at the airport from 1925 on. Member Discussion. Snyder commented that he and NeJame had heard that testimony and voted a certain way, and nothing had changed. However, he said he did not want to influence Riddle, and he thought it was necessary for Riddle to read the minutes and make his own decision. Guisto said he had no problem with continuing the hearing to allow Riddle to read the minutes. NeJame said he would like to see on paper guidelines as to what Guisto thought he could live with and what types of events specifically he thought were grandfathered. He said he would like to know the type of events planned, time of year, etc. He suggested that if Guisto could get this information to the Planning Department and to the Building Inspector, members might be able to get a reaction from the Building Inspector as to how he would consider that. As far as outdoor entertainment, NeJame commented that he thought members had heard evidence of certain types of events, but he did not think it was all inclusive. NeJame indicated that he personally would turn down again a request for grandfathering'of general outdoor entertainment. However, he said he thought he could consider a request for grandfathering of more limited events. NeJame said he would also like to look at parking. Guisto questioned why the fairgrounds had not had to go through a similar process? He said it had been about two and a half years since the fairgrounds was grandfathered... Bennett pointed out that the fairgrounds was zoned for business use back in 1948 3 Riddle said he would be concerned with safety issues, for example, how you would prevent someone from parachuting into a Country and Western show... Guisto said he would be shut down [if this were not addressed]. He said he could provide information [on safety issues]. Bennett said it seemed to him that the facts were essentially unchanged in that the application did not more narrowly specify what was being requested in terms of grandfathered status. The application was still for "entertainment" and did not specify particular uses, he noted. In the prior hearing, there was lots of testimony that some entertainment probably did meet the requirements for grandfathering, but it wasn't clear precisely what scale, he observed. Bennett continued that he had certainly hoped the Zoning Board would have a more narrowly - framed request. Given that the request was not framed more narrowly, he said he didn't see any difference [in outcome]. Bennett referred to the exercise as "spinning wheels," although he acknowledged that it might serve a useful purpose for Guisto's attorney. NeJame said he didn't want to kick the request back to the Building Inspector, but it seemed that if members could narrow down the issues and the scope of what they were looking at, they could take a hard look at what had occurred at the airport and whether it was comparable to what was going on today. However, Snyder said he thought members were there to look at the decision that had already been made. He clarified that he thought Guisto was asking them to look at Patillo's decision based on past testimony. Snyder repeated his recommendation that Riddle read the minutes. He added that he thought that if [former Zoning Board member Alex] Ghiselin were still there, the vote would [again] be 3:0 in denial of the appeal. Discussion continued, with members discussing how to get a narrower request for grandfathering before them. NeJame said he thought Guisto needed to go back before the Building Inspector to request grandfathering of more narrowly -defined entertainment. If the Building Inspector denied that request, members could look at that decision, he said. In response to a question from Riddle, Bennett explained the two venues for allowing outdoor entertainment under current zoning. He said applicants could either obtain a temporary event permit from the City Council or a Special Permit for outdoor commercial recreational use from the Planning Board. The use is allowed in Rural Residential, Suburban Residential and Special Conservancy districts, he said. Riddle said it seemed to him that the thing to do was to make a presentation to the Planning Board and get a Special Permit. "Even if it's been held consistently for all these years?" Guisto asked. Riddle said the Board was being asked to grandfather too few parking spaces, and he didn't agree 4 with that method of operation. A Special Permit would be the best way to do it, he maintained However, Guisto countered that the airport had had barn dances, church dances, etc., "all types of things," through all these years, and prohibiting such events now would be illegal. "That's taking of my land - it would have to go to Court," he said. Members discussed how to proceed. Bennett said he thought what was before the Board was the present application for general grandfathering. He commented that the suggestion of submitting plans to Patillo was not really fair to Tony, since he was making a decision based on the Zoning Permit Application. He clarified that if the Board voted to deny the appeal tonight, it would be up - to Guisto to decide whether to submit another application to Patillo or to go to Court. Guisto asserted that the Building Inspector would not approve the grandfathering even if he only had ten thousand people, since Patillo did not feel entertainment should be down there. Guisto said he would get further details to members. NeJame read Patillo's letter denying the Zoning permit Application. He reiterated his sentiment that Board members had not heard testimony of broad, general entertainment uses but rather had heard testimony of fairly specific types of events. He commented that there were some [proposed] outdoor uses which were not included within any of the testimony and which he would say would not be grandfathered in any case. NeJame asked if any more information was necessary [in order for other members to make a decision]? Snyder said he did not want to drag the whole thing out. He said he would like to have Patillo at the next meeting so he could get his take on things. Guisto confirmed that he would supply specifics of traffic, parking, crowd control, and the number and types of events to the Planning Department in advance of the next hearing. He commented that Mary Ford had made the remark that "there would never be another event at the airport." Snyder moved to continue the hearing to February 11, 1999 at 6:00 p.m. Riddle seconded. The motion passed unanimously 3:0. Members fielded questions from Dave Reid of the Union News about the appeal. 5 U Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 • EMAIL planning6city.northampton.ma.us *Conservation Commission *Historical Commission *Planning Board • Housing Partnership *Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of Meeting February 11, 1999 The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals held a meeting on Thursday, February 11, 1999 at 6:00 p.m. in Hearing Room 18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Mark NeJame and Larry Snyder. Staff. Senior Planner John Bennett At 6:00 p.m., Chair NeJame opened the meeting. NeJame opened the Continuation of a Public Hearing on an Appeal of the Building Inspector's decision determining that the Northampton Airport is not "grandfathered" for outdoor entertainment uses filed by Northampton Airport, Inc. for property on Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1,15 -19, 53 & 71. NeJame read a letter from the applicant requesting a continuance to the Board's next meeting. Snyder moved to continue the hearing to February 25,1999 at 6:00 p.m. in Hearing Room 18. NeJame seconded. The motion passed unanimously 2:0. The meeting was adjourned. ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER w u Office of Planning and Development City of Northampton City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 587-1266 FAX (413) 587-1264 • EMAIL planning®city.northampton.ma.us -Conservation Commission *Historical Commission *Planning Board • Housing Partnership *Zoning Board of Appeals Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of Meeting February 25, 1999 The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals held a meeting on Thursday, February 25, 1999 at 6:00 p.m. in Hearing Room 18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Mark NeJame, Bob Riddle and Larry Snyder. Staff: Senior Planner John Bennett and Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. At 6:42 p.m., Chair Mark NeJame opened the meeting. NeJame opened"the Continuation of a Public Hearing on an Appeal of the Building Inspector's decision determining that the Northampton Airport is not "grandfathered" for outdoor entertainment uses filed by Northampton Airport, Inc. for property on Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1,15 -19, 53 & 71. NeJame read a letter addressed to the Board from Richard Guisto requesting withdrawal of the appeal. Snyder moved to accept the withdrawal of the appeal. Riddle seconded. The motion passed unanimously 3:0. Riddle moved to close the Public Hearing. Snyder seconded. The motion passed unanimously 3:0. Snyder moved to accept the minutes of January 28, 1999. Riddle seconded. The motion passed unanimously 3:0. The meeting was adjourned at 6:46 p.m. ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER NORIMAMP 914 AiRPOR I 4165845614 02/02 '10 11,:46 N0.927 01 PROPOSED EVENTS AT THE NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT 2 Large Events- up to 15,000 people Fireworks Events The following are small events- less than 3,000 people: Craft Fairs Car Shows Airshows-Airport? Balloon Festivals -Airport? Ethnic Celebrations Dances Food Festivals All events are one day except perhaps the circus. This would be limited to two days. All events are over by 10:00 P.M. Events to be held between Apri 1 1'' to October 31 ". SECURITY- All small events (under 3,000) have never been a problem for police. All events over 3,000- coverage depends on the size of the event. For example, a large, 15,000 person event would have 6 local policeoi�'ieers, and 30 Sherriff's Deputies for a total of 36 in uniform, Additionally show security would average approximately people. All large events will have an ambulance on the premises. An vent with l0Q fireworks would also have a fire truck. The emergency entrance and exit is Hockanum Rd. All parking would be on the airport and properly owned by Garyrt , Combined these properties will hold over 7,000 oars, G y __-, MAUHAMt-- QV1`t_ AIKt-VK I 4"135tS45fi't4 _ UL/UL 'IU 11:46 NO. y27 02 All events would total no more then 8 events per year, some events may include multiples, like an air show with a crafts fair and hot air balloon. A car show with a food festival, ctc. The Fire Dept. and Police Dept_ will be kept informed of all events no matter what siyxe the event. The airport has in effect an $1,000,000.00 airport premises insurance policy. This policy has been in effect since we have been here, and will remain in effect as long as we are here. The airport has a lot of experience in parking cars, all cars will be directed to the end of Old Ferry Rd. turned onto Cross Path Rd. to the runway, nut the runway fnt-parking on both sides of the runway. NO CARS VMJL BE STOPPED ON THE RD. FOR ANY REASON. The show areas will all be fenced in and secure. After the show, all areas will be cleaned, policed and returned to original condition within 24 hours. No permanent changes will be trade to the airport without the proper permit processes. 1 have honestly tried to address all of the city and your concerns, if T have omitted anything please feel 3w to contact me and we can adjust what is necessary. HISTORICAL RESEARCH OF AIRPORT PERMITS IN OPD FILES: CONSERVATION COMMISSION RELATED (Wetlands, etc.) (Generally, from most recent to least) PLANNING + ZONING + OTHERS attached in xerox copies Summary below (xeroxes attached of first pages) *June 23, 1998: DEP file #246-248 re. Compensatory storage for building addition) * NOI; June 8, 1998 for 24'x 60' building within floodplain of CT. River * NOI; April, 1998 (Huntley Assoc.) for building construction *Superseding Determination of Applicability under Wetlands Act; DEP, Aug. 26, 1996 *Determination of Applicability under Wetlands Act; DEP, July 5, 1996 *Determination of Applicability; DEP, Applicant: Mass Concerts, June 25, 1996 *Determination of Applicability; DEP, Applicant: Noho Airport, Inc., Feb. 2, 1995 to remove sumac brush except within 100' of riverbank *Certificate of Compliance, Oct., 1987 *Certificate of Compliance, Jan., 1988 *Determination of Applicability, March, 1991 *Certificate of Emergency, Nov., 1984 * Enforcement Order, May, 1989 *NOI, #246-181, Oct., 1987 *Order of Conditions, #246-190, Nov., 1987 *Enforcement Order, #246-134, 178, 181, 190, May, 1989 *Certificate of Compliance, #246-178, July, 1990 *Order of Conditions; #246-178, Sept., 1987 *NOI, #246-178, Sept., 1987 *Order of Conditions, #246-134, June, 1985 *NOI, #246-134, May, 1985 *Enforcement Order, #246-134, May, 1985 *Enforcement Order #246-134, June, 1985 *compiled by Nanci Bateman for John Bennett upon request C:\MyFiles\airport.wpd on Aleta's PC t a-� Acv• a q 8 U LEON W. MALINOFSKY, JR. ATTORNEY AT LAW 182 MAIN STREET NORTHAMPTON, MA O 1 060 - 3 104 TELEPHONE (41 3) 584-7950 FAX (4 1 3) 582-1865 Chairperson / Director Northampton Planning Board City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 To the members of the Planning Board: P EMAIL LWM @ MAP,COM 15 July, 1997 My clients Dick Giusto and Russ Benjamin recently brought to my attention that the Planning Board or City Council will, within the next two weeks, hold a meeting to address the grant of permissions to conduct certain types of activities at the Northampton Airport, via the special permit process. This letter is to advise that after extensive research of the grounds and bases for grant of a so-called "grandfather" exemption to the Fairgrounds, this office concludes that differential treatment of the Airport would be legally suspect and amount to a denial of equal protection of laws. For this reason my clients demand the same class and status of exemption granted to the Fairgrounds on a far less -extensive record of support. I have been given instructions to vigorously safeguard and pursue the Airport's entitlement to nonconforming use, or "grandfather", exemptions for the types of events historically held there and heretofore commended to the Board's attention. To be clear: I see the opportunity for the city to once and for all remove a major source of conflict and public controversy by recognizing the Airport's entitlement to the grandfather exemption. I see any other course of action, including the attempt to retain the power to impose conditions on airport events in a manner different from Fairgrounds events, as certainly provocative of further conflict and legal action, when an opportunity exists for a peaceful accord. I trust the city and its various municipal officers and board members will regard the Airport's application for grandfather exemption with care and circumspection. Yours sincerely, Leon W. Malinofsky, Jr. To Alex Ghiselin, Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals From SPF -W MESSAGE Sam Brindis, Director Dept. of Public Works Subject File No. 97-F-42, Northampton Airport, Old Ferry Road Traffic generation data for the proposed use is not available. Signed ���Date August 28, 1997 Samuel B. Brindis, P.E. LEON W. MALINOFSKY, JR. ATTORNEY AT LAW 182 MAIN STREET NORTHAMPTON, MA O 1 060 - 3104 TELEPHONE (41 3) 5847950 FAX (4 1 3) 582-1865 Mr. Tony Patillo, Building Inspector City of Northampton - City Hall Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 .,UtL 17 1997 .PT OF EMAIL LWM LQi MAP.COM 15 July, 1997 Re: Northampton Airport and Pending request for "grandfather" exemption Dear Tony, I want to let you know, on behalf of my clients Dick Giusto and Russ Benjamin of the Northampton Airport, Inc., that we have been most appreciative of your office's support and accommodation regarding our request for nonconforming use ("grandfather exemption") status for specified types of events. I have spent a great deal of time now studying the grant of a similar exemption to the Fairgrounds, and conclude that issuance of the exemption is most warranted. I have not actually been to City Hall as yet to look at the Fairgrounds' application and supporting evidence, but I think I have received a good precis from my clients. The subject I write about now is the Planning Board's apparent maneuvering to hold a special meeting on the issue of airport events, with the seeming intention of authorizing certain activities by means of a special permit or permits. We want to go on record to the effect that is not the basis on which such activities should be authorized. Instead, it should be the same class and status of exemption granted to the Fairgrounds (the "grandfather" exemption). My clients find the council's attempt thus to retain the power to impose conditions on these activities, and to revoke any permit(s) outright, as legally suspect when compared to the Fairgrounds' case, and demonstrative of denial of equal protection of laws. For this reason we ask that you continue to support, or advocate, the grandfather exemption as you have been kind enough to do in the recent past. We remain most grateful for your efforts. Yours sincerely G': Leor} W. Malinofsky, Jr. LEON W. MALINOFSKY, JR. ATTORNEY AT LAW 1 82 MAIN STREET NORTHAMPTON, MA O 1 060 - 3104 TELEPHONE (4 1 3) 584-7950 FAX (4 1 3) 582-1865 Chairperson / Director Northampton Planning Board City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 EMAIL LWM 9 MAP.COM 15 July, 1997 To the members of the Planning Board: My clients Dick Giusto and Russ Benjamin recently brought to my attention that the Planning Board or City Council will, within the next two weeks, hold a meeting to address the grant of permissions to conduct certain types of activities at the Northampton Airport, via the special permit process. This letter is to advise that after extensive research of the grounds and bases for grant of a so-called "grandfather" exemption to the Fairgrounds, this office concludes that differential treatment of the Airport would be legally suspect and amount to a denial of equal protection of laws. For this reason my clients demand the same class and status of exemption granted to the Fairgrounds on a far less -extensive record of support. I have been given instructions to vigorously safeguard and pursue the Airport's entitlement to nonconforming use, or "grandfather", exemptions for the types of events historically held there and heretofore commended to the Board's attention. To be clear: I see the opportunity for the city to once and for all remove a major source of conflict and public controversy by recognizing the Airport's entitlement to the grandfather exemption. I see any other course of action, including the attempt to retain the power to impose conditions on airport events in a manner different from Fairgrounds events, as certainly provocative of further conflict and legal action, when an opportunity exists for a peaceful accord. I trust the city and its various municipal officers and board members will regard the Airport's application for grandfather exemption with care and circumspection. Yours sincerely,., Leon W. Malinofsky, Jr. - I/ December 12, 1989 Bruce Palmer, Building Inspector CITY OF NORTHAMPTON 212 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 Re: Location of Berkshire Balloons at Northampton Airport Dear Mr. Palmer: You have requested an opinion as to whether a business (Berkshire Balloons) which offers hot air balloon rides and instructions may be located at the Northampton Airport. As you know, the Northampton Airport is located in a Special Conservancy District. Airports are permitted in SC districts by special permit. However, since Northampton Airport was established prior to the requirement of a special permit, it is a pre-existing non -conforming use. Any change, alteration or expansion of that use would require a finding under Section 9.3(b) of the Zoning Ordinance from the Board of Appeals. The expansion of activities at the Airport has been the subject of considerable controversy in recent years. The owners of the Airport have applied for zoning relief on several occasions. Sometimes the relief has been granted and, on occasion, it has been denied. The general direction that the'Board of Appeals has taken has been not to regard an increase in the activity of small aircraft at the site as a change, alteration or expansion of the non -conforming use. However, it has held that activities not related to small aircraft are expansions of the non -conforming use. It is my opinion that the location of a hot air balloon business at the Airport is not part of the current non -conforming use. Such an activity would be an impermissible expansion of said non -conforming use. Before that business could legitimately Bruce Palmer Page 2 December 12, 1989 Building Inspector operate on the airport site, it would be necessary for the airport to receive a finding under Section 9.3(b) from the Board of Appeals. Very truly yours, Kathleen G. Fallon KGF/ss 90 01/24 13:_2l '0413-584-2052 u"5 D�pt3rirTlent of iransportatiOn Federal Aviation Administration JAN 1 q 19go m:- , T"'Achartl Gu,''r; t 7 a,, .cur A 1 r p o r 4,. Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. NTOM,60MRI Flight Stallijarcl* District: Office Building 85-21.4, Fir-st Floor Bradley international Airport Windsor Locks, CT 06096-1009 T i - I 7 r,. e a -L r c., r a f t 0 r I U111ally Uej'tifir,ated under Part 21 of ( FAR.-.; ) , T'ji, `57.7,a-rt!:,d iAil-Mall L111der Part 61 of the FARs. They inL ccmply P�:ort 91 of the FAR-, 4ust ac- all ol)er certificated airman. z, Jaz, t't' FAA !-- concerned, ballooris may launch from pub] areas. It jr; iJit- pi -lots re -;l ,- ih i I i I y t (.) f j r - t rec,ejve p -,rnjjssjc)n from the lancf, owner before they launch out of a nc e re I y ra er Safety Inspector rerations, NE -F500-03 h, I AmhihKftre Interior Design 142 Main Street Northampton MA 01060 413 586 5775 I --q Tristram W Metcalfe III, AIA 9 AP,Cfy, it TH OF 0�SS�t't� r tis•s/ Metcalfe Associates Richard Giusto 72 Boynton Rd S Deerfield Ma 01373 RE: Airport Storage building Flood control issues Dear Dick, February 9,1998 The project drawings Al & A2 show the wall construction method and the anchoring means to enable this building to both produce a minimum of flood dispersion in addition to having both the means to prevent dislodging of the structure and an inability to even float -without being totally reduced to a loose pile of material. The floor and roof trusses are well above the lower level where only a concrete slab exists. The building would not float if torn from the anchors as it has no lower floor to create buoyancy. The anchors are sufficient to withstand the type and velocity of flood waters that could reach the building. As long as the diagonal bracing is created as drawn, the building will withstand the horizontal water pressure over 5 feet above slab level. The volume of water dispersion is minimal due to the fact that the wall materials including the insulation are thin. The wall will fill up with water leaving the displacement to only the plywood sheet rock and siding thicknesses that are below a potential water level. The amount is +-28 sq. ft. of area and it therefore =28 cu. ft. for every foot of water dt;Oth above slab in its displacement. If you need any more help please call. Sincerely, Tris Metcalfe City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 • Conservation Commission • Historical Commission • Housing Partnership • Parking Commission • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals DECISION OF NORTHAMPTON PLANNING BOARD APPLICANT: Richard Guisto/Northampton Airport, Inc. ADDRESS: Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA 01060 OWNER: Northampton Airport, Inc. ADDRESS: Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA 01060 RE LAND OR BUILDINGS IN NORTHAMPTON AT: Old Ferry Road MAP AND PARCEL NUMBERS: MAP #25 PARCEL #1,15-19, 53 & 71 At a meeting conducted on February 12, 1998, the Northampton Planning Board unanimously voted 5:0 to grant the request of Richard Guisto/Northampton Airport, Inc. for a SPECIAL PERMIT with Site Plan Approval under the provisions of Sections 10.10, 10.11, 13.0, 13.4, 13.5 & 13.6 in the Northampton Zoning Ordinance for construction of a new structure (substantial improvement) within the Special Conservancy District at Old Ferry Road, Northampton. Hanning Board Members present and voting were: Chair Andrew Crystal, Vice Chair Daniel J. acuzzo, Kenneth Jodrie, Anne Romano and Associate Member Sanford Weil, Jr. In Granting the Special Permit with Site Plan Approval, the Planning Board found: A. The requested use protects adjoining premises against seriously detrimental uses because the addition is primarily for the storage of equipment which is presently kept outside and because the structure complies with all other applicable zoning regulations. B. The requested use will promote the convenience and safety of vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site and on adjacent streets and minimize traffic impacts on the streets and roads in the area because the building will generate minimal additional traffic. 1 ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER C. The requested use will promote a harmonious relationship of structures and open spaces to the natural landscape, existing buildings and other community assets in the area because the addition will house vehicles which are presently stored outside. D. The requested use will not have an adverse impact on City services such as the City's water supply and distribution system, sanitary and storm sewage collection and treatment systems, fire protection, streets and schools. E. The Planning Board required that the applicant comply with all conditions of Sections 13.5 and 13.6. of the Zoning Ordinance in a filing with the Conservation Commission. F. The requested use bears a positive relationship to the public convenience or welfare, and the use will not unduly impair the integrity of character of the district or adjoining zones. The use will not be detrimental to the health, morals, or general welfare, and the use shall be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Ordinance. The requested use will promote City planning objectives to the extent possible and will not adversely affect those objectives, as defined in City master or study plans adopted under M.G.L. Chapter 41, Section 81-C and D. In reviewing the Site Plan submitted with the Special Permit, the Planning Board found that the project complied with the following technical performance standards: 1. No new curb cuts are requested. Pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular traffic are separated on site to the extent possible. The following condition was imposed upon the project: 1. The applicant must submit an application to the Conservation Commission and obtain an Order of Conditions that addresses Sections 13.5 and 13.6 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2 Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws (MGL), Chapter 40A, Section 11, no Special Permit, or any extension, modification or renewal thereof, shall take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that twenty days have elapsed after the decision has been filed, or if such an appeal has been filed that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Hampshire County registry of Deeds or Land Court, as applicable and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of title. The fee for such recording or registering shall be paid by the owner or applicant. It is the owner or applicant's responsibility to pick up the certified decision from the City Clerk and record it at the Registry of Deeds. The Northampton Planning Board hereby certifies that a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval has been GRANTED and that copies of this decision and all plans referred to in it have been filed with the Planning Board and the City Clerk. Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 15, notice is hereby given that this decision is filed with the Northampton City Clerk on the date below. If anyone wishes to appeal this action, an appeal must be filed pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 17, with the Hampshire County Superior Court and notice of said appeal filed with the City Clerk within twenty days (20) of the date of that this decision was filed with the City Clerk. Applicant: Richard Guisto/Northampton Airport - Old Ferry Road DECISION DATE: February 12, 1998 DECISION FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: March 10, 1998 City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development tity Hall • 210 Main Street orthampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 • Conservation Commission • Historical Commission • Housing Partnership • Parking Commission • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Planning Board Minutes of Meeting September 11, 1997 The Northampton Planning Board held a meeting on Thursday, September 11, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Andrew J. Crystal, Jody Blatt, Paul Diemand, Nancy Duseau and Associate Members Richard Marquis and Sanford Weil, Jr. rtaff. Senior Planner Paulette Kuzdeba and Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. At 7:03 p.m., Crystal called the meeting to order. At 7:48 p.m., Crystal opened the Public Hearing on a request from Richard Guisto/Northampton Airport for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval for construction of a new structure (substantial improvement) within the Special Conservancy District under Sections 10.10,10.11, 13.0, 13.4, 13.5 & 13.6 of the Zoning Ordinance, for property located on Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 53, 71. Crystal read the legal notice and explained the procedure he would use in conducting the hearing. The applicant was not present. The Building Inspector has requested a certification by a structural engineer that the plans are accurate, Kuzdeba said. Also, the applicant will go before the Conservation Commission at its meeting October 20th. Blatt commented that the plan was missing some required information, such as elevations, since the troperty is in the flood plain. Crystal asked Kuzdeba to convey to Guisto that the hearing was ontinued because the plan was lacking some information. Duseau moved to continue the hearing to October 23,1997 at 7:15 p.m. Blatt seconded. The motion passed unanimously 6:0. ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER M City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 • Conservation Commission • Historical Commission • Housing Partnership • Parking Commission • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Planning Board Minutes of Meeting October 23, 1997 The Northampton Planning Board held a meeting on Thursday, October 23, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Andrew J. Crystal, Vice Chair Daniel J. Yacuzzo, Jody Blatt, Paul Diemand, Nancy Duseau, Kenneth Jodrie, Anne Romano and Associate Member Sanford Weil, Jr. Staff. Planning Director Wayne Feiden (for discussion of Florence Plan zoning changes), Senior Planner Paulette Kuzdeba and Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. Crystal called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. At 7:59 p.m., Crystal opened the Continuation of a Public Hearing on a request from Richard uisto/Northampton Airport for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval for construction of new structure (substantial improvement) within the Special Conservancy District under Sections 10. 10, 10. 11, 13.0,13.4,13.5 & 13.6 of the Zoning Ordinance, for property located on Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Northampton Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1, 15,16, 17,18,19, 53, 71. Richard Guisto said the first floor of the proposed building will be used for storage of airport vehicles, and the second floor will have a loft for the hot-air balloons. He would also like to occasionally use the second -floor space to hold meetings of groups he belongs to, Guisto said. The building will be a wood -framed structure with a concrete foundation, eight -foot high ceilings, minimal windows on the second floor, and no windows on the first floor. The building will be located off Cross Path Road behind where the old house used to be, Guisto said. No one spoke in favor or in opposition. ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER -Lr Huntley is finishing some drainage calculations which will be supplied to the Board, Guisto said. Crystal advised him that members will need this information before they can act. The DPW supplied the comment that, "Traffic generation data for the proposed site is not available." Guisto said that this comment had been addressed, and a representative of the DPW said he had no further concern about the plans. Guisto received a Finding from the ZBA because the airport is a nonconforming use, Kuzdeba said. �he reviewed the conditions imposed by the ZBA, including the following: 1. Any meetings taking place in the proposed building will be conducted in connection with current or usual airport uses; 2. No fee shall be charged for use of the facility as a meeting place, and no food shall be served in connection with the use of the meeting place. 3. The meetings shall be limited to a maximum of twenty people. Guisto said he planned to hold Search and Rescue meetings with the Sheriff s Department and Lion's Club and UNICO meetings. However, Romano noted that Guisto could not have a Lion's Club meeting there under the ZBA's conditions, since the ZBA stipulated that meetings had to be associated with the use of the airport. She asked how these meetings were associated with the airport? Guisto said just in that he is a member. He took issue with Romano's interpretation of the condition, maintaining that since he has been using the airport for his meetings, holding meetings in the new wilding is allowed. Crystal said that, if that is his understanding, Guisto should clarify the meaning of the condition with the ZBA. The Planning Board can not act until Guisto goes before the Conservation Commission, Blatt said. Kuzdeba said she had left a message with Guisto and spoken to Tris Metcalfe after the last meeting advising them to provide information on elevations and topography and a statement from the architect that the building would not go off its foundation in a flood. She said she also asked the applicant to address the criteria of Section 13 of the Zoning Ordinance. Diemand noted that UNICO had held events at the airport in the past where food was dispensed. He asked whether Guisto could obtain a special event permit to hold an event such as a spaghetti dinner in the new building? Kuzdeba said probably not because of building requirements. She said she would have to check U whether the ZBA's condition could be overridden by a Special Events permit. Weil asked why Lion's club meetings would not be grandfathered, since they are held at the airport now? He said he did not know why Lion's club meetings should not be able to continue if they have been meeting there all along. He asked Kuzdeba to get feedback from the ZBA regarding their conditions. The Board must hear from the Conservation Commission before acting, Crystal noted. The DPW had no concerns, Kuzdeba said. Kuzdeba asked the applicant to provide the following information: 1) a plan showing elevations and topography, 2) a statement from an architect that the building will not shift during flooding, and 3) information as to how the project complies with Section 13. The land is one hundred and twenty and one hundred and twenty-one feet above sea level, Guisto said. The engineer believes that because the building will displace earth with concrete, no compensatory storage is needed. He said he would submit the requested items. Members expressed the sentiment that they would like to continue the hearing until after the applicant has had his initial hearing before the Conservation Commission. The applicant could appear before the Commission November l Oth, Krutzler said. Blatt moved to continue the hearing to December 11, 1997 at 7:15 p.m. Duseau seconded. The motion passed unanimously 7:0. City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 • Conservation Commission • Historical Commission • Housing Partnership • Parking Commission • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Planning Board Minutes of Meeting December 11, 1997 The Northampton Planning Board held a meeting on Thursday, December 11, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, eassachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Andrew J. Crystal, Jody Blatt, Paul Diemand (7:06 p.m.), Nancy Duseau, Anne Romano and Associate Members Rick Marquis (7:23 p.m.) and Sanford Weil, Jr. Staff. Senior Planner Paulette Kuzdeba and Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. Crystal opened the meeting at 7:02 p.m. At 7:30 p.m., Crystal opened the Continuation of a Public Hearing on a request from Richard Guisto/Northampton Airport for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval for construction of a new structure (substantial improvement) within the Special Conservancy District under Sections 10. 10, 10. 11, 13.0,13.4,13.5 & 13.6 of the Zoning Ordinance, for property located on Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Northampton Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1, 15,16, 17,18,19, 53, 71. fhe applicant has requested that the hearing be continued to January 8, 1998, Kuzdeba said. Krutzler pointed out that Guisto would appear before the Zoning Board of Appeals on January 21, 1998. ZBA members had a difference of opinion as to the interpretation of the conditions imposed with their recent Finding, Kuzdeba explained, and Guisto is scheduled to attend the meeting to clarify the conditions. Duseau moved to continue the Public Hearing to January 22,1998 at 7:30 p.m. Blatt seconded. The motion passed unanimously 7:0. ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 • Conservation Commission • Historical Commission • Housing Partnership • Parking Commission • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Planning Board Minutes of Meeting January 22, 1998 The Northampton Planning Board held a meeting on Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Vice Chair Daniel J. Yacuzzo, Paul Diemand, Kenneth Jodrie, Anne Romano and Associate Members Rick Marquis and Sanford Weil, Jr. Staff: Planning Director Wayne Feiden, Senior Planner Paulette Kuzdeba and Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. At 7:10 p.m., Yacuzzo opened the meeting. � t 8:02 p.m., Yacuzzo opened the Continuation of a Public Hearing on a request from Richard uisto/Northampton Airport for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval for construction of a new structure (substantial improvement) within the Special Conservancy District under Sections 10.10,10.11,13.0,13.4,13.5 & 13.6 of the Zoning Ordinance, for property located on Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Northampton Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1, 15,16, 17,18,19,53&71. Yacuzzo read the legal notice. Richard Guisto presented the application. The public hearing was continued to clarify the following condition imposed by the Zoning Board of Appeals in granting a Finding for the proposed structure: 1. Any meetings taking place in the proposed building will be conducted in connection with current or usual airport uses. Kuzdeba reported the results of last night's discussion by Zoning Board members regarding the 1 ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER interpretation of this condition. ZBA members clarified that, in imposing this condition, they did intend to allow the meetings of the civic groups that Mr. Guisto belongs to. Specifically, ZBA members said they would allow three groups, the Lion's club, UNICO, and the Sheriffs Department, as long as the groups did not exceed one meeting per group per month and as long as the groups do not establish an office there. Since these meetings move around, ZBA members did not see this as establishing a new use at the airport, Kuzdeba said. The three groups named are those which already have been meeting at the airport on a rotating basis, Kuzdeba noted. Guisto would require additional permission to allow any other body or group to meet there, she said. The only other group which would meet at the airport would be a group meeting in connection with an airport event, Guisto stated. The new building is primarily for storage of vehicles, he said. Kuzdeba reviewed the ZBA's other conditions. The conditions were added to prevent the building ,ftom becoming a meeting hall, she explained. The conditions were not modified at last night's eeting; ZBA members simply agreed to clarify the first condition. The previous hearing was also continued because the Planning Board was waiting for additional information - specifically, elevations and topography, Kuzdeba said. Mr. Guisto provided these last night, so the only items still missing are a statement from an architect that the building would not go off the foundation and compensatory storage for the walls of the building. Guisto said that, in the past, when he built the hangar, he had compensatory storage which he agreed to have banked, since there was quite a bit of excess. Kuzdeba said she would have to review the file to confirm this, since this was before her time. Typically, the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) does not allow commissions to bank compensatory storage, she noted. However, if this did happen, the Conservation Commission would allow the action to stand, although they would not do it again in the future. Guisto asked Kuzdeba to provide him with a list of the missing items. The Planning Board also will require that Guisto address the conditions of Section 13.6 and 13.5 of the Zoning Ordinance, Kuzdeba said. (iYacuzzo asked whether anyone wished to speak in favor or in opposition to the application? No one poke. Jodrie moved to continue the hearing to February 12, 1998 at 9:00 p.m. Romano seconded. The motion passed unanimously 6:0. 0 City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 Conservation Commission • Historical Commission • Housing Partnership • Parking Commission • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Planning Board Minutes of Meeting February 12, 1998 The Northampton Planning Board held a meeting on Thursday, February 12, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Andrew Crystal, Vice Chair Daniel J. Yacuzzo, Kenneth Jodrie, Val Romano (7:17 p.m.) and Associate Member Sanford Weil, Jr. Staff: Planning Director Wayne Feiden, Senior Planner Paulette Kuzdeba and Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. opened the meeting at 7:08 p.m. At 9:12 p.m., Crystal opened the Continuation of a Public Hearing on a request from Richard Guisto/Northampton Airport for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval for construction of a new structure (substantial improvement) within the Special Conservancy District under Sections 10. 10, 10. 11, 13.0, 13.4, 13.5 & 13.6 of the Zoning Ordinance, for property located on Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Northampton Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1, 15,16, 17,18,19, 53, 71. Crystal read the legal notice. Richard Guisto explained that the hearing was continued from the Board's last meeting because members had just received the plan showing elevations the day before and still did not have information on compensatory storage and a statement from an architect showing that the building would not float or move off the foundation. Members have now received plans showing the elevations and the required letter from an architect, Guisto said, although the Building Inspector has not yet approved the letter. Therefore, the only outstanding issue is compensatory storage. tauzdeba said she had not yet had time to check the file [to see if there was a reference to Guisto ving banked compensatory storage on a previous occasion]. ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Guisto said that, even if not, each foot [of water depth] would only take up about twenty-eight cubic feet, so the Board is only looking at seventy-eight cubic feet [of displaced water]. Kuzdeba interrupted to point out that the Board did not have a quorum to act on the permit. Also, she noted that, for other applications in the flood plain, members have typically waited for Tony's approval of the letter from the architect, which they don't yet have. The application also requires review by the Conservation Commission, Kuzdeba said. Jodrie asked why the plans had not yet gone before the Conservation Commission? Romano added that the Planning Board would normally incorporate an Order of Conditions from the Commission into its permit. Listo said he went through therocess the way he thought he should. P Y g Guisto expressed a willingness to represent his application for the benefit of Crystal, who was not present for the last hearing on January 22nd. He noted that, at that hearing, members basically heard a clarification of the ZBA's conditions. Crystal stated that it looked as if the letter addressed the issue of showing that the building will not float. Kuzdeba clarified that the Conservation Commission will look at whether there is sufficient compensatory storage on site. Guisto pointed out that the ZBA voted subject to Conservation Commission approval and asked whether the Planning Board couldn't do the same thing? Crystal asked how Guisto intended to address the issue of compensatory storage? Guisto replied that the compensatory storage is a very minimal amount. He said he had quite a bit cf banked storage from land he took out before, but, assuming this doesn't exist, the amount of ompensatory storage must be taken from the same level. The grading for the driveway at the front would more than compensate for the volume the building would be using, he stated. The building also has to be flood -proofed and watertight to the 100 -year flood elevation unless it is constructed to allow water to enter and leave, Kuzdeba explained. Also, the applicant would have to provide compensatory storage for the space of the wall and any piers or structures in the building that would not allow water to enter. Compensatory storage must be provided at the same elevation and within the same flood reach of the river, she added. The area around the building is approximately at an elevation of one hundred and twenty feet, and the flood level is one hundred and twenty-three feet, Guisto observed. Members decided they could condition the permit on the Conservation Commission dealing with the issue of compensatory. storage. Crystal asked if all other requirements had been addressed? Kuzdeba said yes. The Conservation Commission will not issue a permit for construction unless the requirement to provide compensatory storage is met, she assured. Yacuzzo moved to close the Public Hearing. Jodrie seconded. The motion passed unanimously 5:0. Romano moved to approve a request from Richard Guisto/ Northampton Airport for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval for construction of a new structure (substantial improvement) within the Special Conservancy District under Sections 10.10, 10.11, 13.0, 13.4, 13.5 & 13.6 of the Zoning Ordinance, for property located on Old Ferry Road, Northampton, because the application meets the criteria of zoning, with the following condition: 1. The applicant must submit an application to the Conservation Commission and obtain a permit in accordance with their requirements. Weil seconded. Yacuzzo said he thought the permit should be specific in stating that the Conservation Commission should address the compensatory storage issue so as to satisfy the requirements of Section 13.5 in the Commission's Order of Conditions. Members decided to reword the condition as follows: 1. The applicant must submit an application to the Conservation Commission and obtain an Order of Conditions that addresses Sections 13.5 and 13.6 of the Zoning Ordinance. Romano and Weil accepted this amendment. The motion passed unanimously 5:0. M City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 • Conservation Commission • Historical Commission • Housing Partnership • Parking Commission • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals December 8, 1997 Richard Guisto Northampton Airport, Inc. Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. Guisto: This letter is to confirm that the Public Hearing on your application for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval to construct a new structure (substantial improvement) within the Special Conservancy District on Old Ferry Road, Northampton has been continued by the Northampton Planning Board to its meeting scheduled for December 11, 1997 at 7:15 P.M. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton. You and/or your representative(s) are required to attend this meeting to explain the application and discuss the merits of the application. If you have any questions, please contact the.Office of Planning and Development, City Hall, Telephone 586-6950, Extension 262. Sincerely, Laura H. Krutzler Board Secretary enclosure ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 • Conservation Commission • Historical Commission • Housing Partnership • Parking Commission • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Planning Board Minutes of Meeting October 23, 1997 The Northampton Planning Board held a meeting on Thursday, October 23, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Andrew J. Crystal, Vice Chair Daniel J. Yacuzzo, Jody Blatt, Paul Diemand, Nancy Duseau, Kenneth Jodrie, Anne Romano and Associate Member Sanford Weil, Jr. Staff: Planning Director Wayne Feiden (for discussion of Florence Plan zoning changes), Senior Planner Paulette Kuzdeba and Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. Crystal called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. Duseau moved to approve the minutes of July 24, 1997. Paul Diemand seconded. The motion Massed unanimously 6:0. The Planning Board received an "As -Built" plan for the detention basin on Fruit Street from Killam Associates, Kuzdeba advised. At 7:15 p.m., Crystal opened the Continuation of a Public Hearing on a request from Donald A. Chiulli for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval to build a single family residence within 200 feet of a brook in a WSP District under Section 16.7 (1)(D) and 10.11 (6) of the Zoning Ordinance for property located at 163 Kennedy Road, known as Assessor's Map #14, Parcels 7 and 8. Kuzdeba reminded members that the hearing on an application for work within a WSP District was continued for a year because the owners were not sure where they were going to put their house. Crystal read a letter from the applicant requesting that the hearing be continued for another three ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER months. Duseau moved to continue the Public Hearing to January 22, 1997 at 7:15 p. m. Jodrie seconded. The motion passed unanimously 7:0. At 7:15 p.m., Crystal opened the Public Hearing on a request from Pride Convenience, Inc. for a Site Plan Special Permit to remodel a service station and convenience store and add retail space under Sections 5.2, 10.10 and 10.11 of the Zoning Ordinance, for property located at the corner of Damon Road and King Street, Northampton, also known as Northampton Assessor's Map 181), Parcel 40. Crystal read the legal notice and explained the procedure he would use in conducting the hearing. Robert Bolduc, President of Pride, presented the application, accompanied by Kathleen Waterman, in charge of real estate for Pride. He distributed copies of a plan revised to eliminate some of the existing driveways. tride is a locally -owned and operated chain with twenty-four locations in the area, Bolduc explained. he corporation is on a three-year remodeling strategy to bring its stores up to the latest environmental and government standards, and owners are also remodeling for marketing purposes to stay in tune with their towns. All changes proposed are benefits, he commented. The company is open to recommendations from local boards and has a policy of working with whatever town a store is in. Pride proposes to "knock everything down and start over," Bolduc said. The building will be moved back from the intersection to the rear property line, opening up lines of sight and visibility. The sign, which is now on the curbing due to land takings, will be moved back to the required setback of fifteen feet. Also, the building will be increased in size from 2,000 square feet to 2,400 square feet. Pride will add two smaller retail spaces for rental income, since the company is spending in excess of $600,000 on the renovations, Bolduc said. The new Pride will look better than the Mobil station on King Street, which was suggested to him as a model, Bolduc said. Pride stations are Subway franchisees in some towns, but because there is already a competing Subway nearby, this store will offer a subs and salads deli, Bolduc said. The renovated property will te a "nice plus to the town," he concluded. Crystal asked if anyone wished to speak in favor? No one spoke. He asked if anyone would like to speak in opposition? Joseph Wilhelm, Esq., spoke on behalf of D.W. Corporation, the owner of land adjacent to the 2 property. The rear property line mentioned by Bolduc is D.W. Corporation's property line, Wilhelm said. His client's building - now occupied by Wilderness Mold - is right on Damon Road and fills the lot on which it is located. Wilderness Mold is a plastics operation which sometimes emits plastic solvent odor. D.W. Corp.'s nonconforming setback is grandfathered, so, by eliminating its rear setback, Pride will be putting a food service operation downwind of plastic solvents. Also, noise is generated by the business, Wilhelm said. Now, nobody notices, but if the Pride building is relocated, people will notice. Wilhelm said his client does not object to the concept, they object to eliminating the setback between the new building and their lot. In a normal situation, there would be a setback on both sides of the property line, Wilhelm laborated. Since there is no setback on D.W.'s side, the setback intended by planners is already varied fifty percent (50%), and further variance would aggravate the problem. Crystal asked if Wilhelm had seen the plans? The plans show D.W. Corp.'s building to be twenty feet from the property line, he noted, and the applicant has also met the required setback. Wilhelm expressed disbelief. After viewing the plan, Wilhelm said the property line shown did not agree with what he thought his client owned. Wilhelm also noted that the parking lot was eliminated on the plan. Pride owns the parking lot area, Bolduc maintained. Killam Associates prepared the plan and checked the setbacks, he added. Wilhelm said his client has been utilizing the parking lot for in excess of twenty years. However, Bolduc said they have not, and he can prove it. Wilhelm said that, if his client owns more land than he had thought, he was happy about that. He had no other concerns, he noted. Crystal pointed out that elevations had not been supplied. Bolduc apologized and verbally described ,he proposed building. The new building will use the same material as the existing building - white stone aggregate panel. However, the new building will have larger windows for safety reasons. In response to a question from Duseau, Bolduc said the company will not close down operations during construction. The company will construct the new building during the winter, then close the existing facility in the Spring and remodel that part of the site. Duseau expressed concern about traffic flow during construction. However, Bolduc said there would be at least twenty-five to thirty feet between the existing facility and the front wall of the new building, so this should not be a problem. Such a reconstruction was successfully completed in Chicopee in the past year, he said. Members raised the following additional questions and concerns: ---- The driveway closest to Kollmorgen presents a problem from people trying to exit and cut across three lanes of traffic, Duseau said. Using Damon Road as an exit K instead would enhance traffic flow, she suggested. ---- Butt noted that the King Street entrance had been moved back from the intersection and asked whether there was any discussion of moving the entrance onto Damon Road further from the intersection? Bolduc said that plans call for closing two of the three curb cuts on King Street. The two driveways closest to the intersection have been removed, and the remaining entrance is eighteen to twenty feet further from the intersection than the closest driveway presently is. Bolduc commented that the curb cut on Damon Road could not be moved all the way back because cars would end up running into the side of the building. Bolduc also noted that the new underground storage tanks will be relocated to the Kollmorgen property line, eliminating traffic from tanker unloading [on the Damon Road side]. Romano asked if Pride intends to use the area now used as parking by D.W. Corporation for parking? Bolduc said that half of the paved surface in this area will be removed and turned into green space. Bolduc said that Pride had prepared a traffic study for the Mass. Highway Department. Pe also noted that the project will go before the Zoning Board of Appeals because 1) the site does iot meet the requirement of having thirty percent (30%) open space (it only has eighteen percent), and 2) the proposed sign is taller than what is allowed as of right. In response to additional questions, Bolduc also presented the following details: ---- The only additional traffic expected due to the renovation is traffic generated by the two new retail spaces, since there is already an operating gas station/convenience store. Bolduc gave a hairdresser/barbershop, retail store and computer consulting business as examples of the types of possible tenants. ---- The remodeled gas station will not allow outdoor vending. ---- The convenience store receives one delivery a week from a grocery supplier and one bread and one newspaper delivery a day. ---- The property is a listed site with the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and is under a waiver process with the agency. A Licensed Site Professional (LSP) will be on site during the removal of the existing underground storage tanks, and any contamination surrounding the tanks will be removed. Lolduc described the lighting as shown on plans. He said the lighting met the requirement of fading to one footcandle or less around the perimeter of the property. 4 Crystal said the Board may want to require Pride to return as they sign leases for the spaces. Bolduc also said he would revise the plans to include a catch basin with a gas hood to collect water at the curb cut on King Street, rather than allowing water from the property to run into the street, as presently proposed. Members also discussed the project's compliance with the requirement or providing a tree for every forty feet of frontage. Bolduc said he chose not to put trees across the very front because of the busy corner, but included additional trees in other areas to compensate. However, Crystal noted that, as long as the crown of the tree is high enough, branches should not obstruct vision. Crystal said he would like to see Pride meet the tree requirement along the front of the property. The Board requested that the applicant return with the following items: 1) building elevations, 2) to planting plan showing the number and species of various plantings and meeting the street tree requirement, 3) a site plan with a photometric overlay showing spillover and lighting intensity, 4) revised plans showing a bike rack, signage, the additional catch basin and a designated area for snow storage, and 5) a traffic study. Bolduc said he would present the plans to the ZBA on November 5, 1997. The added catch basin will drain to an underground retention/infiltration area at the back of the site, as shown on the original plan, Bolduc noted. The Department of Public Works (DPW) had no concerns. Blatt moved to continue the Public Hearing to November 13, 1997 at 8:00 p.m. Duseau seconded. The motion passed unanimously 7:0. At 7:57 p.m., Crystal opened the Continuation of a Public Hearing on a request from Susan Berson and David Noonan for three (3) Special Permits with Site Plan Approval to i) create Anderson lots and ii) access a lot via a common driveway under Sections 6.12, 6.13, 10.10 and 10.11 of the Zoning Ordinance, for property located at 242 Sylvester Road, Northampton, also known as Northampton Assessor's Map 28, Parcel 66. David Noonan requested a two-week continuance to try to resolve issues raised by some of his neighbors. Blatt moved to continue the hearing to 8:00 p.m. on November 13, 1997. Yacuzzo seconded. The motion passed unanimously 7:0. At 7:59 p.m., Crystal opened the Continuation of a Public Hearing on a request from Richard 5 Guisto/Northampton Airport for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval for construction of a new structure (substantial improvement) within the Special Conservancy District under Sections 10.10,10.11, 13.0, 13.4, 13.5 & 13.6 of the Zoning Ordinance, for property located on Old ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Northampton Assessor's Map 25, Parcels 1,15,16, 7,18,19, 53, 71. Richard Guisto said the first floor of the proposed building will be used for storage of airport vehicles, and the second floor will have a loft for the hot-air balloons. He would also like to occasionally use the second -floor space to hold meetings of groups he belongs to, Guisto said. The building will be a wood -framed structure with a concrete foundation, eight -foot high ceilings, minimal windows on the second floor, and no windows on the first floor. The building will be located off Cross Path Road behind where the old house used to be, Guisto said. No one spoke in favor or in opposition. Huntley is finishing some drainage calculations which will be supplied to the Board, Guisto said. Crystal advised him that members will need this information before they can act. The DPW supplied the comment that, "Traffic generation data for the proposed site is not available." �tusto said that this comment had been addressed, and a representative of the DPW said he had no urt.,her concern about the plans. Guisto received a Finding from the ZBA because the airport is a nonconforming use, Kuzdeba said. She reviewed the conditions imposed by the ZBA, including the following: 1. Any meetings taking place in the proposed building will be conducted in connection with current or usual airport uses; 2. No fee shall be charged for use of the facility as a meeting place, and no food shall be served in connection with the use of the meeting place. 3. The meetings shall be limited to a maximum of twenty people. Guisto said he planned to hold Search and Rescue meetings with the Sheriffs Department and Lion's Club and UNICO meetings. However, Romano noted that Guisto could not have a Lion's Club meeting there under the ZBA's conditions, since the ZBA stipulated that meetings had to be associated with the use of the airport. She asked how these meetings were associated with the airport? Listo said just in that he is a member. He took issue with Romano's interpretation of the condition, maintaining that since he has been using the airport for his meetings, holding meetings in the new 0 building is allowed. Crystal said that, if that is his understanding, Guisto should clarify the meaning of the condition with the ZBA. The Planning Board can not act until Guisto goes before the Conservation Commission, Blatt said. Kuzdeba said she had left a message with Guisto and spoken to Tris Metcalfe after the last meeting advising them to provide information on elevations and topography and a statement from the architect that the building would not go off its foundation in a flood. She said she also asked the applicant to address the criteria of Section 13 of the Zoning Ordinance. Diemand noted that UNICO had held events at the airport in the past where food was dispensed. He ked whether Guisto could obtain a special event permit to hold an event such as a spaghetti dinner n the new building? Kuzdeba said probably not because of building requirements. She said she would have to check whether the ZBA's condition could be overridden by a Special Events permit. Weil asked why Lion's club meetings would not be grandfathered, since they are held at the airport now? He said he did not know why Lion's club meetings should not be able to continue if they have been meeting there all along. He asked Kuzdeba to get feedback from the ZBA regarding their conditions. The Board must hear from the Conservation Commission before acting, Crystal noted. The DPW had no concerns, Kuzdeba said. Kuzdeba asked the applicant to provide the following information: 1) a pian showing elevations and topography, 2) a statement from an architect that the building will not shift during flooding, and 3) information as to how the project complies with Section 13. The land is one hundred and twenty and one hundred and twenty-one feet above sea level, Guisto rd, The engineer believes that because the building will displace earth with concrete, no mensatory storage is needed. He said he would submit the requested items. Members expressed the sentiment that they would like to continue the hearing until after the applicant has had his initial hearing before the Conservation Commission. The applicant could appear before the Commission November 10th, Krutzler said. Blatt moved to continue the hearing to December 11, 1997 at 7:15 p.m. Duseau seconded. The motion passed unanimously 7:0. 7 At 8:20 p.m., Crystal opened the Continuation of a Public Hearing on a request from Nelson Charland for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval to construct an addition to an existing house and a garage/utility shed (substantial improvement within the Special Conservancy District) under Sections 10. 10, 10. 11, 13.0, 13.3-6 of the Zoning Ordinance, for property located Fa 336 Old Springfield Road, Northampton, also known as Northampton Assessor's Map 45, rcels 41. Kuzdeba said the applicant called to request a continuance to the Board's November meeting because the application is still going through the Conservation Commission and also has to go before the Easthampton Conservation Commission to provide compensatory storage. Duseau moved to continue the hearing to November 13,1997 at 7:15 p.m. Blatt seconded. The motion passed unanimously 7:0. Other Business. The Planning Board received a letter from Frank Lucchesi of Benjamin A. Barnes Law Offices notifying the Board of the intent of Blanche Keefe to sell forty-five acres of land with frontage on Florence Road for residential purposes for $135,000. Under law, the City has the right of first refusal on land under the Chapter 61A program. The owner has also notified the Conservation Commission and is requesting that the Planning Board vote to waive its right of first refusal [if the City is not interested in purchasing the property.] Le property abuts the ice pond site at the state hospital and does not abut the land at the hospital earmarked for open space. Feiden said he would consider its purchase a low priority. Yacuzzo moved to recommend the release of the parcel. Duseau seconded. The motion passed unanimously 7:0. Florence Plan Zoning Changes. Members discussed a letter addressed to Wayne Feiden from Smith College requesting that he review the zoning of 50 West Street to see whether it permits Smith College to construct a parking garage there by right. The letter stated that, if not, Smith College requests a change in zoning to allow this use. Feiden explained that parking garages are presently not allowed in URC districts, but such a structure to serve Smith College would probably be exempt from zoning as an educational use. Although Smith College could build the garage without a zoning change, planners do not want to create an adversarial relationship with the College by having the garage gain approval in this manner. He explained that, without a zoning change, the Building Inspector would deny the application for a garage, since he is required to interpret the Zoning Ordinance literally. Under this scenario, Smith College could appeal to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Then, either the Zoning Board would determine the project was exempt from zoning, or, if they upheld the Building Inspector's decision, Smith College could appeal to Superior Court to gain permission for the garage's construction. Instead, Feiden said he is suggesting that the Planning Board amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow parking garages in URC districts by Special Permit. He suggested that this was a reasonable way to allow the use, since this provision would allow the Planning Board to look at issues such as traffic . and parking. Romano said she thought it set a bad precedent for Feiden to recommend "spot zoning" to the Board as a result of a phone call from an individual. However, Feiden pointed out that he gets similar requests all the time and that people have the right request zoning changes for the Board's consideration. He cited the request for a zoning change the industrial park and the request for a zoning change to allow funeral parlors in URB districts as examples of previous requests the Board has considered. Feiden also clarified that the proposal does not amount to "spot zoning" because he is not recommending that the Board rezone 50 West Street. Rather, planners are suggesting changing zoning to say that there are some places in URC districts where parking garages are appropriate and some places where they are not, and to set up a process for considering requests. The City has been telling Smith College for twenty years that they should build a parking garage to get cars off the street, he noted. Duseau complimented the existing parking garage for its low visibility and said this was because the City worked with a developer toward its construction. She said she would rather see a developer come to the Planning Board and work with the Board [than design and build a garage on his own]. Romano commented that the site plan review process is very limited. However, Feiden clarified that the use would require a Special Permit, which the Board has the ability to deny. eiden clarified that only garages"primarily serving educational uses" would be allowed by Special ermit in URC districts. When asked by Jodrie whether he felt the URC was a good district for this use, Feiden said he did, as long as the biggest educational institution is located in a URC district. Feiden said the only alternative [to allowing parking garages in URC districts] was to create an educational district to include all of Smith College, Smith Vocational and the High School. After further discussion, members expressed the consensus that they did want to provide zoning relief to allow Smith College to build a parking garage. Crystal commented that the Special Permit process may be the best vehicle for allowing the use, since it gives the Planning Board the most 0 L� V control through the ability to impose conditions. He raised the possibility of including performance standards, such as requiring that the garage be in proportion to the size of the institution, or prohibiting the operation of the garage for profit. Blatt raised the possibility of specifying that the parking garage should be primarily for the use of the educational facility. However, Feiden said he would be careful about restricting the use of such arages since parking garages are better than surface parking. Crystal said he would like some kind of design review included beyond what the Special Permit process allows. Other Zoning Changes. Feiden reviewed the other proposed zoning changes to implement the Florence Plan, with members offering comments and suggestions. Members suggested the following changes to the definition of Mixed Residential/Work Space: ---- Replacing the words "consisting of with the phrase "including, but not limited to." ---- Changing the wording to clarify that the residential space could only be fifty percent (50%) of the total space rather than fifty percent (50%) of the work space. Members accepted Feiden's suggestion that the first floor of spaces used for mixed residential/work spaces should not be allowed to be residential space. Decreasing Minimum Lot Size in URB Districts. The area requirement for a single-family lot in a URB district was increased from 6,000 square feet to 10,000 square feet in 1975, Feiden explained. Under present zoning, in order to maximize the use of a property, the owner must build a two-family home, since a duplex only requires 12,000 square feet [but a single-family home requires 10,000 square feet]. Planners are suggesting returning to the 1975 minimum lot area of 6,000 square feet to make it easier to build single-family homes and also to eliminate hundreds of pre-existing nonconforming structures. This would allow some additional in -fill development, which is one of planner's goals, he indicated. Feiden also reviewed the proposal to relax the minimum front -yard setback in the General Business district to 0 and to create a maximum front yard setback in GB of ten feet. He also reviewed proposed changes to simplify the Lot Size Averaging provision. If lot sizes are reduced in the URB district, this provision would mostly be used for setback or frontage reductions in the future, he observed. Yacuzzo, Blatt and Romano said they would like to delete the requirement that infill development allowed by lot -size averaging "improve and enhance the appearance" of the neighborhood. 1 10 Members offered additional minor changes which were recorded by Feiden. Feiden said he would provide a revised copy of the proposed changes to members in two weeks. The meeting was adjourned at 10:02 p.m. 11 LEON W. MALINOFSKY, JR. ATTORNEY AT LAW 182 MAIN STREET NORTHAMPTON, MA O 1 060 - 3104 TELEPHONE (4 1 3) 584-7950 -- --- - - EMAIL LWM @Q MAP,COM FAX (4 1 3) 582-1 865- 30 September, 1997 Paulette Kudzeba OCT 1 "'97 Planning Department a City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Re: "Grandfather" determination for uses at Fairgrounds Dear Ms. Kudzeba, This is a formal request for information regarding the grounds of a so-called "grandfather" exemption granted to the Fairgrounds. A copy of this letter is being sent to the city solicitor, the building inspector, and the mayor. As you know, my client, the Northampton Airport, is in the process of applying for a "grandfather" exemption for certain uses on their situs. As I write this letter, Mr. Giusto and I, pursuant to a request from the city solicitor, are gathering information and documenting events in support of that application. In an effort to understand the kind of detail required for the grant of such an exemption, I looked at the Fairgrounds' application. It would be fair to say I was stunned to see not a single listed supporting event of the kind for which their new exemption was granted (general entertainment uses as opposed to the conduct of county fairs and agricultural uses). Neither do I find anywhere in the application a request for nonconforming use determination (the so- called "grandfather" exemption). On this record, it is impossible to see how the planning board could even have considered the grant of such an exemption. Can you explain and cite authority? I can only conclude I may be missing something major, so please, if you can, by return mail identify for me where I can obtain any information or application submitted by the Fairgrounds in support of a request for grandfathering. YC urs very lin ely, cc: Janet Shepard, Mary Ford, Anthony Patillo Leon W. Mali ofsky, Jr. February 25, 1998 Dear Mr. Guisto, I have reviewed your application for a decision as to whether the airport is "grandfathered " for entertainment use beyond the accessory uses associated with an airport. Paulette Kuzedba , Senior Planner, and myself, reviewed the files, maps, and Zoning Ordinances for the City of Northampton going back to 1927. The information that we found clearly indicates that the use of the airport for any thing except as a airfield and accessory uses connected directly with aviation are the only uses permitted. The Zoning Ordinance from 1927 state (copy enclosed) there were three zoning districts, Non -residence, General Residence, and Single residence districts. The Airport at its inception was in an area that was a residence district. The Zoning Ordinance from 1927 read.." Section 2 ... no parcel of land lying in any residence district and not at the time this ordinance becomes effective devoted to any business or industry, other than those specified in Section 1 shall hereafter be used for any business or industry,......" Since the airport by all records was started in 1929 this is the ordinance that was in effect which the airport would have to comply with as being a pre-existing non -conforming use. Enclosed you will find a zoning map dated October 8, 1948 which also shows the airport in a residence district. Any expansion beyond the original use as a airfield would have required a permit from the alderman and our records indicate no permit was ever issued. Therefore the uses that were not subordinate and incidental to the principal use of the airport were illegal uses and cannot be considered as grounds for being grandfathered as a pre-existing non conforming use because the uses never were legal. Therefore I am denying your application that the airport is grandfathered for entertainment uses not associated with the accessory uses as -an airport. Sincerely, Anthony Patillo L •T _ t� A f < O et p p o- 7 C �O 7 n ' Oi m R O A p . (_.• O •°t R� 3 R 3� �% n y � n 7 C' G. R '' T p a _ R R N 47 R _ t� "'t R '•p R '•' - O "�` R •m. w R d^» O p ?i 4. v � aeb C oa R c i� c -; > > r � •°s ,CI =` C' a ^ _° 3 = n .�. y � R � � to - R �.. n d R to r: O] =R rt u. fs S 7 07 d ato ° to'! •s 0. G p - O R "'t 7. b t-. ,R. < R cNs�. �• O' n � t" � p n O O9 to 7 R •t R C ,"It '-' to A O .w S O R p R � O• O R rt 7 to O .. G; O A r°r y Oa m H� IST• P M fa ison _ to N R fs S R -` b y N p f rt � •t r� N tny n< O •i n O p � y ✓R. C .m":. "t p m ,.n N S -• d^ rt= a ?. � rt rt t' R � R R O .Ci nt � R rt 7 m d m O .°j �_ iC' N _O `+ _ j R Oq p ••. 1.. .Ri S w rt pj y b v a ••n .t m R N n .q ,,,t .y O O .' ^ p A •e b R .5+ O •t R �. y rt G d 5 S p �, n fa n O' u •s - •t. .°„ '*. n f G. c n p + ts• cps . y• .Rn.. �. O. p A G "" _ im, r O f •-R' R U y A eG 0 O fRo r. 04 •^ N. rt .. A 7a A A m — O Ip•► d A b p 04 .a,04 .... N A e°•' .'7 f: A ^' '"A :(y"`. ': ••1•i'ar m cab y -�,•-- = ..ate -3- - m RID a •. Ot O 'ts m b ry "� .. is fit ea. d. p .A •V H fs ^ O (� � 3 A 7 W"~ N g? w n O cps OD d O• V a C d ~ r=i• Ql . sOi `. O n a_ ,�.' .. R G '? R •Q d C. n H •"' ti c t y fp A" y > O 6 R rt y �• ... oz`s a s � H •: ° c 7 •R *'� R o •Ri -� 3 0 5 c =eb R• -. c= •S7 O b "1 O 0 N •t . R "' {p R .7 - '+ N - R tS _c .q 7 O R y n R R r Nm... .t R - R R fs :.. A • H 4&r. .� •t �G p ? „°� n (J; O ti y O e. C '< •t •v O �... "•.. �. •O 1-: '1• 1 N N O A� •t -` � •1 S � y? R _ R •+ y R h C.....� - • A .t � G re O d •°+. d O .� n O R Il. � O � � .... .Rj � S "q ; t•G G p p O .�.t A � n ' fs� AJ R :_'fix-:+:: ... �;'-�tsyn:+.'.-- o_fp_� M.. � , . - 'Rt, n • ry �` Wit`►.: \•�;. �;;'-�' +: ••1. M: C 'M p . O .�.. Om. •� .R A N W O rt d _ m r N m b - •Ot•n rt •� C = rt~ O. my O R R C �J m A n o N. W m A n •t n .' P c° d C p ti d e 91 rt a = rt y .o �< 17 A C" 'L7 O R R d A S '• C R p R. n• "J~ � A � y eC O O9 f� fN' • n -•°t p �< — p n R .—.. ..t n � = '+ ,_ � rt O. _� p O e+• m r. m r ~ •rti tt. p d C O tom.• ' OR S` Ot ^ a< rw R R y Z A p A � .+ rt R _� n A p (; I � � P y „q O•..� A S_ r n!!', A � R p A •'.'� A 7 , b mp A. C O rt M• A ti O S n O F .~i• .:.. "°� •R'► h o, O eG R M R ,i p p m •°s 'O e = "' °i ' n y ... = a. .� y =_ R ai ci = ... n 0 a R � cs p n p rC.• to •r"'+ O d n •°e �� O R O � �• tf n f� O O rt .b C o' _ yRi .p+ _3 G. O ,"„ O 7 A R R et A R O ... - ,• •t rt •• R p ^ - A �' °•w ' a to = ? e = °» _ f y v o fa ' K y •w o e S > - ' A R O K O ^� R r~r C rt? -' X �+ M rt R to ,� �_ < •t fa0,4 _� to • c f P o = - y IF � n o n R � •'" '� -' .r � '''-„ 0=i ; " ; `F _ � o" .O. A A R A A R - •°t R cf AO- • rOr '-' R tT .. Il. ''C 7 N .q ? • .O•• eG -MEICflaiY Y!C.. L •T _ t� A f < O et p p o- 7 C �O 7 n ' Oi m R O A p . (_.• O •°t R� 3 R 3� �% n y � n 7 C' G. R '' T p a _ R R N 47 R _ t� "'t R '•p R '•' - O "�` R •m. w R d^» O p ?i 4. v � aeb C oa R c i� c -; > > r � •°s ,CI =` C' a ^ _° 3 = n .�. y � R � � to - R �.. n d R to r: O] =R rt u. fs S 7 07 d ato ° to'! •s 0. G p - O R "'t 7. b t-. ,R. < R cNs�. �• O' n � t" � p n O O9 to 7 R •t R C ,"It '-' to A O .w S O R p R � O• O R rt 7 to O .. G; O A r°r y Oa m H� IST• P M fa ison _ to N R fs S R -` b y N p f rt � •t r� N tny n< O •i n O p � y ✓R. C .m":. "t p m ,.n N S -• d^ rt= a ?. � rt rt t' R � R R O .Ci nt � R rt 7 m d m O .°j �_ iC' N _O `+ _ j R Oq p ••. 1.. .Ri S w rt pj y b v a ••n .t m R N n .q ,,,t .y O O .' ^ p A •e b R .5+ O •t R �. y rt G d 5 S p �, n fa n O' u •s - •t. .°„ '*. n f G. c n p + ts• cps . y• .Rn.. �. O. p A G "" _ im, r O f •-R' R U y A eG 0 O fRo r. 04 •^ N. rt .. A 7a A A m — O Ip•► d A b p 04 .a,04 .... N A e°•' .'7 f: A ^' '"A :(y"`. ': ••1•i'ar m cab y -�,•-- = ..ate -3- - m RID a •. Ot O 'ts m b ry "� .. is fit ea. d. p .A •V H fs ^ O (� � 3 A 7 is > >eb N < Il. .q pR G " "t k a R� .--r 7 '--• C O R at O rr A C •� R R .t p. e'e - p • p O _� = R '• N C A b O R C y x O T A a n U] .i •'1. ... p -. tF. R O C rt • 04 .°j S d L' J to y •% R O O. ID � at C A. C G at 10 AJ R :_'fix-:+:: ... �;'-�tsyn:+.'.-- o_fp_� M.. � , . - 'Rt, n • ry �` Wit`►.: \•�;. �;;'-�' +: ••1. M: C 'M p . O .�.. Om. A Ij " .eG p ... � A d y : Oo A � d R R 7 t•Af G. �R+Si A .'a . O •.� �.-`�-: f' y 4 . _ `•'y''la+.L:a';st Y�•: -_ _ _ _ :l:ie ilH-.tiv��.. -.isYa' «�C'. +F.!: ..rw.+�P._-.,ii- .�.��w•: _c�.i;�' .;.1...,.. �'7_•S;. '-ii - ..�:...'+.h.%_i�•^'�wt}a •r'yjt �t:k� _ M�'sv�."•o:Y�1`A_�•IiNR''�i:c.`ii.:1i�_:� -_•y '� +•• • `''�y+ '�'[ SI'�e-� �t1T'.�•.�,.-'Jri�.'�'.fY.b[.�1'y..'•_y.::a �'r. .. .- +�.�.- ' � 'to a .,o •,- w = w o ,,,_ •. m -'""kms,,. �.• .W rt ' ry _' .'� .. ••It T � .n P. Y ": �+i di4Y 3t -.:.. ' `? � = di t^ r .4..' •i% - .pq � '-• - _ _ = fJ H O x = � ,C„ f° g � aS 'ii S C CD7 _ .•.- a •e N.. �, _ m C ' = 2S' d- t? C7 S. p ; •° d p, is c n O•' « � y . p � H -e .w � .09 .. e � C N C rt T. � O d _ � C' A p p = . O. 07 a p' ... = y 0• C m „r ^ p e o e rt „•+,, Ui .. '� �^,' O_ a .n.. i O. O ? O e O �' ry O n f° _• n O• _ = CID, S "'• .q 'tQ ,p O OD O _ «w rt D D N_ •+. C •+. N m " e O + s rr a a o N _ OEn CD T o p {1. '(�! a to 'A a e O 1-7 _ • _~ e C '"` •'°•= A e N N .� n.b-.� eycmHfoo e7od°�°noT� .� .�.. O: P• O C5 O T p O „" •+. a _r 04 G to a �° •t n m= e = ° dpi `r. ° T S K 9 O vdi O' C C,to L2, 04 M " H Eft = LL O p = d .°, _• p, e T • e = h7 07 m _^ e ' D 04 e :gm Uo ...e .p f•� A ~ h m M mro 7e C 'C Y ,a o .e, ? o + e e m er n 'a e O = ° f0 h7 e = eb e = m C .ert.. m p - ° '• '= e = e "' S 04 ° C n p O pH0A� K m? p ^• r e �p '3�. �p a 09 O S M •s to. e n O m S O p �-:�. p = m �•• °.-w p ^, = d? .y 7 O 7. .O ebd �� m CD � m p e, m e.. °�° _ '~GT= ••.S ip<C'7' rt = m dC=.• m m rl dm A t•• K e •t T ^~ O n K m r-+ = ti ~ ° p r e A ~ d r m p b rt eUUl O CD .n.. a O. _ = d i e rt M e ^ p - E N e = e T e = y d e N m Da aG y yr aC 4 n •t p . C ^� p p, � — T A ^, � .t = e y 0 n. m a •t —_^� te• � O. = e to O CD d s e �. ° N C' Oq 5 p= P y N t9 p e y d = p •"' .q C1 _ ^. .+ p C O n e =. '3 O n� � • � � � e m -' H. rt ^ n d e •ps '< _ •t C in e m •. n ^-• z 02 y^ y •s .•* _- a p, K �. R .+ •' �? O = e w e a '< ti p � n �. T O p O .e-. e �' y A P =° = M C tl. "'t � v •t A e A � •s p •! = N p� �- 4. ro p Y! < MO � � R rt e p N rpr a •• iS'• � e p (1 • � � ~ •+. e q e ,p^ = e O N � ^ fd' CD p ° p _ 3 p p eb d N a `! m= p. N i� 4 C .. 5 ,+. p d= d N •t X• to d d e = C - d n n �• p' "" T p CD n �� T_ CA M y Z a X y b N _cox co .Y .ej' A O y .JO• C O• rt91 nft 5. • ..� O= a N e p m ^mob NO04 C2 = a .7 c" p= p n i eb O m n n = eb O7A> — o .H/ 0 CD C N G = W .3 G o � � a = f n ° �, fa y to r C7 tn p •• m• n x x _° O "o` .o n n o a o q¢ to .a a x .ems. Cn o y to ae _ n H z a n p O r y O N eb 0 el ci a r = F t++ = m Z Z cs 15 • - - _ ,. pr- :� - � y �"' .� �•y .. ... -. ,°.,, '► .. _ _: '! �►°. = p - O •. ^ a ..cf ' -a ..� � ]f.'w :" -j.ii: t a e•ry- 5 ^� 'z �'±`� --3a..s+ �►c_..,...D.�;,_ w:%f- 'e' 04 -::.... .�•-,a:>:n - .•. O "" - _ .A_ rt:_ shy ? D.r .,:: td -^"'^':: sf ii..e.•- r��_y�,,� r •� _�� .., . L��. _ _ _ .e d. S dei fJ" f►.:aa:..�-�ii� �. b:'. .. >•.a ��+•:�: �:i �F:. fir.• a `°'_' !► _ :.;+:. : �;,N,�..� .,...'. .� � ... M ...,.:_..,_ t: ^..:. brad v. as . • =_• f: 's i -_u.,.M.i. S" : , D n ="tT ^ "` :ate::i .•:. ..3 .� k t• s,idt-a;+ ,:,- .. •.:w e n n.: w.a is �.�.. ' '�' x:. �. .:a•<'y .:_•,:: _ .;:Y: � .� •. p; .... .., m . �,:: .�'°-�' -�•` - - t ice. � a;- ;��.�"- a- -.. ... A"� .iu _::AF__�w::=.f^tti; �.: - '.,.•�.:5�':y4:lEC��st ..r..i�a..'. - ... :'�;'�»n'�:2��we'a• AN m J� •= Y� w O Y Y C V C> Y .�10. be 3uYr,z "bbeA ors C V „ .ca. •o a .Q p ° �» ,cu b �: 3 _ e e Y 3. C C p 0 'Q .... ^« 7 C p— d w y m _w V C C w (q L �•. O .0 C r C S O •' m m45 = =Z C X `'off C W Y O 44 44 ° N toci cj M t Y O U O = N 'O u A S :� •c � c❑ 41 w w e a > Y 44 44 u u °— C Yy C Y H o -Z A Y C p _ y y 50 0 4'a to 41w 3°-0 -; �• - ^`C � `.. �: :i-_:':�,K -. 1_ :' .mss`: 'L >s' C.�ttY"'r�'O .�+'� k C U .. Y.?R}r�'•^ O R.' ,C'.s.s:•�:. *' .L• v > 47 rz • w Y u > L q 'd Y C .� u w 3 = m ' O .r+ u Y w d � W z w o �A w C C O X wY aqi w C Y C ':] G d 'B 4 C' _w W _ ao°_, d C_ ami _N •, Y be W> Y •+ m Y C � .0 7 C w 'd E•N Y u c u Y 3 w u 'B Y o �. o~ O Y c w c E U) c N w C o 0 X 'C E. A n o � e AN m J� •= Y� w O Y Y C V C> Y .�10. be 3uYr,z "bbeA ors C V „ .ca. •o a .Q p ° �» ,cu b �: 3 _ e e Y 3. C C p 0 'Q .... ^« 7 C p— d w y m _w V C C w (q L �•. O .0 C r C S O •' m m45 = =Z C X `'off C W Y O 44 44 ° N toci cj M t Y O U O = N 'O u A S :� •c � c❑ 41 w w e a > Y 44 44 u u °— C Yy C Y H o -Z A Y C p _ y y 50 0 4'a to 41w 3°-0 -; �• - ^`C � `.. �: :i-_:':�,K -. 1_ :' .mss`: 'L >s' C.�ttY"'r�'O .�+'� k C U .. Y.?R}r�'•^ O R.' ,C'.s.s:•�:. *' .L• v > u c u c o u Y w 3 m ' O .r+ u Y w cs C M C C C O X wY aqi w C Y C ':] G d 'B C' _w W _ ao°_, C_ i., w C Y W •, q be W> Y •+ m Y C � .0 7 C w 'd u ►' = C w C u u c u Y 3 w A = C . Y Y u o �. O w C. u- E U) «°{to N w C o 0 E. A n o —�° C°� C C C q C w u — •• . fp Y •� _C w C i10 v Y-1 w �' C Y > N u — Y C W W ► ^ 7= w C C S Q w° U u u y Y y is ►°. r 'C : G to o Y c Y o =. ► o. m -to = e •C o pte _ir = = Y u c E Lc "' u° CJ 3 Y D O u m 0 ° G G° v u y C 3 q C C y u u u Y d O C b G 0 Y n� EL•� u.0 Q 'C ° 'C Y O C 44) .. v — w 3 C M C C > u ►. � .0 7 C w 'd C� � y ►. u C Y N CI 3 Y crd N Y ' Y q C V40 ° e m � C Y o °.a• c e r x c Y o c Y ►. ►. �^.. .0 p � `,y �•' w Y � C G ° 'O (� 1O ►: be aY.• 03 0 ca G s 3 r e ; E Y u E-4 G o m 3 or c G „ ° M m p, M u 3 45 q a Y q a. +.R.�2'•.�i'z'7;� .B!'•t;:�.?-u._' q'i.'�"�.�;4, �.,.�m+.yy.,r..-_�;r.+r::.';:.....,,4+��'�^n„ir_".�!!. _ 4 ��A . :-:.a.- �! � 'Ci _� az' V �t! G, O �. I n., [-- +� •. .:.a -t.. ..Li.it:t:aM+.:.” .�. - .F .•= rr+'*s..G «.li. .. .. 'm.r •C - _.in C u .. _ '��L.. �;-�c;��.,f•, _::�7F""V `:fi .7-.�. ..t.;: };••v. -IrT bo vc _.�v--u,.•u .4 m G•� �b m w p•`b"'S!"'=�'S`+ -,.,. '" .lp:diy� _f.s k- :`.W V C - , M . m a ' n �.. - F . G .'-` - C •� r'C.+. - - u� .a, .. � :C"� % a ,� G -_ _ `�l �_ ^T •` C4 _.!a a.. '�+' .. _ _ '.MA- �Qp :, -GCs M .: m m• "� .° M G'- m .. •m r+ .' •• H °. -. � � _+�. .� . • C.• W Z 1O v -° �: 3 10, .'.d + - U - 0 0 c •d tO a C3 Rr o 0 as G ~ - A r n 4) > W V C c •o .U. c u = v > w v O 7 +dam+ xi . Ci .w :' M w45 y o x o z -wj�a a b r A u U U a o v ° m o U C C y 6/ O U x ►+ c c«Ui h `•m0 C ; ` • ° w y U •� -, E" 0. m G: r q Z'en C �.+ ? « °' a' 0 y, o a4 co z 4 c e- c b == '�~ a4 e q w °°' C C d .. u 'x" .. a oto V" O F e� e= c o o . > A c r = C� 3 •% v a0 0" vv N�"� ° �,v x {=7 ►+ w° 'mac u U v �o m q? v o u 4 G« 0,0 a c w m � u o _e v r. q u� N y cn v v iii ►. C V1 Fa. _ C �^7 C �'• U .. 3 . &4 M b G'7 S d C ti H .0 .. CO v a� a w ° w .v .3 a o a u w g., o�.o 0 o v c e C,9 ." 0 CS CO N C O V! Y (n V N �" fA 1 fA q i"-. C C.i m p ' c 0.0 .O x to m; y O b c 0 7 C y r !0 G° G m owl M 3 m ►°. V C G a• d :n 7 ..: y C 4. Y u y C ° u G£ .�+ m w 3 m u w k ♦ •d U '� .°.. w� .+ C C b V m G v p w c w O ►. C« y N d G N U C ; C 7 G« L'N Y w 7 3 y O G ►. w a w ° N 7 w C G •� �` b U y �- w w m u u z v" • C Gi U ►`. m O G m w y C b C v 7 O. V 45 bo rm Y a~+ v C ..a.. c G 'C•. � V .q. m G m C�T`w" V O a. x G4 •c '^ c ► 3 u �+ G G> C w G o C u b G s .. tj _ u o U w O G o m 134 o G 3 .. m u y m mCj ••„ C w C M .. °ocs.d'°.wov 01 >>° o' w« O +� ° A w a° m G u m•« G c o 0 0 s G" m s w m~ C w w 7 w w U O w« v ►a V ." S 3 m r+ U E y m .mU. .r C; m w u ,�? C w s 7 'O .a V "•' 3 u ~ .: G „w. u w » •=) 1O ° "" v .0 C « 'O > y ° u G .+ G m M ... a+ C G ++ U G M 3 v b G o o a, ,•, �+ o 4) ° � ; ~ 0 e « w w a. m > w .^ .q ++ a. • a+ J 7 G� ° G� ' u v w. ,p I •, O U... G = . ".• N O° w w v0„ O « .° O .A C O 7 n3 C •lz N w w w• o� U= ,j (3. b^ r G E >. •°r Mbo45 GG ° o> .a. C c o •a .. '� m 5 c" u -.5 m C > - w G a7 s w C '." 7, q C G� c r u �jj c C u •d C G a. m c C y U _C :> � C d> .r .° ` J C 'C O U v v G c Z C u ul A v C, o o= •o q° `4 m c` m r o C E+ u ¢c u. m v' .: G F"' a.- V •, ._ Q 42 en c 7 w 7 a w C 7 G Qw„ y C• = 5 O d7 O G °y, w ��,. ° m :+ y p V. �. fl'.: w u o �° e v v es", a •0 3 Q. _ m c:. o" �;• :; o v c .d 3 m o v o m v„" O• m .�. 0 >. «� to w ++ V N 7 U •+ ."{�i G V y N :u+u m. C ."i •� V y O' .• .c ci ..- .a - C e a w .7 .—.r e y a O .+ m C� a 7 w .o p C .o. 'eJ w. C +•' m _ _ H h b d. x N. ° C +'t �. A w•.VC_Vl V,= `CD 7�GSa45�m7M V. k.Up7 p O •vO G °�"..Oa+��•.'. •4 Q:-�'.. ..- . ,� °� .q ie G !i .� •,C,. a .0 O u •= < - ►ci tl:. e w � � Od C d r O a:y,,,n.� - . August 19, 1997 A,Yp,r+ 5.) It . CITY1-,-)F NORTHAMPTON, ,AS SACHUS FITS OFFICE OF THE CITY SOLICITOR Janet M. Sheppard, Esq. City Solicitor Leon W. Malinofsky, Jr., Esq. 182 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060-3104 RE: Dick Giusto and Russ Benjamin and the Northampton Airport Dear Attorney Malinofsky: I'm in receipt of your letter to Anthony Patillo dated July 15, 1997. 1 have reviewed some of the material with the Building Inspector and with the Senior Planner Paulette Kuzdeba regarding your request for a grandfathered use of the Airport. Please be advised that as of this date you have not provided sufficient information to the Building Inspector, in order to justify this zoning use. I would suggest that if you would like the City to consider this request that you put together a list of dates and events that have taken place at the Airport and describe the nature of those events so that we might review your situation. To date the Building Inspector has received information from your client in an unorganized manner. I have instructed the Building Inspector and the Senior Planner to forward copies of any documents that they receive from you to my office for my review. I look forward to resolving this matter with you and allowing the Building Inspector to make a determination based on all of the facts. I would appreciate it if you would contact my office if you have any questions. Otherwise please forward your documents to the Building Inspector so tha the Building Inspector might review it. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please let me krwif you have any questions. Very7uly yours, W* !Jan . Sheppard, Esq. JMS:msg cc: Mayor Mary Ford Michael Vito, Executive Assistant Anthony Patillo, Building Inspector Wayne Feiden, Head of Planning Department Paulette Kuzdeba, Senior Planner Nancy Pelletier, Esq. cAtext\dty97Utrsmems.811 76 Masonic Street, Northampton MA 01060 (413) 585-5889 FAX: (413) 586-2937 Northampton Airport Special Conditions: Any meetings taking place in the proposed building will be conducted in connection with current or usual airport uses; 2. No fee shall be charged for use of the facility as a meeting place, and no food shall be served in connection with the use of the meeting place. 3. The meetings will be limited to a maximum of %© people; and 4. Any expansion, alteration or deviation from these conditions, or those set forth in the application shall require additional permits from City agencies. CfIT OF NORTiiAMPTON PLANNING BOARD APPLICATION FOR 1 2 3. 4. S. Applicaa Address: Parcel Identification: Zoning Map # Paroel # Street Address: Zoning District: Status of Applicant: Owner C�Put+chaser Lessee Other (explain) ���i . Property Address. Describe Proposed Work/Project (Use additional sheds if neoessary): G. Has the following information been included in the application? Sitc/Plot Plan List of requested waivers fee 2 sets of labels (supplied by Ute Assessor's Office) Signed dated and dented Zoning Permit Application �ECEI �/FO _ Tin-ce (3) copies of the Certified Abutters List from Ass:.sors' Office. AUG 1 1991 8. Site Plan and Special Permit Approval Criteria. (If any permit criteria docs not apply, explain wily) Use additional sheets if necessary. Assistance for completing this information is available through the Office of Planning & Development. A. How will the requested use Pr oct adjoining premises against seriously detrimental uses? TAEL Cl 1 11 � tU0 How will die project provide for: 0�'O— AMU 6Qr:�'. surface water drainage: i sound and si ht buffers: u � the preserver ' n pf views, light and air. A �N-4 B. How will the requested use promote the convenienoe and safety of pedatria povernent within the site and on adjacent streets? c t�NR T;0'r 41G 119L C How will projectat � mule impacts on the streets � roads in te area? • \ I —1—. n P* Where -is the location of drivt way openings in nktion to frit% and adjacent soreds? CS 'P What features hive been mompomted into the design tb allow for access by emergency vehicles: 7A CCt53 I .NY' !; the safe and couvegient arraugemegt of parking and loading spaces; provisions for persons Aitlr disabilities: ��GEIVFO AUG 1 1997 z K NO a`c V C. How will the proposed use promote a harmonic relationship o=_r and the natural landscape: a'l/ 1 to existing buildings-. other community assets in the arca: D. What measures arc being taken that show the use will not overload the Citys resources, i water supply and distribution system: C1lhe QU /-", -.a - I.. — \11 .IR - - sewage and storm water collection and treatment rice protection, streets and How will the proposed project itigate any adverse impacts on the City's resources, as listed above? `T 1 �V`Qx snocir -�COW R List the section(s) of the Zoning Ordinance that states what special regulations are required for the proposed project (flag lot, common drive, lot size averaging, eta) _ r How does the project axt lite special regt ? (Use addiizaaal sheets tf necessary)? F. State how the project meets the following technical perfarmanoe standards: 1. Curb cuts ace minimized: T %Pq Q�CEIVF� AUG 1 1997 –�, Check off all that apply to the project: -4 use of a ca neon driveway for access to more than one business use of an existing side street use of a lqoped service road 2. Does the project require more than out driveway cut? NO YES (if yes, explain why) — 3. Are pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular traffic separated on-site? YES NO (if no, explain why) For projects that require Intermediate Site Plan Approval, ONLY . sign application and end here. f'f I 9. I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate to'the best of my knowledge. The undersigned owner (s) Planning property to review this application.— Date: Applicants Signatu Date: Owner's Signature: permission to enter the not same as applicant) For projects that require a Special Permit or which are a major project, a licants must also Complete the follolkyingpage. �rCEIVF, AUG 1 1997 F. Explain why the requested use will: not unduly impair the integrity or rt _ s- •. 1 I- - 1 not be detrimental to the health, morals orAeneral welfare: be in harmony with the general purpose and ineat of the Ordinance: G. Explain how the requested use will promote City planning objectives to the extent possible and will not adversely effect those objectives, defined m City masts study plans (Open Space and Recreation Plan, Northampton State Hospital Rezoning Plan; and Downtown Northampton Today, Tomorrow and the Future). 9. I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. The undersigned owners) grant the P ning Board permission to enter the property to review this appon. r Date: Applicants Si _ Date: Owner's Signature: (If not the same as applicant's) MAJOR PROJECTS must also complete the following AUG 1 1997 c��NW jjA 5 APPLIC_ANT/CONT�A_T A�I)RESS/PHONE! PROPERTY LOCATION: MAP FILE # v �C � 43) _ � MA ON: oma,_ PARCEL: THIS SECTION FOR. -OFFICIAL USE ONLY: PERWr APPLICATION CHECKLIST iY'�-71 Approved as presented/based on information presented x _ Denied as presented: XSpeci 4yermit and/or Site Plan Required under. § L3. (U V.xAl) mfr aCb �� C �1S�r + C+ PLANNING BOARD ZONING.BOARD Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Et►closed %Finding Required under: § 633 w/ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Of Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed J 11, Variance Required under. § w/ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed Other Permits Required: Curb Cut from DPW Water Availability Sewer Availability /Septic Approval-Bd of Health %_Permit from Conservat' Signature of w &Tg—Ifisneftr Well Water Potability -Bd Health �j -P vv d p l NOTE:Issuanoa of as zoning permit does not relieve an zoning requirements and obtain all required permits Commission, Department of Publio Works and other AUG 1 1997 c` K to oomply with all Health, Conservation (ranting authoritles. .1, •---- _-- FA - File File No. ,97 01,3 D PERMIT APPLICATION (§10.2). TYPE OR PRINT ALL INFORMATION 1. Name of Applicant:_ ]"1(�1►lOU1`-L� 2. 3. 4 5 Owner of Property: / Address: Telephone - Status of Applicant: Owner Contract Purchaser Lessee Other (explain): Job Location: Parcel Id: Zoning Map#Parcel- -- District(s): _ S (f0 BE FILLED IN BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT) Existing Use of Structure/Property _ 1% 0-414 j 6. Description of PrAposgV%J�ork/Project/Og4upation:,(Wse tonal sheets if 7. Attached Plans: Sketch Plan Site Plan Engineered/Surveyed Plans Answers to the following Z questions may be obtained by checking with the Building Dept or Planning Department Files. 8. Has a Special PermiWariance/Finding ever been issued for/on the site? NO DON'T KNOtN' YES IF YES, date issued: IF YES: Was the Permit recorded at the Registry of Deeds? NO DONT KNOW— V- YES IF YES: enter Book Page and/or Document # 9. Does the site contain a brook, body of water or wetlands? NO>5� DONT KNOW YES IF YES, has a permit been or need to be obtained from the Conservation Commission? Needs to be obtained—Obtained ed ate iss (FORM CONTINUES ON OTHER SID O AUG /n^• __`` os WHAT THE FUTURE CONDITIONS WIIS. H • -,0- AND THE, kCCOMpANyING PLANS WHAT THE EaSTINGCC)NDMONS ARE AND Of , Plans, in duplicate, must be filed with t,-:. ppficadonbeforeapennitwillbegmnied,one% 7tich, upon issuance the permit shall be kept at the site during tni-Progressof the work. New.............. 'Zone ................... . Type ................... . Map .................... . I Addition Parcel..................... AlterationsO JUN ...... ..... 0 2 5 1997 CITY OF NORTHAMPTON DeRemolpair ition .... 0 MASSACHUSETTS —"'ication for other than a Dwelling Permit (To be filled out in ink OR on a typewriter) To the Building inspector. p, ?. . ..................... 199�1 Application for a permit is hereby made according to the following:- . 1. Location, Street and . ...... .. ......... . ... . . ..... 2. Nearest cross streetz ............................ ....... . ... Lot............................ 3. Owner's ............. A . ..............No . .............. . ... Ad ....... ..... Q 4. ArchitecVs name.. .. . ........ ..... ............... Address Buildees name ..... 5. X ........ .... ... ...................... Address 6. Use of building, Present ..................................... Proposed .... ... ......... 7. Building fronts on how many Streets? ........ I/ ........ . ..................................................................... 1%,11,11 .. 147-1 8. Is building in fire district? ........ _:�'k .................................. . . . ................................................... 9. Size of building, Width in ft...... ............... . Length in 10. Distance of building from Street Line./00. ", left lot line ............. . Height in fL...;2/ ...... "l�- A " rear lot line &ivc 11. Type of construction (check one)* I -A .......... I -B .......... I tFoa. r'ghtlot linel.......... IV .......... V Stories B 1 2 stary heights in & J 4 S 6 .7 Roof Thickn's of walls in ins. Material of Walls Material of floor/ roof Design live load Design dud kad Occupancy or Use No. of Persons / families No. of suits 12. Soil under footing is ....... . .......................................................... . ................................... 13- Depth of footing below ga&.. -11 ................. - 1/--1 ................... ft. Will P:.! used P22d 14. ? . ..•'••"••,..... ....... Area of entire building (Present plus new) ....... Ly.,.41C 5 - 15. Type of roof -flat ...................... . pitched Material of sq. ft of f, 16. No. of elevators .... Methodofheating .............. f covering ..........»... System ...................... Fuel 17. Are live loads noted on drawings? ............... Are all other be) (is) eqstructural Building (will 61pped with sprinklers?..... pri truca iral conditions noted on drawings?. 19. Is building to be used as a rAclO-*1 18- Bu nkl Wih tsprinkler alarm? .......»..... ................ rY, workshop or mercantile *­****­**­­ OrOdw-tablishment employing 10 or more persons? 20. Is building to be used as an office building. dormitory, hot*e*],*'*f**'—'**il*y***h'*o*'td'*******"***'**"**********"**'*****,-*,**"*****"*"**'****, , apartment or boarding house, lodging house or tenement house having 8 Or more rooms above the second story?.. - 21. How many exits (per floor) to street? ............................................... R ........................................................................................................... 22. Is building a "Place Of assembly" as defined by the General Laws....."I 23. Will building conform to the General Laws? . .1 -za .............................................. 24. If a garage, distance from nearest building? ...... %5.r.,Q T- Building and Zoning Ordinances? ................................................. ........................... 25. If an addition, alteration Or demolition, when was building erected? ..... 26. Estimated costs: - General S.j.0000 ignedegrtifiesb"r5i �Menm are true to the best The unders' pa MTO%Udf 04� Plumbing ........... Gas Piping../ -.ZD -.................... natnrs f Sprinklers ./Zo Heating.../'Zo ............................. WRITTEN D'SCRUMON OF WORK TO BE DONE 50(se blank half of reverse side, it necessary) Electric ATOG.... , Other. .. . . .... ......... ............. ................... .. Total $ .. ..... ... .... ... r of . .. ...... .... NOTE: IN ORDER THATTIUS APPUCA71ONMAYBE ACCI-FrED. THE DATA CALLED FOR BELOW MUSTBESO serFoRTHTHAT WECAN X)MERMWEPROM7REAPPLJCATIONANDTHE'kCCOMPANYINGPLANSWHATTREWaS7TNGCONDMONS AREAND WHAT THE FUTURE CONDITIONS WILL BE" Plans, in duplicate, in ust be filed with this application before a permit will be granted, of the permit shall be kept at the Site during the progress of the ' one 0fwhich, Upon issuance work. New .............. NO.................-D, 7=e ..... I ............ .. I)FIX .................... Map.............._:., Addition _......0 Parcel..................... Alterations ....0 JUN 2 51997 Repair ............ 0 CITY OF NORTHAMPTON Demolition .... 0 MASSACHUSETTS clCH 11", ................................ .. . . ; 11 '1 I's ....................... Application for other than a Dwelling Permit (To be filled out in ink OR on a typewriter) To the Building inspector 19 9�/ Application for a Permit is hereby made according to the following:- . . ..................... 1. Location, .. Street and.......0 2. Nearest cross saw ... .... . ... ....... ............ 3. Owner's name Lot No.............. ........ Ad ....... 4. Architect's name... ........ ............... Address../. -Y 27. 5. Builder's name .....v . ........ ........ ... . ...................... Address 6. Use of building, Present ..................................... Proposed ....... e.� 7. Building fronts on how many Streets? ........ 8. Is building in fire district? ........ .70 . . .................................................. 9. Size of building, Width in ft......,24/ V ................ . Length in ............ . Height in fL...;2/.. - 0 - 10. Distance of building from street Line./Co..", left lot Imiet5 a0, tight lot linc&.90 "rear lot line 11. Type of construction fh-1-one I -A .......... I -B .......... 1-C.......... II.......... III.......... IV.......... V Stories B 1 2_� 6 7 awrKheights in ft- I I 7lickn's of --M—in ins. Material Of wells Material of floor / roof Design live load Design dead load Occupancy or Use No. Of Persons / families No. of stairs 12. Soil under footing is... 13. Depth of footing below grade..._;�I-., ft. Will used .................. Pt t ) , 14. L=� ......................... Area of entire building (Present plus new) ...... ZY 41X.. *** ** *;***• ..... sq. ft 15. Type of roof -flat ....................... pitched ..... >� ........ Material of f covering 16. No. of elevators -,?& .... Method of heating .............. System of I . .... . �-* ................ ................... o ............. Fuel 17. Are live loads noted on drawings? ............... Are all other structural conditions noted on drawings?.-VAJ 18- Building (will be) (is) eq -. .17�* ....... nipped with sprinkIers?.../,'ZC) ........... o ........ With sprinkler alarm? 19. Is building to be used as a factory, workshop or mercantile or other establishment employing 10 or more persons ns U ? .... ;.......... o ............................................................................. ................................................................... : 20. Is building to be used as an office building, dormitory, hotel, family hotel. apartment or boarding house, lodging house or tenement house having 8 or more rooms above the second story? ?7z 21. How many exits (per floor) to street? ..... ; . ............................................... 1-C .... __ .................... o .......................... . 22. Is building a "Place of assembly" as defined by the General Laws? 23. Will building conform to the General Laws? 24. If a garage, distance from nearest building? Building and Zoni*n**g****O'*r*d**in**a**n**c'*e**s*?"** ............. o .............. o ......... .... 25. If an addition, alterati . ................................................. 26. Estimated costs:- on or demolition, when was building erected? ...................................................................... General $ oj 000 h Nndersign=ejh" a meuig� _Q . .............. o ................ r _belief of-7hi e knq !�tXuetothebest Plumbing... _wJ ZZC ......... o .................. Gas Piping..2_20... ....................... Sprinklers .117zo o ......... o ignature �f owner, architect or engineer 'Zo ........................... WRI7"rEN DISCRUMON OF WORK TO BE DONE I 00leating.../S(Use blank half of reverse side, if necessary) i ectric Other Total $ ...... ...... .......... .......... ............. ................ ....... 51a IS ...... *. '4'3Li,iAoi a7, � Saar AM80 ?AM SLC•-J*A moo; ,Z46L-' IT! Z SOIL ,1.�1 KOrthaaporoet, tis` 01041 �• a ZA M I SM CfanwAcom tagw0t got "Vol" Dote MumaidA at Applicability, old perry load, Northampton A rsproaantaative at thin allice zooduattad an as -cies ,sseU" eel se"Oebse :;i. %aid At tits location referenced above. Taub was to isappealt the afore�ap roe. caft"Tvatton coming ion Is ftoitive mate Cion o! #p�pl,sa 1tneat for a�tuaa3 (lsts) that sise�lrise� the Northampton Airport poropesty, end for aaor�C dsaarim94 so special events, Tlease *vents 1041*10, but ars not limited to, car 3"". peogarens for-anildson ind ooncer.s. Diaoussiom at the meeting focused an regulation 09 activulos at tsar +i.i'&vwt j : an Arrau subnoot to Protection t*Uc the Act. The entire site is within chs IS riga fsrdasin0 U04 subjoct to Flooding, tAi 100- ss llo laiA oS the Conneaticut hives. she areas re the ed aativit se ere to calcar planta ass gra"ed and pawed portions of the ss ltty. V Wt explanati,*0 of i�Lpaoto to the reecurve area was that uarparrsrY asdleu PWtsbls •tWUCtas4s were emoted an the site to p:cvS4a auppart for tbs events. The Dowtvact understands Case would be no fill associated with thsaa *V*ftCl speci:iaally mentioned iva the Request tar Determination Of Applicability, abortly after the conaiuslan at suet events you irAt.atto tare sit* to sotwresasd t-0 its origiDal conditien in ordar to resume ordinary ik.%Oort Masse - 'Phe 1eotUt events similar", described la tha ftgwott, are ads 44"4i --4 " subsaquently those eventa s&Mwt ata Clearly asVMlssd as to %iwthor t.wre WOU14 be iaptats on flow ttorw 4494*1V its t r t ofpsepotation for the *vent, the went itself amd/mr say activity related Taco. des bsp►�rt�t +ar o! ansa opinion that this issue of the lams of itstor"tioa to alloy tbs issnsiitg Authority to a®suratsly dsteraino jurisdiat,lonAl projects and reralatory Deeds Is evident in this paraieular determination procase. lha Mquset Is TSVAG is its aenss:udiag phrase which attempts to provaals blanket coverage far MY otbsv similar Avant taking place as tete airport. The suhsisa t �M Of Uuwlsislast ialarasti teairaes it difficult for the lssa.irq authority uC remiss dsoisioas that a+ *0%.Az 4 protect the 'iniesesti' cf the Acct foZ4 to M signif"mat to the rso atu.;' tras where work is The it�ulatioaa, at I C1ss 30. , s I3) (i} {1� tsars t t the """t shall incl " suilicisnt iaior"tion to allow Ma rirervss.s.� cwalselan sa ddsterains erh tho: eke proposed MOCk ►rill SIM stn Aral fasbi* t ,ti 7rac*cttaon oases assd A4t. 'TU 06-"Astaat is Of the ®piaima that the Plaaansat of itMoswee the llovdpUin in unjvnetion with, activities such as airrouses. aur sftev. concerts tad otbea events that are tiratMALoist in nature Is not galts�da�a r� raawt fLiliog. deodping or altertag of 14md Uploat so lle"LAIyN 'P activities aoss"Lated with the Aviation busiaesst, such as the parking of a ti,rorsft, likewise, Ah"Ald :got be emasladerad activities is be regulated. > i1n sheet + **4%K Mu"Awsear win + F" 44140 706.1 I'm 4 MW'1 p A�itsp apANOW"Un As atsud aba*s, tb4 nepaalations 314 me 14.00, identis the -4.:�s for es dseaining l'ursediatiasw resource areas cad those aastivitrse that- ttr,e1 to- be regulated tb "h WW wtland Permit Process- •leaps be Odvised bast urAOr procedures, at 310 M lo. o3 t 3 i t ) (b), netessinations of Applicability ars 'lid for three years trop teas date of issuance. Thew derisiede do not etWA toy 4911 tial`•, rovisiM project pr---- .9 a:o atpproaah the aamoorvatales acami.esieft shaft the Orse year petted ioas revAesed by the DW910 of IS aaadsr Che Act `,rad lorAlatiene do rAt S"esa+ds leaal bylaw reiWrema t s at relieve applicants tray $ mating fthar 1e0s stat* OT i+iU r4l psxvitar, it aawassary, please a" attsaft" the Diparteaont.s etipers*dirip pettroa=aaastien cot Awtaktll'ty for the let• identified as comptaing the Northesipton Airportpreeperty aced for the proposed aetiviti#s clearly i&Mtlfie8 iata teas ROG"at, but eft for $shier sisilaar *veaatas$ sentieated in the asgttset. Those aaideetilisd activitiss sbmld o C? ear? y aieseribsd to a stabset"Ut itmpast for saaraaaacM"Welft of 71PPllaRability ^-not x h -e y Avv, known ofyW as�►e acres Questions, D-10460feelfree to 'Oontact- obeat Hell ma 01 O! las; At t4131 #i-1100, `acre. 313, , vo ry c i ro J3t'° 104 �7sa�a1K'iai`TO 'Clet'tisd NAil t f 231 191 333, rOtUTA oneaiptC rfat WOtA. cc: 40r+4A wmft& ta +Canasmcioat isslaaa city stall, 310 main Street iroartbaxpt Gi.. XA 01 D S Y 10.20, 3io CIM� j)%p _ARTMzNT =" 4 . OF ZWMNMENTAL `4 664:� J. The owk dw#.bW bmkw, *tWb itWVAN WUP'm Of tkw wwk — 'A PW s W'Alx Us %ft *"W j& tM npktM and wW aftr im Am 8400 to Pmondm Ueda to AM. 10 mucibm MW wOk 7411"ift *0 AUMS of 4 Nctn d late" Tku Doarmiaw-i" w A-WeNtm C TM on Anw6w kA 7mv mim" 2. X 7U wWb !ft dougod is y"I nqwa is wit lift as Am "is" = P"ift" UsdW $be Am*. 100 *141 r4c gom&vo. in 4mjA a dw_ " ammi. Thembft DA IMAIMM ofsbat &PLgym"CAR SHOW% XMI APW - TOM (CONC23M 3.' Under the AM Tom, 4WWq&6MW9m 4, Cj'lis &MjW fir �ti in*, Wool# ampba, w qwWW is do Adt wid aa mad" at b"M IN 9"Q*41 Inaw by the DopmeAmp at md wow WAMW4 t -ho the ins iwArUWANAI, 14 go opimong, w"'go supinsam law sw dw" rm Jim Aim 4w W OvAg". tm woo., w vw" awbul dc wd p- 1 PUN" War at atAw A& v faq;Am da *Wwmy kow" "MA" is %bo no" ;A, WA6 tv wow" WAD st be" b4"10 doarrrMr 140 ft Tom as po 10=1) %J" to Amps ow 68 *0 lg;w-,�Aw it i's Dmirafts" a" of ONWISI oft" 0" - * 3064, VA -OW. A ON St. tm mom $has at ad am tLas IN M Im swumm ad ow *Aw ww, taf A mum jtl�uft 4w4"A"*%m*Y mg aftwx dw mewwq im w odwa ft Amilow. name 49 00 a~ MA OWFM w 40 X*116 166 Ampivis ftlft Alimm Wit tabu' 1 wow at im "M WW4 ow tart sam arab dOW4100 ilN I - - to) lbs mom md damn ICIA ad PAN, If (11) a mast am audio skuwasm 00) a* wk *+A* aaf ThduWaJAW (311 t: INIMMISPIA w"s lid ~ms lis bon' 11 anti tit MW* Via 4406 A, 1 *WNW ill ft as low NW* 11 (03 a stsksma *A a aa it as no" Am bm am ar thi A"kwAk %I* www"A" #MUM vAb" A samom no Iwo bt a diewl" ft"Pa"At 1c, 1 910 mak: i� ."�:'� OF ENVMONWXN I`AL PPDMn N �f i4qqyy pr1� It f+4.i 5%r.v^RysW-•ns+�.-+.Mr..�rvn...,-� �y) RP 16 3641 qv, ?wm %rf"infieft Of eticabilr Shu wettan h Pl on Act4 G.`. C. 131l 9 Dow. .}_Asa& {Name of pmostfar 4wwl nw e to to aaropd am wwi w X by «A mors I rail l "qua"d 0"-��. �r � .ti�.r.as+�ea+unwrr.• °Pum&ns to &M aohMtl of O,L. a. 131, 140, tie ho souWenai yow mgwrt for a $lutoeMMU" of A�q► aat ,1+� a st � ' Mao the a�1Muivat" tdmk whwh~ Is 'mar �-��►,�r,,,,�'� .a�„�,».�, in ve. L X Tho +tt� i�ad ialwwr, tm fiftg et a Noom at taa>aa i i T of o" 3D "dao *at do=" biowr, ur" uw w " a3i *" of ym " - m'�oi�lioa �Je�r tis Jlat and urili xw�o�, il�t� �r o' 1b�s �'ti=- " : �ry City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 • Conservation Commission • Historical Commission • Housing Partnership • Parking commission • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals To: Richard Guist -0 - From: From: Paulette L. Kuzdeba, Senior Planner Subject: Requirements for Filings - Northampton Airport Date: April 11, 1997 CC: Anthony Patillo, Building Commissioner & file During the week of March 17, 1997 we discussed the issue of requiring the Airport to file with the Conservation Commission prior to temporary events taking place. At that time, I thought we agreed that you would file a Request for Determination, listing all temporary events and they types of activities that would take place in order that the Conservation Commission could issue one Determination of Applicability (good for three years) and no further filings would have to occur. To reach that point, I stated that I would assist you in filling out the application so that it would be complete and encompass all activities on the site (in order to avoid further confrontations about the site) and you agreed, much to my surprise. Furthermore, we established a meeting time for Wednesday, March 26, 1997 at 11:00 AM. Somewhere in between our conversation and the date of our meeting, you changed your mind and decided that no permits were going to be sought from the Conservation Commission for any temporary event, because you believed the "Act" did not apply. You contacted DEP and received information from them contrary to what I had been told in the fall of 1996. When you arrived for our meeting, you were not alone (bringing people from the Sheriff s Department), nor did you have any intention of working with me to fill out a permit for all of the temporary events that might occur at the airport. During the meeting, you stated that DEP, specifically Bob McCollum, had informed you that it was not necessary to file for or obtain a permit from the Conservation Commission for any temporary event. ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Richard Guisto Page 2 April 11, 1997 This was a surprise to me so at that time, I told you that I would contact Mr. McCollum to verify the information, and even called him while you were sitting there. Unfortunately, I was unable to speak with him, but left a message on his voice mail. At that point I informed you that if Mr. McCollum gives me the same interpretation that was given to you, I would accept it as a ruling under the Wetlands Protection Act. However, I also told you that DEP had no jurisdiction over the City's Wetland Protection Ordinance, and that I had no ability to apply the decision towards the city's Ordinance and the issue had to be decided by the Conservation Commission. Later that week, I did speak to Mr. McCollum, who confirmed what you had told me and I stated that I would abide by that ruling under the Wetlands Protection Act. At that time, I informed Mr. McCollum the reason the Commission asked for a filing was to have a paper trail showing that the Commission determined that the proposed events would not have any impact on the flood plain. However, the Commission's belief was if they did not know what all of the activities were during each event, they could not determine whether or not there would be any impact. Also during our conversation, I asked him how could we determine if there would be an impact if a filing did not occur and what we should do if there was some form of alteration due to an event. His reply was that the Department did not believe that temporary events would effect the flood plain but if an alteration did occur, the Commission should take all enforcement actions necessary to correct the violation. To that I replied "that is exactly what the Commission would like to avoid having to do." Additionally, I asked Mr. McCollum to clarify the information being given out by his department. Specifically, people have been told that if they have a trailer, it is on wheels, and is in the flood plain, it is not considered a permanent structure, therefore it does not require compensatory storage. He agreed, because "they would most likely move it, if there was a flood." I then asked when a trailer would be considered a permanent structure, especially if it had not been moved for many years. To this he had no answer. It was at that time I informed him of another site, which has a trailer that was not removed, as per the requirements of the permit issued. Finally, I asked Mr. McCollum to call you and explain that his ruling was only under the Wetlands Protection Act and not the City's Wetland Protection Ordinance. He agreed. I also informed him that if you wanted to approach the Commission and ask them to make the same interpretive ruling regarding temporary events, that I would bring it to the Commission, if requested. Please note, that throughout this process, I informed anyone who asked, that I would abide by the DEP's ruling, however, I did not have the ability to extend that ruling to the City's Wetland Protection Ordinance. Which brings us to today. If you want to appear before the Commission to request they make the same interpretation as the DEP, please call or submit a written request to get on the Commission's agenda. Richard Guisto Page 3 April 11, 1997 On a closing note, after last falls "media blitz" over this same situation, we talked and I believe you told me "I'm not a bad guy and am willing to work with you. I know I have a temper (something about being Italian), but instead of talking to the reporters, if there's a problem, call me. You can even yell at me if you want, I'll do the same and we'll work things out." Well, I've conducted myself as we agreed, however you have not. You have not called to discuss the matter further when we disagreed, in fact you have made statements on the radio and to other people about me, and how I (or the "City") have a hidden agenda and am "out to get the airport". Please note, I have no hidden agenda, nor do I intend to "get the airport." I enforce the laws of the Commonwealth (the Wetlands Protection Act) and the Ordinances of the City (the Wetlands Protection Ordinance) and when push comes to shove I have to stand by the decisions made by the Conservation Commission until told otherwise, nothing personal. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hail • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation • Historic Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals • Northampton Parking Commission Richard Giusto Russ Benjamin c/o Att. Leon W. Malinofsky, Jr. 182 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 May 14, 1996 Messrs. Giusto, Benjamin & Malinofsky: This letter is in reply to one sent to me by Attorney Malinofsky. I have answered his questions as best as possible, using the same numbers as in his inquiry. 1. The airport is located in the Special Conservancy (SC) District. 2. The City does not content that the airport is in a wetland. However, it is located within a floodplain, which is a regulatable resource area under both the State Wetlands Protection Act and the City of Northampton's Wetlands Protection Ordinance (WPO). The area owned by the airport which is adjacent to the Connecticut River contains bordering vegetated wetland, bordering land subject to flooding, bank and endangered species habitat, all regulatable under the WPA & City's WPO. There are many special requirements for work in resource areas all of which are clearly listed within the WPA and the city's WPO. 3. The airport is located in both a Special Conservancy District and a Floodplain. Again the special requirements are outlined within the WPA & WPO for work in a resource area and within the City's Zoning Ordinance (too numerous to list). 4. Based on the 1965 topographic plans and the FEMA flood maps, it appears that the entire airport is located within a floodplain. If an applicant/owner disputes this information, it is up to the applicant to provide a detailed survey showing all topographic elevations on the site, to the Conservation Commission with a Request for Determination in order to change it's status. 5. Additional laws, rules and regulations, aside from the City's Zoning Ordinance, which applies to the site, include the Wetland's Protection Act, the City's Wetland Protection Ordinance, and Special Events permits (as required by Zoning). The City's Zoning ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Ordinance specifically states that "any use not listed shall be construed to be prohibited". This means that any temporary event (not specifically allowed under zoning) must receive a permit from the City Council to be in compliance with Zoning. The Wetlands Protection Act & Regulations are available at the State Book store, located in Springfield, MA. Certified copies of the City's WPO is available from the City Clerk's Office, during regular business hours. 6. The fairgrounds are located within the UR -A Zoning District. 7. The fairgrounds are located within a floodplain. 8. The fairgrounds are an allowed use under the definition of "agriculture" and are pre- existing non -conforming. Any change extension and/or alteration of the use would require one of two things: a Finding or a Special Permit. Also, because they are located within a floodplain, all activities are regulatable under the WPA & City's WPO. The Fairgrounds, unlike the airport, have filed for and received a five year maintenance permit from the Conservation Commission, under the WPA & City's WPO. 9. The Airport is grandfathered as an airport, only. Any change, extension and/or alteration requires a Finding from the Zoning Board of Appeals. This would include the expansion of the airport to conduct fairs, events, and even offer skydiving lessons. None of which were being offered when the City's Zoning made the airport nonconforming. Also the sale of firearms from the premises requires a Finding, of which there is no record. The "firing range" was not in existence when the Zoning came into effect, and therefore requires a use Variance for it's operation is required (which has never been requested or received). The applicable regulations have been outline, however, due to the lengthy nature of regulations, it is not possible to include them with this fax. There is much discussion that needs to occur, and many regulations that need to be addressed. I look forward to our meeting later today. Sincerely, Paulette L. Kuzdeba, Senior Tanner LEON W. MALINOFSKY, JR. ATTORNEY AT L Aw 18 2 MAIN STREET NORTHAMPTON. MA 0 1060 - 3 104 TELEPHONE (4 1 3) 584-7050 FAx (413) 552-1 ae5 Paulette Kuzdeba via FAX to 586-3726 Dear Ms. Kuzdeba, First, please excuse me if I have misspelled your name. EMAIL LWM Q MAP.GOM May 13, 1996 I and my clients, Dick Giusto and Russ Benjamin of the Northampton Airport look forward to our meeting tomorrow with you, the mayor, city counsel et al. In advance of that meeting it would be helpful to have your written answers to the following questions: 1. In what zone does the city contend the Airport is located? 2. Does the city contend the Airport is a Wetland? If so, are there any special requirements for uses in Wetlands? What are these? 3. Does the city contend all or any part of the Airport is located in either a floodplain or a special conservancy district? If yes, please say which, and give any special requirements for uses in a) floodplains of the type in which the airport is located; and b) special conservancy districts. 4. Does the city contend that all of the airport is in a floodplain or special conservancy district? If not, please identify which part or parts. 5. Please identify, aside from the city zoning ordinance, any set of laws, rules or regulations which the city contends applies to uses of the Airport property. The most helpful thing the Airport could receive in advance of our meeting is faked xerocopies (to the fax no. above) of any ordinances, rules or regulations the city contends apply to uses of Airport property. 6. In what zone does the city contend the Fairgrounds are located? 7. Does the city contend the Fairgrounds are in either a floodplain or a special conservancy district? If yes, please say which. 8. If the Fairgrounds are "grandfathered" for certain pre-existing non - 0 conforming uses, please say what these are. 9. If, similarly, the Airport is "grandfathered" for certain pre-existing non- conforming uses, please say what these are. Written answers and copies of applicable regulations would be most appreciated. Our goal is to bring the airport into lawful compliance and to assure all parties are treated fairly. Thanks sincerely. Your Leo W. Malinofsky, Jr. "-I. LEON W. MALINOFSKY, JR. ATronN" AT LAw 162 MAPS Swtarr Norrrr Amprom, MA o 1000 - 3104 7tLlPN0M1C <q 131 ZGd-7V$0 f.MAlt LWN (W ~.C4M Po,x cd 1 31 3 81-1 alga May 6, 1996 Hon. Mary Ford City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Via Fax to 5$ Dear Mayor Ford, Elements, as you know, conspired to squash the Craft Fair which was to be held last Saturday-- the fair did not occur. That may be just as well conxidering the hot bone of contention it had become. bids' Day, on the other hand, run by the women at New England Air Connection came off successfully Sunday, albeit with drastically reduced attendance over the`past five years. You may be aware that Saturn of Hadley, which had agreed to sponsor�rhe hot dogs, hamburgers and beverages pulled out in response to rhe publicly voiced opposirion of your office and council. NEAC had managed to provide for a helium tank, however, so the kids who carte could have balloons before they took their plane rides. There were about fifteencars parked in the airport parking lot Sunday when I stopped by at about 11 A.M. It was, on the whole, a fairly bedraggled event this year. I write to describe Mr. Gusto's and Mr. Benjamin's feelings about the conduct of the events and controversy surrounding their plans for last Saturday, I would like to make the fallowing points: 1. Kilo' Day has been held and operated by the women at NERC, which is a small business renting space from Mr. Giusto, for the last five or so years. To my understanding no special permit has ever been sought or required for this community -oriented, public-spirited event until this year, despite the presence at Kids' Day in the past of vendors, food booths and craftspeople which contribute to the hoped-for festive atmosphere. 2. Some or all of the proceeds realized by NEA►C from Kids' Day go to cancer research charidex. It is Mr. Giusto's supportable position that small ,events of this kind, whether coupled with a crafts show or nor, ZO'd £00'ON 62:VT 96`ZO fiPW b66ZV8G2TVT:-131 SM3N NOIN 0 whose purpose is not commercial or mercenary, are legitimate ancillary uses of the business for which he is zoned, in the nature of garnering community goodwill for the Airport. 3. Events such as the Scottish Games, which the Council approved, require the closing of the airport to transient traffic for up to three days with the consequential loss of fuel sale revenues. The $1,500.00 to be received by Mr. Giusro will not even cover this loss and the cleanup expense. it therefore seems difficult to view his agreement to host them games as a profit -motivated idea. He would like to ask you to consider what his motive might be instead, 4. Last year a member of your administration called my office. t regret 1 cannot remember her name. The gist of her message was that members of the administration were unhappy with the Airport's cavalier scheduling of on-site events without pre approval in the form of the appropriate permits. The gist of my response was that the Airport wanted very much to be a good neighbor and in compliance with all regulations and laws, and therefore would appreciate the opportunity to sit down with members of the adminisrration to discuss what uses would, in the administration's view, require a permit and which would not. Despite Mr. Giusto's and Mr. Benjamin's continuing interest in such a meeting, it did not occur. S. The same offer has been made this time, without positive response, as yet, from your office, the Council, or any City department. 6. Despite the fact that Kids' Day, in very much the form planned for it this year, has been a longstanding event in Northampton, members of your administtatiotn have both undertaken personal communication with this year's arrendees in an ical and to dissuade them from tratisactine with -him _ Th or an event for which no permit exists (it islegal--it merely exposes the con foi-liar : Y ro t t�o'ther if the permit is not later obtained), but they are slanderous per se. Interference with advanrageous, contract or tmsinc53 relations lTa remediable tort. No damages need be proved in an instance of disparagcmenr of one's trade or business reputation. 7. A representative of the Conservation Commission has made public remarks, repeated in the press, to the effect Conservation Commission approval; is ncodcd for Airport events. To our knowledge though the Airport lies partly in a flood plain, it is not a wetland. If there is some basis for Conservation Commission involvement in matters of this kind, we would like to hear it. Mr. Giusto regards the public statements by the member of the Commission as tending to disparage him in his reputation and business, in that ty► impute to him an inrexst,onA! 20'd 200'ON 62:VT 96`ZO fiew b66ZVSG2TVI:-131 SM3N NOIN disregard of lawhil requirements. 8. The administration has made statements, again repeated in the press, to the effect "draconian measures" are planned, and that the administration may bar "temporary events" of any kind at the airport. If this barT is put in.plgee with the city's zoning power, it would be illegal as shot zorinz a tion �y.'thc`admin si'—'rracto _ — _ I! ' re elates coir �ecould fi� e lly, A s ect stn subjected to close appellate scrutiny. t haft fair organizer, w o ismost ells esstd jT� s{`e'city"s action, recounts that Councilor Tyntoczko woke her with an 11!00 telephone call, .and at first refused to identify herself; then proceeded to advise her that the Airport's actions in contracting with them were both illegal and unethical, and suggested there were other sites in Northampton where no permit would be required. -Mr. Giusto is under the impression tha Councilor even stared thar rhe Airport was f�_7on�lhus ,; N mmn where such a permit would,�e requiredent�; taken with the Council's public condemnation of the Airport in applying for and procuring a permit .for the Lollapalooza tour, suggest a demonstrable, Airport -specific animus, or personal dislike, on the part of the administration. _ J Mr. Giusto stili hopes to meet with city officials and establish some ground rules to keep these disputes out of the papers and the Courts. Please advise if this is possible. Yo sincerely, Leon W. Malinofsky, Jr. cc: Daily Hampshire Gazette Springfield Morning Union VO'd iOO'ON Ob:VT 964ZO field b66Zb8S2IbI:-131 SM3N NOIN LEON W- MALINOFSKY, JR, Arr0XNXV Ar LAw 1132 MAIN 3TWEr NortrmAMMON. MAC 1060 • 3104 7neM.oN� {41 �> ��A•791s0 rAx t4 1 3: 582-1 sea EW.SL 0 -WN 9 Mop. Com ERRATUM: Add to numbered par. 4 of open letter to Hoa. Mary Ford: "Nevertheless, they have dutifully applied for, and received, permits you required for a nrimber of special events since then." SO'd iOO'ON Ib:bl 96`ZO fiPW b66Zb8S2TVT:-131 0 SM3N NOIN City of *6"hampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development -Clty Hall' 210 Main Street • - - - _ Northampton, MA 01060 . (413) 386.8950 . community and Economic Development . Conservation. Hietode Preservation • Planning Board* Zoning Board of Appeals Conservation Commission Date Submitted _1 -) /,2- 7 OPD Staff Review Legal Notice Gazette (Notice 5 Bus Legal Notice Posted Map ID Filer s Days before Letter to Owner Agenda Posted- COPY osted- Copy to Conservation Commission Members Order/Determination filled out (w/out conditions) _ Conservation Commission Hearing Conservation Conservation Decision Decision filed with Registry of Deeds Decision to Building Inspector Decision to DEP Decision to PB/ZBA Permit entered on Computer Decision filed OPD (Memorex: ConCom\CCINSTRU 4./3/92) CITY OF NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS OFFICE OF THE CITY SOLICITOR Janet M. Sheppard, Esq. City ,solicitor June 11, 1999 Harry Jekanowski, Esq., Clerk Hampshire Superior Court 15 Gothic Street PO Box 1119 Northampton, MA 01060 RE: Northampton Airport, Inc. v. ZBA of the City of Northampton et al Civil Action No.: 98-213 Dear Attorney Jekanowski: Enclosed for filing with the Court, please find a Stipulation of Dismissal for the above captioned matter. Very t ul s n �. Sheppard, Esq. JMS:msg Enclosure cc: Mayor Marg Ford Wayne Feiden Anthony Patillo Leon Malinofsky, Esq. 76 Moronic Street, Nord mpton MA 01060 (413) 585-5889 FAX: (413) 586-2937 THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT HAMPSHIRE, ss. Civil No. 98-213 NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, Inc., Plaintiff, V. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF NORTHAMPTON, and its members MARK NEJAME, RICHARD GHISELIN, LARRY SNYDER; and ANTHONY PATILLO, Building Commissioner of the City of Northampton, Defendants STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL (Rule 41(a)(1)(ii)) Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(ii), the parties herein have stipulated that this action on behalf of Northampton Airport, Inc., plaintiff herein, be dismissed as to all defendants. THE PLAINTIFF By: -+i �--- Leon W. Malinofsky, Jr. Its Attorney 182 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 (413) 584-7950 BBO #315740 Agreed: t M. Sheppard, Esq. ')") Attorney for Defendants 76 Masonic Street Northampton, MA 01060 (413) 585-5889 BBO #457820 12 March, 1999 t • 4 1 ' day W14 y JoAeW' •jr. 's;uesnW •g p!Aen :p8AoiddV xJelo A113 ' -piscl►umis ou 4s qo 'p011oauo pug pau!epao'sRu!peaa 0MI passed `popuadsnssaIna 0661 Z ddd ,I!3uno3 Apo ui ' zaqdp ' ZV-V UOT409S pup TV -V UOT409S 'A aToTgaV qO SSONVNIGUO 30 SQOO u04dmpggaoN 90 suoTSTnoad aao quTM agony gDTq UT p944Tivaad aq Xpiu 'p944T aad fou sT asn ao Juana goes gOTgM LIT �oTa�STp bUTLIOZ p LIT 30 sTaoapd ao Taoapd p uo buTzan000 asn ao p94POOT PupT 4uana Xapaodwa;. V s4u9ng Xapaodmay u snn01101 ST p-ea.z 04 ` �- .zaquznu aq o3 uol s Sut -puauzz aq 's14asngazss X 'uojduzv.zo V XIQN cl P `�q Pa g3 H 3010 aql Jo sao"urp.10;o apo0 atp 3ug,L •i uo?129,S : snnol -loJ sT `Palquzassv 1puno0 A310 ut `uogduregjjox jo Ajz0 ag3 3o Irauno0 A3t0 age Aq pautepzo 3i aa DUTUOZ p • sasn �apaoda� ao� Sulpinoad .......... ...... � .�.�.... a.aaquznu oq o3 uor.}aas z Sulppe Xq papuauzz 3 XIQN� dy aq s asngassszyq uoiduregjjox jo f410 `saouzurpz0 Jo aPoO ag3 3L'tR Surpreozd `spasngazsnIq `uojduzzgjjoX 3o fz0 ag3 Io aauuutp.z0 uy OR HOHVHIQgp aL'�''a u�snL1 g--pTn Q "zoo L1' do XoIJV(I ajgjt00aU aHZ xo lfl puu pazpung outW puzsnogZ au0 Mej ag, UI S1••LaSf1H0vSSvw U-01 dlundIT-111 JIT COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL T DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTE N WESTERN REGIONAL OFFICE WILLIAM F. WELD Governor TRUDY CORE Secretary ARGEO PAUL CELLUCCI Lt. GovernorAVID B. STRUHS OCT4 04 1W Commissioner Robert Guisto Northampton Airport Box 221 Northampton, MA 01061 Re: Request for Superseding Determination of Applicability, Old Ferry Road, Northampton Dear Mr. Guisto: A representative of this office conducted an on-site meeting on September 19, 1996 at the location referenced above. This was in response to your appeal of the Northampton Conservation Commission's Positive Determination of Applicability for areas (lots) that comprise the Northampton Airport property, and for work described as special events. These events include, but are not limited to, car shows, programs for children and concerts. Discussion at the meeting focused on regulation of activities at the airport in an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. The entire site is within the jurisdictional area Bordering Land Subject to Flooding, the 100 -year floodplain of the Connecticut River. The areas where the proposed activities are to take place are grassed and paved portions of the facility. Your explanation of impacts to the resource area was that temporary and/or portable structures were erected on the site to provide support for the events. The Department understands there would be no fill associated with those events specifically mentioned in the Request for Determination of Applicability. Shortly after the conclusion of such events you indicate the site is returned to its original condition in order to resume ordinary airport business. The "other events similar", described in the Request, are not identified and subsequently these events cannot be clearly recognized as to whether there would be impacts on flood storage capacity as a result of preparation for the event, the event itself and/or any activity related thereto. The Department is of the opinion that this issue of the lack of information to allow the issuing authority to accurately determine jurisdictional projects and regulatory needs is evident in this particular determination process. The Request is vague in its concluding phrase which attempts to provide blanket coverage for any other similar event taking place at the airport. The submission of insufficient information makes it difficult for the issuing authority to render decisions that adequately protect the "interests" of the Act found to be significant to the resource area where work is proposed. The Regulations, at 310 CMR 10..5(3)(a)(2), state that the request shall include sufficient information to allow the conservation commission to determine whether the proposed work will alter an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. The Department is of the opinion that the placement of structures or objects in the floodplain in conjunction with activities such as circuses, car shows, concerts and other events that are transient in nature is not considered removing, filling, dredging or altering of Land Subject to Flooding. The activities associated with the aviation business, such as the parking of aircraft, likewise, should not be considered activities to be regulated. 436 Dwight Street • Springfield, Massachusetts 01103 • FAX (413) 784-1149 • TOO (413) 746-6620 • Telephone (413) 784-1100 0 Printed on Recycled Paper (20% Post Consumer) As stated above, the Regulations 310 CMR 10.00, identify the process for determining jurisdictional resource areas and those activities that need to be regulated through the wetland permit process. Please be advised that under Procedures, at 310 CMR 10.05(3)(2)(b), Determinations of Applicability are valid for three years from the date of issuance. These decisions do not stand for all time, requiring project proponents to approach the conservation commission when the three year period lapses. Decisions rendered by the Department under the Act and Regulations do not supersede local bylaw requirements or relieve applicants from securing other local state or federal permits, if necessary. Please find attached the Department's Superseding Determination of Applicability for the lots identified as comprising the Northampton Airport property and for the proposed activities clearly identified in the Request, but not for "other similar events" mentioned in the Request. These unidentified activities should be clearly described in a subsequent Request for Determination of Applicability once they are known. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Robert McCollum of this office, at (413) 784-1100, ext. 228. A Very trul David Kowland/ Acting Regia al Engineer Bureau of Resource Protection JTM/WW108 JSDAGSTO Certified MAil # P 237 892 323, return receipt requested. CC: Northampton Conservation Commission City Hall, 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 310 CMR: ,RPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL -.PROTECTION 10.99: continued DEP File No. N/A Form 2 (To be provided by DEP) City/Town Northampton Applicant Guisto Commonwealth of Massachusetts Date Request Filed August 26, 1996 SUPERSEDING Determination of Applicability Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, § 40 From The Department of Environmental Protection (the Department) _ Issuing Authority TO Robert Guisto Same (Name of person making request) (Name of property owner) Address Box 221, Northampton Airport Address Same This determination is issued and delivered as follows: ❑ by hand delivery to person making request on (date) X by certified mail, return receipt requested on October 4, 1996 (date) Pursuant to the authority of G.L. c. 131, §40, the Department has considered your request for a Determination of Applicability and its supporting documentation, and has made the following determination (check whichever is applicable): Location: Street Address Old Ferry Road Norhtampton Lot Number: Map #25. Lots #1. 15-001 16 17 18 19 53 71-021 71-024 and 71-025 This Determination is positive. 1. X The area described below, which includes all/part of the area described in your request, is an Area subject to Protection under the Act. Therefore, any removing, filing, dredging or altering of that area requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. LOT #s REFERENCED ABOVE 2. ❑ The work described below, which includes all/part of the work described in your request, is within an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act and will remove, fill, dredge or alter that area. Therefore, said work requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. 4/1/94 310 CMR - 399 310 CMR: &--ARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL -RROTECTION 10.99: continued 3. ❑ The work described below, which includes all/part of the work described in your request, is within the Buffer Zone as defined in the regulations, and will alter an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. Therefore, said work requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. This Determination is negative: 1. ❑ The area described in your request is not an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. 2. X The work you described in your request is within an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act, but will not remove, fill, dredge, or alter that area. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent. SPECIAL EVENTS: CAR SHOWS, KIDS DAY AND WORPED TOUR. (CONCERT) 3. ❑ The work you described in your request is within the Buffer Zone, as defined in the regulations, but will not alter an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent. 4. ❑ The area described in your request is subject to Protection Under the Act, but since the work you describe therein meets the requirements for the following exemption, as specified in the Act and the regulations, no Notice of Intent is required: Issued by the Departmept of E Signature U On this / z day of 19 ,J �a , before me personally appeared David Howland , to me known to be the person described in, and who executed, the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she executed the same is/her free act and ,� �U 3 Notary ublic My C mission Wires T. his Superseding Determination does not relieve the applicant from complying with all other applicable federal, state or local institutes, ordinances, by-laws or regulations. This Superseding Determination shall be valid for three years from the date of issuance. The applicant, the owner, any person aggrieved by the Superseding Determination, any owner of land abutting the land upon which the proposed work is to be done, or any ten persons pursuant to G.L. c. 30A, § 10A, are hereby notified of their right to request an adjudicatory hearing pursuant to G.L. c. 30A, § 10, providing the request is made by certified mail or hand delivery to the Department, with the appropriate filing fee and Fee Transmittal Form as provided in 310 CMR 10.03(7) within ten days from the date of issuance of this Superseding Determination, and addressed to: Docket Clerk, Office of General Counsel, Department of Environmental Protection, One Winter Street, Boston, MA 02108. A copy of the request shall at the same time be sent by certified mail or band delivery to the conservation commission, the applicant, and any other party. A notice of Claim for an Adjudicatory Hearing shall comply with the Department's Rules for Adjudicatory Proceedings, 310 CMR 1.01(6), and shall contain the following information: (a) the DEP wetlands File Number, name of the applicant, and address of the project; (b) the complete name, address and telephone number of the party filing the request, and, if represented by counsel, the name and address of the attorney; (c) the names and addresses of all other parties, if known; (d) a clear and concise statement of (1) the facts which are grounds for the proceeding, (2) the objections to this Superseding Determination, including specifically the manner in which it is alleged to be inconsistent with the Department's Wetlands Regulations, (310 CMR 10.00) and (3) the relief sought through the adjudicatory hearing, including specifically the changes desired in the Superseding Determination; (e) a statement that a copy of the request has been sent to the applicant, the conservation commission and each other party or representative of such party, if known. Failure to submit all necessary may result in a dismissal by the Department of the Notice of Claim for an Adjudicatory Hearing. 4/1/94 310 CMR - 400 WILLIAM F. WELD Governor ARGEO PAUL CELLUCCI Lt. Governor M COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION WESTERN REGIONAL OFFICE - -- ------------ Robert Guisto Northampton Airport P.O. Box 221 Northampton, MA 01061 Dear Mr Guisto: 5` 61996 SEP 0 4 1996 TRUDY CORE Secretary DAVID B. STRUHS w � Commissioner RE: Request for Superseding Determination of Applicability, Northampton. Airport, Robert Guisto This office is in receipt of your appeal of the Northampton Conservation Commission's Determination of Applicability for the above referenced project. Although this office is in receipt of your appeal, the Department will determine if the materials received by the Department can be accepted as a valid appeal under the regulatory requirements of 310 CMR 10.05(7). As part of the Department's review of this project, a representative of this office will be conducting an informal on-site meeting. This informal meeting will be held on Thursday, September 19, 1996 at 10:00 a.m. at the Airport. All interested parties are invited to attend. The Request for a Determination of Applicability filed by you on July 5, 1996 does not provide a description of proposed work. Please submit a description of the existing site conditions and proposed work that is the subject of this Request, as well as a plan showing the parcels listed. The Department also requests that you provide proof that the appeal was served to the Conservation Commission. This information should be submitted to the Department prior to the date ofthe on-site meeting. Please be advised that no work subject to jurisdiction under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act may proceed until the Department issues a Final Determination for this project. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact the undersigned at (413) 784-1100. Ver my yours, bert McCollum Section Chief Wetlands Program KHWW110 DOCNAME Certified Mail P 237 802 804, return receipt requested. CC: Northampton Conservation Commission Certified Mail P 237 802 805, return receipt requested. 436 Dwight Street • Springfield, Massachusetts 01103 • FAX (413) 784-1149 • TOO (413) 746-6620 • Telephone (413) 784-1100 0 Printed on Recycled Paper (20% Post Consumer) � � �0/� S�✓/.�T� °� CO/h/�Sio.J 610-570 /ate /41*2FoR7- L m f 9/5/96 0 \ Mr. Robert McCollum Section Chief wetlands program Department of Environmental Protection - 436 Dwight St. Springfield, Ma. 01103 Dear Mr. McCollum: In response to your letter of Sept. 4, 1996 The Reason for my appeal is because the local conservation commission and myself at a public meeting had discussed this subject and I was told they would not make a determination at that time and would work out an agreement with me on what I would need a permit for and that they felt that I should not need a permit for car shows etc. I then left the meeting. A few weeks later I received the letter from the Conservation Commission that they voted that night that I would need a permit for all my events regardless. Let me explain what we do at our special events. antique car shows, Highland Games (Scottish fest), Music concerts, Kids Aviation day, Craft shows, and other events that in no way affect the 100 year flood plain. Also we do not construct any structures that are permanent or in any effect the soil that they our on. The type of structures that we used are rented tents, stages that are on trucks, food venders that are self sufficient. There is in no way that any of our events affect the flood plain or in any impact the environment in any way. This is why we feel that after reading the environmental laws of the commonwealth, that we should need a conservation permit , also we have been having this type of events for fourteen years and until kids day 1996 we never needed a permit. I have enclosed a plot plan of the airport and marked the areas that we use. Thank.you!"r 1 Richard usto CC Northampton Conservation Commission TO CMR 10.99 Form 2 ..a Commonwealth of Massachusetts DEP Fae No.2246- (To be wow0ed by D=P) Cdy,Town Northampton y Amicant Date Request Filed Determination of Applicability Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c.1.31, §40 & NORTHAMPTON WETLANDS PROTECTION ORDINANCE From Northampton Conservation Comm * Issuing Authority To -14A Dt/{ i r 01^ �ic,�tanr^,� i�}•moi 11 ' arrin (Name of person making req est) (Name of property owner) Address _9.Ll�-� � oQ Address � � �� � --� 1Jor i ha, , r jv-v-) I AM , O 10 le This determination is issued and delivered as follows: "- by hand delivery to person making request on (date) " r 10 by certified mail, return receipt requested on (date) Pursuant to the authority of G.L. c. 131, §40, the Northampton Conservation Comm -i scion has considered your request fora Determination of Applicability and its supporting documentation, and has made the foilowing determination (check whichever is applicable): Location: Stri Lot Number. This eterminations ositiv 1. The area descnbe�below, Mich includes all/part of the area described in your request, r a Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. Therefore, any removing, filling, dredging or altering of that area requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. - .Even t +o Ztl e n+ WO' Ll e t mL`Le 111was {- ('or- pefe,-►n � �3 �rr� Pat- 8 CA . - Z ,iG/,MaE ►r1%nao eb �,►'r ► C'S �rs� dJow%>' u.�,-e �� O V CL, JJO f. 6P � k,0+ Q0Ci. i 35manCep 0 f' arl d� C4-nPi 4•'"D"'5 tD 0001 9CY' Va-'t 0T% C to r» 1 9 5 1 0'r T 2. J The work described below, which includes all/part the work described in your request. is within an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act and will remove, fill, dredge or alter that area. There- fore. said work requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. Effective 11/10/89 2-1 3. The work described below, which includes all; part of the work descnoec•in your reauest, is within the Buffer Zone as defined In the regulations. and will alter an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. Therefore, said work requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. This Determination is negative: 1. G The area described in your request is not an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. 2.- 0 The work described in your request is within an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act, but will not remove, fill, dredge, or alter that area. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent. 3. a The work described in your request is within the Buffer Zone, as defined in the reaulations, but will not alter an Area Subject to Protection tinder the Act. Therefore, said work does not require the filino of a Notice of Intent. 4. G The are2 described in your request is Subject to Protection Under the Act, but since the work described therein meets the requirements for the following exemption,as specified in the Act anis the regulations, no Notice of Intent is required: Issued by Northampton Conservation Commission • �,/, "RA This Determination must be sioned by a majority of the Conservation Commission. On this._ personally day of 1 °q4- , before me , to me known to be the person described in, and who executed, the foregoing instrument, and aCknaaled-,edihat he!sh$ executed sa as his/her free act and deed. OL Notary Public My com ission expires This Determination toes not relieve ine applicant from complying with all other applicable feceral. state c, iota! statues, ordinances. by-laws or regulations. Tnis Determination snalt be valid for three years form the Gate of issuance The applicant, the owner. any person agarieveL' by this Determination, any owner of land abuning the lana upon whic 1 the proposed work is to be cone, or any ten resioents of the city or town in whim such land is located, are hereby notif ieo of tneir richt to revues: the Depanmen: a`m Environmental Protection to issue a superseding Determination of Applicability, providing ine reauest is made by cenifiec mail or hand delivery to the Depanmen;, wi:h the appropriate filino tee and Fee Transmittal Form as provided in 310 CM=, 10.03j7) within ten days from I" date of issuance of this Determination. A copy of ine request shall at the same time be sant by cenifiec mail or nano delivery to the Conservation Commission and the a! ahcan;. 2-2A co 55* Cr Ce to ,° �a s PIK�6: Of c�+ _ .., ..,cr . C:. :7 � to ,.j _ p, �—+ ae` �C (D." I.40 o rw 91 A. tv12, - ElfDoFo�o 0o O too o `c goa oti�op, oro� A'a � c�'0�• � ���a, ewe o � �� o �a:o ra depend on coueccmg mun- $lheyoid sug–g"ted additional .4ney could be used to hire a par - ,,al for much of the tax .title qrk at $35 an hour, and that tore money needs to be budgeted I -send delinquent properties to .ate land court at $310 apiece. i+ } rirpo&. Owner R isles state help .c ntinued from Page B1. r • mmlissioners. "And I'll do it vih a smile on my face." Out after receiving the com-, nission's ruling that every event tow requires . a permit, Giusto ;a4l the officials were. overplay- At�regulatory hand. �T re not: my mother and faCier," he said. ."If - I'm doing ;61pething wrong, tell me and I'll stop. But -don't jerk me around." Piusto.. said the. • ruling ap-; paged to violate the spirit of the earlier meeting. - $uzdeba said the ruling mere- ly)#ted the current policy gov-. erring the airport,and that it in no;.* way prevent,, :. Giusto from working out a five�year• plan. Under such a *a, she said, he wold describe-. the °'*ox* being do e, Whether anyfenipgo: ;or 1 I flonteff uit !lU e4 as a studio Continued from Page B1 car and try to get in it," he said. Collins, who will also super- vise activity at the new John F. Kennedy Middle School pool, came up with the idea for the sand castle contest afterwitness- Ing a similar event in Acapulco. "They had the beach split up for at least a mile," he said. "There were some really fantas- tic designs." The older winners in the. Mexi- co competition, received college scholarships, for prizes; Collins said. The rewards were more modest yesterday, consisting of certificates for free ice cream and pizza. But, everyone came away, a winner thanks to the small turnout. Tessa and Luke Dowling of Westhampton, ages 8 ,and 5 re- Mtively, consulted with friend Thia. Agular, 8, of Greenfield over the fine points of excavat- ing their moat. "I think the moat is finished," said Agular. "This needs to be deeper," countered Tessa.. "I know that." Amy Weber, 16, of William- sburg, carefully shaped a spiral- ing sand form she said was going be peftunen,t ,structures : would be butt and..the effect of Ony wort to a,sun. "I wanted to make it into a "but o .. Y ." ; - e P castle somehow," she said, I 6iust49aid events such `as' a haven't really worked it out." Nearby, her friends Dave cr5ft t- a' conceit or.an an- ts e' r'�ow do nothing to the Spencer, 15, and David Sargen- fl and shouldn't ; require .ski 17, plunked down a series,of nuclear -reactor -shaped piles -that a eThey leave the airport in `ex-.. eventually became a fort. Spen- per said he originally intended to achy the:.. same shape _as it, was �m help his 8 -year-old brother Nich- "Camelot" Vie' °atd commissioners and olas build bot was barred from doing so by the rules Kisdek i qi trying to exert too of the contest much coe%rol over his *port. Even some non -contestants, got h 4Msy,.Y, Mayor. Mary_ Ford sand -castle fever: Amy Hamel ttxt�dwl. to. shut down a. fair because no Hatfield began working on- a her plahnedtirafts mermaid but stopped, when pe rni$ peen filed. That event . 21 -month-old daughter, Hannah was _ ixi due to rain, ' accidentally bonked herself in .filed Iast '.the chin with a pail, gab*t Ford, aide Mi- "It's hard, seeing her thing is eI ` Ward ,3 Councilor to mush out whatever I make," Charges., them .Hamel,said as a tear rolled down critftii Shoar:Ar-: Hannah's cheek.. . g.with that !The Recreation Department ainhpge�chcacter_: hopes. to- attract a larger field anis • lits pFivacy. next year. Blood drive NORTHAMPTON — A Hamp- shire County blood drive, co-spon- sored by Hotel Northampton and radio station WHMP-AM, will be K_ held Aug. from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. at the Hotel Northampton. Jewish open house AM HERST — Valley residents interested in knowing more about membership in -the Jewish Com- munity of Amherst are invited to an introductory evening with Rab- bi Sheila. Weinberg and board members on Aug: 29. at 7 at the JCA's social hall, 742 Main St. Those , attending can also tour the JGA buildings and hear about new and continuing programs. Children are welcome. Mount Tom micro hike NORTHAMPTON — Mount Tom State Reservation Interpre- tive Programs will hold a Mount Tom Micro -Hike Aug. 30 from 9 to 10:30 a.m. Hikers should meet at the Stone House. Free and open to the public, hikers will walk about 100 feet to view the small but important world around them. For more in- formation, call 527-4805. Adult walk AMFIERST.— The Department of Environmental Management will sponsor a Not -Over -The -Hill Adult Walk along the Southside Trail for everyone over 55 on Aug. 30 at 10:30-'a.m. at the Notch Visi- tor Center, Route 116. The event is Free and open to the public. Walkers are advised to wear good hiking shoes and to bring bug repellent. Reasonable accomodations are available on advance notice For more information, call 2883. English'fiower festi% AMHERST — The Second ditional English Flower. Fes at Grace Episcopal Church, I ed on the common, will be during the Labor Day weeken The church; decorated flowers from area gardens, w open to the public Aug. 31, fr a.m. to 4 p.m., Sept., 11 from to 4 p.m. and Sept. 2,• from 9 to 4 p.m. Music will be performed 1 church by local musicians at and 8 p.m. Tea will be served 3 to 4 p.m. for a donation of ;• Spot of Tea finale HADLEY The 1996 Pi Spot of Tea series will cor with, Louis Romao perfoj classical and jazz music o guitar on Aug.'31, With seats 2:30 and 3:30, p.m. at With. P Phelps -Huntington Museun River Drive. Adhnission is $6; which in, tea, pastries and music. No vations are necessary. Too available on.the half-hour additional fee of $4. For mi formation, call 5844699. Contra dancing. AAHiERST -- Contra di, with caller Susan Kevra wi a-rama, will be held Aug: 31 8:30 to 11:30 pm. at the 1► Library, South East St. The cost is $5 payable door. . For more informatio% a 9380 or 802-254-2874. Planning under way fad electric tar rate NORTHAMPTON — A friendly race of electric cars will make a return trip through the city next spring, but people interested in the Tour de Sol can start getting in- volved next month. The Northeast Sustainable En- ergy Association's American Tour de Sol road competition began eight years ago; and last year the cars stopped in Northampton as they made them way north. The rade runs from Waterbury, Conn., to Portland, Maine, and is coordi- nated along the route with schools f educational programs about Ooten ",of cars -that can run fit organizational meeting will tales place on Oct. 1, at 3:30 p.m., atthe Waterbury Region Conven- tio and - Visitor's Bureau. For more, information, call 7?4-6051. DiP r !ng' awaited at airport events . -t�SR't'E•TAMPT(111T �-,» Ce►nimiw unmental Protection and Northampton,. Air - r Giusto met a etor lad Veek. ied4" ' held after pealed. Conservation ►n on last month I f him to get ap- Ch a he plans an ie! rt. which lies in DEP ruling is- ex - e Giu#o has said most spe- onnts qt the airport need no because they don't perma- damage the area, commis- � claim they can't know that t seeing detailed plans: neighbors who oppose the project. Stop & Shop wants to subdivide the acre parcel into several coxrm-,tcial building lots, includ- ballot. Concern about the develop- ment's effect e- `he adjacent Bar- rett Street n, moi, however, has Atop the big top velopment of New 1 Newton, has twice offe rezone his property f Workers do the heavy lifting bofore the 80 -by -100 foot tent is raised on th Plow 'tliterary Contest sponsored by Amherst Area Chamber of Comuvsrof � tasting at Amherst College. Other events are scheduled Saturday and, Sund t ed, pos ; o_.es �I1g11t�1tOR'Ss fll �A Cosh But that doesn't mean the city's 'hope we dolt lttivo sw 4wbsi,,: getting off easy. ill ouni ill dize the "At some point, somebody. is'.` Free c ie tike Sf god to have to make that up'. ey reser"ISCcoUML ediicot' I farm until extra Thomas Scanlon, an outside ac-' year, mitran tb i 1M5,0@ rN'd f 18 �Ou countant who did an audit of the ' has about 1 W irr tr health farm's accounts, it told the comm- m 1M'otd tee be othea" ityyto ocher at BYvgSON Siestaynce: the state certifies .the thed lentary--yy-- city'g once a free cash ¢ear jn .' later ^ s state < < ,,. i e .StoH!►.Wlr 'r M June, Scanlon said there, 3s no tUA than fe� • , NQRT�IAMP'1'Ol The City to dose the ga . that if Wfi RFIn;! Com, will But he also said the state will with the wrtil atQ'd( wltii the , not let the city use the moniiy for q >,oAQ elit•at'ltlt-vocation- any other purpose. unfit the deficit to"be ab�e.t1 .. "F is paid off. 2Lml _ artcultufal•��ool,. since... "That's just fabulous," At -targe �i HAM B� of Nod4antoon �iffit�ttft�f DEPARTMENT OF BUILDNG INSPECTIONS INSPECTOR 212 Main Street ' Municipal Building Northampton, Mass. 01060 Mayor Ford 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 June 10, 1996 Subject: Warped Tour Concert at Airport July 30 Dear Mayor, I met with John Peters promoter of the Warped Tour Concert this afternoon along with Senior Planner Paulette Kuzdeba. The following details were worked out and agreed to by Mr. Peters: I. Application to Conservation Commission submitted for a determination, this hearing will occur June 24. 2. Clean up will be by a private contractor, contract will be in place 30 days before event and clean up will take place immediately after concert. 3. Site map will be prepared for stage locations, food, rock climbing wall etc. and submitted to our office ten days before event. 4. Binder for liability insurance ten days before concert, one million dollar coverage. 5. Police coverage by NPD and private security. 6. Food vending by independent contractor who will secure proper permits from Board of Health. 7. Area will be fenced in with a better fence than last years event. Sincerely, Anthony Patil Building Comm ssioner City of Northampton CC: City Council Members NORTHAMPTON CITY COUNCIL TEMPORARY EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION Applicant: Friends Of Children, Inc, by John Peters (MassConcerts) Applicant's Address:Peoples Inst., Gothic St., Northampton 01060 MassConcerts 11 Paige 11 Paige Street. Amherst. MA 01002 Applicant's Status:(civic, non-profit, religious organization, etc.) Non Profit (501(C)(3)1 - Childrens Advocacy Group Contact Person/Telephone Jane Lyons. 586-0011 John Peters, 2S6-4280 Name and Description of Event: "The War ed Tour" - Outdoor Alternative Music (Rock) daytime event witK--p-r-oFessional sporting demonstrations (skateboarding and rollerblading). Location: Northampton Airport, Old Ferry Road, Northampton Owner of Location if different than Applicant (attach letter of permission) Richard Giusto and Russ Benjamin dba Northampton Airport, Inc. Date(s)/Time of Event: Tuesday, July 30th - 1:00 pm - 8:00 pm ,,/Requested signage: (attach sketch showing wording and dimensions) Traffic control provisions/ Parking requirements: Parking on site ✓with posible additional parking rented from neighbors. Will work with Captain Wall to come to a mutually agreed upon number of off -duty police est. 8 - ***Attach site plan showing area in which event is to be held including location of (1) structures -to be used for event, including temporary structures erected for event, (2) exhibits%or displays (including vehicles, models, etc) if outside a permanent structure, (3) signs, (4) fencing or other crowd control and/or security devices, (5) signage, (6) pedestrian access. and vehicular access/parking, (7) any other relevant information Date: 5130116 p riCE9WE MAY 3 1 1996 CITY CLERKS OFFICE NORTHAMPTON. MA 01080 �_� L e/L­Z�1 Applicant Northampton Airport Inc, Po. box 22.E Northampton Ma 01061 5130196 To whom it way concern; Northampton Airport gives permission to the Friends Of Children to hold on July 30th 1896 an event t�78lled B4 T'hisevent was held t the airport Tour. If their are any Questions please call m last year and their were no problems. Y ichard D 1 c 1 0 V 1 MAY 3 1 1996 cmr CLEWS 0"" NORMWPMN, MA OIOW Internal Revenue Service District Director G.P.U. EOX 1.680 BROOKLYN+ NY 11202 Da tau SEP 8 1989 FRIENDS OF CHILDREN INC 2t 14AR*f4-4TftM NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 3'9 CirO��Ai C 14-'� , Dear Appl lc.;ints Department of the Treasury c Employer Ident i -f i cat icon Number: 22-29F;22EE Contact Person:: G ERALCl WATERS Contact Telephone Number: (71."-',) 780•-6160 Accountincl Period Ending J unci 'r)Ot h Foi,m 990 Req u i i•ed : Yes Addendum App I ifts: No _D.,LECE0VE M AY 3 1.1996 CITY CLERKS OFFICE NORTHAMPTON MA 01060 Based an intorma•ticen sufrpl iod, and assum incl your operations i,li I I bo as stated in your a;)pl icatian for recoclnition of exemption, swe have determined you are exe aipt fi•aa Federa 1 income tsar, wider .;vr.ti :1r, 301 (a) c,f the .In•ter na I Revenue Codo as nn orgarfization desc:ribed in section 501(,_)(3). We have, further edret:ermiiied that; y:-11 Are *nota pi-ivat,: f'c,undat;ion r!ithiI) the roeani•ng of section lt;09(a) of •thf: Code:, hf:.callse YOU ar,: tin orllan.iz3r:1on desci,ibEd ire sections G09(a) (1) a-nd 170(b) (1) 0)) (v.i),. If Your- soui,ces of support, e)r your purpe:%f:s, k.!,.-irac•ter•, or methe:10 ,:,f operation changev ple•ssfr lett us k•nori so i4e ca -n consider h- affect; of Kite change on yceur es;@apt stratus and Iottndition status. In the. --se -'•f j , i,min(1•. ment to yctur organiza•tianal hoeumeant; or bylaws+ plea!;e ';e,nd u-: rcipy M the: amended document or bylaws. A 1 spa, you should i of o rm us o -f to I I c h.t+ .;' 3 in your name or address. Since you si•fs aa•t-.& private •foundst inn 1 you are not -subject to the exc e:: taxes; under Chapter 42 of - tho Cade. 'Wowover, you are. n,: -t. auF,c,mat; is A I i, exeml,t from other Federal ekcisie .,taxes.- It have t.riy QIli2sti,:'na dGC,l,e: emp1c.-ymen-t, or other Federal taxa -;1 please let us know. Donors may deduct contributions, t,:- lie:,u as provided in siection 170 e:ef thf: Code.. Bequf:sts, legacif:sl dovifses, trawtfers, cer gilts to yeou or for viceur uric, are deductible for .Federal estate arid gift tax purppi;es i•f they meet -thf, applicable Ferovistions of Codfr swoons 2U` 59 2106+ arid 21[1._2. — Contribution deductions arer.•allcerrable to dc,nr..ers cooly tce the n.-xterit that their contributions are.giftr;l with no considerratior, recriive:d. Ticket pur- chasos and uimi lar pa•ymr!nts in ccen,.iunl:tion with fundraising event;!, ma'.., ree:,t neceissari ly qualify as deductible contributio'n,, depe:ndrerg oii the. c irc•,ni•- stanres . See Reven us Ru l I ng 67-2-461 p rill I e sheed i it Curnu i at i ver El u l I Pt i n 1,16 7 on page 1-.141 which sets forth guIdeIines regardiitg ti -it, :re:•ductIbi!,ty, chare- tablfa con•tributions l e)f paymfants trade ty taxpayf:rs fOr adnrii;�;ion 1.-a c. -thrr participation in fundraising activities for charity. Lette3r 1/47(0(I/CU) p r cE0vE MAY 3 1 1996 CITY CLERKS OFFICE �t NORTHAMPTON, MA 01080 i �af°ver MD O Ir O N fsb,9 ,0 caq WlJ4 ap Is � � Y . x Q (ts fa to N E 1 - N a-) N 'LJ W W +> 4-)0 fa rt �a x o w un un A Q r� d N O U fa' s'a N O O N a R u W s a Q J O a K (ts 4-) \ 's x 04 � o a. a M M; .1 �a LL I.Cra jq_j Q ,0 caq WlJ4 ap Is � � Y . x Q (ts fa to N E 1 - N a-) N 'LJ W W +> 4-)0 fa rt �a x o w un un A Q r� d N O U fa' s'a N O O N a R u W s a Q J O a K WILLIAM F. WELD Governor ARGEO PAUL CELLUCCI IA. Governor �ONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETri,� EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION WESTERN REGIONAL OFFICE Richard Giusto Northampton Airport Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. Giusto: TRUDY CORE Secretary DAVID B. STRUHS Commissioner As per our conversation, attached please find the pertinent sections of the MA Wetlands Regulations 310 CMR 10.00 as they relate to jurisdiction, rekuests for determination of applicability and bordering land subject to flooding. The Request for Determination of Applicability (RDA) process is inexpensive and straightforward. Within 21 days after submitting your completed 2 - page form, the Conservation Commission will issue its decision as to whether or not the activity you propose will "remove, fill, dredge or alter" a protected wetland resource area, in your case the 100 -year floodplain. The -.RDA process will enable the commission b''� assured that no additional clearing to review your proposal and of vegetation, excavation, etc. will occur. If you have not done so already, I urge you to call Paulette Kuzdeba at 586-6950 for assistance and additional information on Northampton's Wetland and Floodplain by-laws. If you have additional questions, please do not hesitate to call back. Very trulAde urs, `4P ' �L� Laurie Sas Wetlands Outreach s 436 Dwight Street • Springfield, Massachusetts 01103 • FAX (413) 784-1149 • TDD (413) 746-6620 • Tel*phon• (413) 784-1100 Clip Printed on Recycled Paper (20% Post coasumer) JUL-16-96 09:09 AM MassConcefts July 16, 1996 City of Northampton Conservation Commission Paulette Kuzdcba City I tall Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Paulette, P.01 Enclosed is a copy of my clean-up contract with G&H Landscaping of I lolyoke to clean the NorthaTTTpton Airport after the Warped lour concert. G&H is the same company that is employed by the Three County Fair for their clean-up. Io keep the site clean during the event i have rented :til garbage cans, purchased 200 garbage bags, and hired 10 people to empty the cans. The bags, will be brought to the perinteter of the site, then driven by golf cart to one of two dumpsiers 1 have rented. G&H will cultic through after the event with a sweeper truck and a crew of five people with gas powered blowers. Feel free to call me if you have any questions. MassConcerts 11 Poige Street, Amherst, MA 01002 Ph. (413) 256-4280 / tax. (413) 256, 1230 0 JUL-16-96 09:10 AM .—•-�— --• - -- ._ �,;� � tl ,111 � si at P.02 G & H LANDSCAPING, INC.' P.O. Box 1159 Holyoke, MA 01041 (413) 532-4858 - Fax (413) 533-4519 k ;rcienfinl - Cvrtfln�rttar • indu.5rrrc�l 1c. �t 3'0 rw7F_ AzSUMArrrr• �{ lata '_ vi'm a. !tr rft7r i � c S -��— Y.��~��1 `\\' GITt, ^.TAtF 0 it rr., ,Yj14 LtX:Ai!ONN « .— �. _..�!1 e� t . _ . . _.-Q lSJ� �..r _. — iv�RT//r�.•�qr �.,/ /r� r iPlo�/ti i JCA s•HlINE WO lwretry SUbM•f firwt'II14e{t.Cr G S1'rl axturime! far. ; F t r C-^"-Q.F..1.1.._ AxFws R-t.i'TN�:✓ /d] i,✓ '►. YPit, 7 .�,� .r �[ a S b�.�",v c�v.� -mss ..jv/- �✓c SS �/�r, �'f `-'rrp►h.~�el A.,�. ''•.L=. ..._ /'?t CT/ 7l(.�Lr .1i.'i'1� �, ,._ elf, 'rfl I J// Ca // mac T Lio,' Tt'7-- — plp jJ rxv p t1 i4r twret-y to famish mat«iW Find I*x)r - rotV1,ole in mevordance wish above plefcationsfor t}wl of: CN �b-' ,r _ /em . a_y"VFit fo be m&Je ao ) 4 l 4 ,IQ�IY.t (Mesktr Ciilr,t frit() Vlsa r�ccoptrril)-- �•—F_i��t �`�n-r �!!F '1'��e.•J: � .. .�- — Mrml:ani:KQyPA+do�+ih)Lr�z:•r�h+0 A�w_-K►tJ r:nmt+i�+yr�wur4rtwr•I,karnnrMdtY!•l '9 AUNtDCRAti , M rt41rir1BrCMM•tK•vs. Any lhe•:rd irr Wtki:,;)�..,,'rrrn Y;,WSCR,rR..Icnr. in.+f4rp o,l•dC(:S!a w••I!� 3lgnaturt? (r't, �,,, R„+Kvttl r•,Ir �p;v ,.,.Mqo uQMt.:r•d �M'ra.;y.y an f�!•u r r x;in ,.pr a�W µ•�.r. t•.rr �•ctmAiq WA ,.. aq ccrt rnraca+wq .•Ivi uaxtw� Arr,04^ �C'trYktjtllr),+rM+arrLq,tlal. LiNr,ryM.a ri n•g.'t+rvlu Note: This Doc A'It,d+M•'If!E!!!tW rn•,w�1,fi1. ty„ w;.r•N:•J.rC • 1CsnLiy be 'ully:.s,a'o.•nvrvirturc:r.,I.rrea�+S11T'dln�fYr:YY.r. VYittldr'�MR1 by V!i 11t f In tAi i1CCeptCd itl cloys. ,Acceplaticr of rtip Qsa-The aWwt-iakee.specifiewitsr,s— and vu.ulltruns:tresa(istsrfvryor:daretrr'4et*ya=pted. You are mufti 5ignalwe do the wurl% a.^.• spwrtaa. Payment w4l bmade as oullmiNi abevo. U•+te 01 Acc;wl wicw _ ., .. ? 1 � — Sipathwe 310 CMR 10.99 Foran 2 ..a —, - Commonwealth - of Massachusetts DEP File No. , 246- (ro be prowled by DEP) City,Town Northampton AooliCant Lrn AS$ 4_r0 ce0Q_-c5 Date Request Filed/asT Determination of Applicability Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 & NORTHAMPTON WETLANDS PROTECTION ORDINANCE From Northampton Conservation Commission Issuing Authority GA To -;504W f2T A -S /rnAzSSGoNCei�cs No�2-rHf+mP ,sa�kPORr� =Nc. (Name of person making request) (Name of property owner) Address I t PA�6e SrAet T , ArnH�Sr-t r�A+ Address Q 6 f, )e ,2� t NnKr»A,r.P,�i>v, ►^^ �' O�Gb / 0166J_ This determination is issued and delivered as follows: by hand delivery to person making request on • (date) �- by certified mail, return receipt requested on (date) Pursuant to the authority of G.L. c. 131, §40, the Northampton Conservation Commission has considered your request for a Determination of Applicability and its supporting documentation, and has made the following determination (check whichever is applicable): Location: Street Address A-'Kf6A:r4c"5s ?A -TM ROAD Lot Number: (MAP ID ��) rns�P .0 This Determination �s ositiv 1. G The area describeTbelow, w�iich includes all/part of the area described in your request, is an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. Therefore, any removing, filling, dredging or altering of that area requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. 2. The work described below, which includes all/part of the work described in your request, is within an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act and will remove, fill, dredge or alter that area. There- fore. said work requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. Effective 11/10/89 2-1 3. ` The work described below, which includes ail; part of the work descrloec-In your request. is within the Buffer Zone as defined In the regulations. and will alter an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. Therefore, said work requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. This Determination is negative: I. G The area described in your request is not an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. 2. The work described in your request is within an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act, but will not remove. fill, dredge, or alter that area. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent. 3. 0 The work described in your request is within the Buffer Zone, as defined in the regulations. but will not alter an Area Subject to Protection tinder the Act. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent. 4. G The area described in your request is Subject to Protection Under the Act, but since the work described therein meets the requirements for the following exemption.as specified in the Act and the regulations. no Notice of Intent is required: 4 Conservation Commission Issued by Northampton This Determination must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission. On this :b3 day of 199 —.,before me personally appeared M0-5 n — n , to me known to be the person described in, and who executed, the foregoing instrument. and ac no4eijaed,tbat he!shb executed me as his/her free act and deed. . Notary Public My commission expires This Determination aces not relieve the applicant from complymg with all other applicable feaeral. state or Iotal slatutes. ordinances. by-laws or regulations. Tnis Determination shall De valid for three years form the gale of issuance The applicant, the owner. any person aggrieved by this Determination, any owner of land abutting the lana upon which the proposed work is to be cone, or any ten rasiaents of the city or town in whicn such land is located, are hereoy notified of tneir richt to reauest the department o: Environmental Protection to issue a Superseding Determination of Applicability, providing the request is mace oy cerifiea mail or hand delivery to the Department, with the appropriate filing fee and Fee Transmittal Form as provided in 310 CMR 10.03(7 1. within ten nays from the date of issuance of this determination. A copy of the request shall at the same time be sent by ceriftec man or nano aeiivery to the Conservation Commission and the applicant. :. 2-2A JUN -25-96 04:51 PM Ma'ssConcerls June 25, 1996 Conservation Commission Paulette Kuzdeha City 1 tall Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Paulette, P.01 Enclosed is my application ror the event at The Northampton Airport on Tuesday, July 30th. Please confirm by mail or phone the time that this will he discussed at your meeting on July 8th, 1996. You have already received the $20 fee. T am mailing 9 copies of the application to your attention c/o the Northampton Conservation Commission. 1 am also rnaiiing a copy to the owner of the airport, and to the Wetlands Division of the DEP in Springfield. Call me if you have any questions. Si cc. Mikal Weiss, V'riends Of Children Richars Gusto, Northampton Airport Peters MassConcerts i 1 Paige Street, Amherst, MA 01002 Ph. (413) 256-4280 / Fax. (413) 256-1230 0 JUN -25-96 04:52 PM P.02 ! . •. WINE COPIES OF ',-�LZTZ AILING TO THE NORTKAMPT0N ,_..,s5£RVATi0N COMMI53ION ONE COPY OF COMPLETE $IL=NG To per, Wetlands Division, SPkrVGrJr.Lo r 310 CMFJ10.99 420.00 CHECI PAYABLE TO: THE CITY OF NORTHAMPTON OEP Foe ho. (k"PivrANd g► DEP) Commonwealth cay-t~. _ NorthaE tori of Massachusetts Request for a Determination of APP110ability Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. o. 1313 §40 & NORTHAM 14 WETLANDS PROTECTION ORDINANCE_ 1. 1, the undersigned, hereby request that the NOrtha tion Conservation Commission make a determination as to whether the area, described below. or work to be pertorrned on said area, also described glow, is Subject to the jurisdiction of the Wetlands Protection Act G.L c. 131. "0. 2. The area is described as follow$, WSe Maps or plans, if necessary, to provide a description and the location of the area subject to this request.) ATTACH LOCUS MAI' SHOWING SITE LOCATION. Location: Street Address Northampton Airport, Old Ferry Road, Northamptor. Lot Number. 3. The work in said acea i5 described betow. tt Ise 4dditior pz6if• 0 necessary. to describe the ProPosed work.) v _ See attached paper Effective 11n0/e9 0 1.1 JUN -25-96 04:52 PM r J f wo ZO t rA A r w w P.03 .,.#, -164 �tprs Iry .� �r �a uq n n T P. r CC w 0 N• o / ' m � C+ m l f JUN -25-96 04:53 PM P.04 I • ". Set up plans for the "Warped Tour` event at The Northampton Airport on Tuesday, July 30th are as follows: Sta O The event takes places on 2 stages for live music and equipment for professional skateboarders. The main stage is 32'x 24' and comes as a trailer pulled by a truck. It sits flat on the ground. A temporary roof is part of the stage. This will arrive at noon on Monday the 29th and be fully setup by 5:00 pm. This stage will be broken down and removed at the end of the event (8:00 pm), The second stage is the back of a flat bed truck. This stage arrives the morning of the event (6:00 am) and departs at the conclusion of the show (8:00 pm). The skateboarding will take place on an 11' vertical half -pipe. This item arrives with the tour the morning of the 30th. It sits on the ground. R departs at the end of the show. Fen in The grounds for the event wig be surrounded by temporary snow type fencing. The fencing is orange plastic and approximately Thigh. The fencing is tied to 4' metal stakes that are pounded 9 to 12' into the ground. These stakes are placed about every 10'. 1 estimate that I will use 700-1000 feet of fencing to surround the site and separate the parking area (see attached map). Approximately 80 - 906 of the fencing wilt be set up in the two days preceding the event (July 28 8 29), the remaining 10 - 20% will be installed the day of the event once all of the stages and tents are within the site. The fencing will be partially removed after the concert on the 30th, and My removed by 5:00 pm on the 31st of July. Bathrooms M I will rent the appropriate number of portable bathroom facilities for the event. This number will be based on expected attendance. The units wig be delivered on set up on the 29th. They will be removed on the 31 st The rental company will provide attendants to keep the units clean during the event Vents I will rent approximately 10 tents that measure 10' x 10' for vendors. I will also rent a few larger tents to be used as catering and backstage areas. These tents will measure 20'x 20' and 20'x 30'. All will be standard tents with stakes and rope to secure them. 0 JUN -25-96 04:53 PM 0 P.05 1 will contract with a waste removal and/or landscaping company to clean the site following the event I will forward me agreement to Anthony Pablo in the Building inspectors once as soon as it is contracted. I will also have a crew of 14 -1 Z on the site during the event to keep the grounds clean. The mistake we made last year was to remove the temporary fencing before we cleaned the site. This allowed papers to drift outside of the immediate area. JUN -25-96 04:54 PM P.06 • 4. Tne owner(S) of the area, I not the person mawng m►s rectML has been given written notification of thm renuest on 6/7-5/96 -n" rtsme(s) and 8doress(e$) of the owner(s). Russell Benjamin Richard Giusto Northampton Airport old Ferry Road Northampton, MA 01060 5. 1 have filed a cornalete copy of this request with the appropriate regional office of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection_.. 6 2 6 ,..A_.. (date) j - DEP Western Regional Office -State House west. 4th Floor 436 Dwigtu Street Springfield, MA 01103 G. I understand that notification of this request will be placed in a local newspaper at my expense in accdr- dance with Section 10.05(3) (b)1 of the regulations bythe Co' naervation CommissioA znr1 thirst 1 Y411 ne billed accordingly. If r, I also graft petlniss avn•fir the Canservdtian Camiissia) tc Inspect my prope to the Puu11c Hearing. &gnatur - Name John Peters Aadr�ss 11 AsLe St. , Amherst, MA 01002 ,Cel 256-4280 * Applying on behalf of "Friends Of Children", holder of the Special Events permit issued by the Northampton Ci Ly Council. 1-2 LIN Date/Time: 6/11/96 15:13:45 ------------------------------------------------------------- Crimes Management System Page: 1 ?rogrm: CMS301 Incident Report -------------------------------------------------------------------- Case No.: 1-96-001292 NORTHAMPTON POLICE DEPARTMENT )ate of Occurrence.: 6/04/96 thru 6/07/96 Time of Occur.: 16:19 thru 16:19 )ate of Report.....: 6/07/96 Time of Report: 16:19 )ispatched.......... 6/07/96 @ 16:19 Responded...... @ 0:00 arrived ............: 6/07/96 @ 16:19 Cleared.......: 6/07/96 @ 17:10 Day of the Week...: FRIDAY Common Name...... Incident Location.: 1 RIVERBANK RD Incident Cty/ST/PR: Northampton MA County ............. HAMPSHIRE Location Type.....: FIELD/WOODS Beat Assignment...: SECTOR 1 District..........: UNIFORM PATROL Zone/Div: Sector 1 Department Classif: Reporting Officer.: CARLOS A LEBRON Case Status......: Exceptionally Cleared Alcohol Related...: NO Drugs Related.....: NO Microflm/Roll#: ZIP: 01060 01 10 Map Ref..: 4G Date: 6/07/96 ************ V E R I F I C A T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N****************** pt Officer Review: 6/07/96 Employee: CARLOS A LEBRON upervisory Review: Employee: lerical Entry....: 6/10/96 Employee: HELEN ELMES *********** C A S E M A N A G E M E N T I N F O R M A T I O N************* ase Disposition.: Exceptionally Cleared EXCEPT Date: 6/07/96 ase Forwarded To: ******************** P E R S O N I N F O R M A T I O N********************** INFORMATION # 1 Middle ZIP: Country: Sex.. OL ST: Country: DOB.: SSN.: 000000000 Phn#: (000)000-0000 Bus#: (000)000-0000 Misc#: * SUSPECT/ARRESTEE * INFORMATION # 1 Last First Middle ime: BENJAMIN RUSSELL P DOB.: 3/26/51 1dr: OLD FERRY RD SSN.: 000000000 * PERSON REPORTING * Last First ame: LEBRON OFFICER ddr: ity: ST: DB.: ST: npl : -cp: ace....... thnic Org.: L# ....... 4e......... eight ..... 000 Ft./in. =eight.....: lbs INFORMATION # 1 Middle ZIP: Country: Sex.. OL ST: Country: DOB.: SSN.: 000000000 Phn#: (000)000-0000 Bus#: (000)000-0000 Misc#: * SUSPECT/ARRESTEE * INFORMATION # 1 Last First Middle ime: BENJAMIN RUSSELL P DOB.: 3/26/51 1dr: OLD FERRY RD SSN.: 000000000 )ate/Time: 6/11/96 15:13:44 Crimes Management System Page: 2 >rogrm: CMS301 Incident Report --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case No.: 1-96-001292 NORTHAMPTON POLICE DEPARTMENT (Continued) 'ity: NORTHAMPTON ST: MA ZIP: 000001060 Phn#: (413)000-0000 SOB.: ST: Country: American :mpl: Bus#: (413)000-0000 )ccp: !ace........ WHITE Sex.. MALE :thnic Org.: NOT OF HISPANIC ORIG >L #........ OL ST: Country: American [in. Height: 000 Ft./in. Weight: lbs Misc#: [ax. Height: Ft./in. Weight: lbs [in. Age...: 45 Max: * SUSPECT/ARRESTEE * INFORMATION # 2 Last First Middle fame: GIUSTO RICHARD DOB.: 3/02/40 ,ddr: 72 BOYNTON RD SSN.: 048301169 'ity: DEERFIELD ST: MA ZIP: 01342 Phn#: (413)665-3963 'OB.: ST: Country: American mpl: NITON AIRPORT Bus#: (413)584-7980 iccp: OWNER/PARTNER .ace........ Sex.: MALE Ithnic Org.. ,L #.......: SAME AS SS# OL ST: MA Country: American ,in. Height: 000 Ft./in. Weight: lbs Misc#: .ax. Height: Ft./in. Weight: lbs :in. Age.... 56 Max: * OTHER PERSON * INFORMATION # 1 Last First Middle ame: KOLAKOSKI MIKE J DOB.: 6/29/79 ddr: 64 AUSTIN CIR SSN.: 000000000 ity: NORTHAMPTON ST: MA ZIP: 000001060 Phn#: (413)000-0000 OB.: NORTHAMPTON ST: MA Country: mpl: Bus#: (413)000-0000 ccp: ace........ UNKNOWN Sex.: MALE thnic Org.: L #........ OL ST: Country: ge......... 16 Misc#: eight...... 509 Ft./in. eight...... 115 lbs * OTHER PERSON * INFORMATION # 2 Last First Middle ame: SHAW RICHARD T DOB.: 6/07/79 ddr: 71 ELM ST Apt: B SSN.: 012605190 ity: HATFIELD ST: MA ZIP: 01038 Phn#: (000)000-0000 OB.: ST: Country: mpl: Bus#: (000)000-0000 ccp: ace........ WHITE Sex.. MALE thnic Org.: Date/Time: 6/11/96 15:13:44 '%,�' --------------------------------------------------- Crimes Management System page. 3 Progrm: CMS301 Incident Report --------------------------------------------- Case No.: 1-96-001292 NORTHAMPTON POLICE DEPARTMENT (Continued) OL #.......: 012605190 OL ST: MA Country: Age......... 17 Misc#: Height...... 000 Ft./in. Weight...... lbs * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * N A R R A T I V E * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * GUNSHOTS/SHOOTING Reported By: LEBRON, CARLOS A. 6/07/96 Call#: 961590056 Beat: SECTOR 1 Units.: 121 Employees: 0121 LEBRON, CARLOS On 06/04/96 at approximately 1754hrs, I Officer Lebron, was dispatched to the area of Riverbank Rd, for report of gunshots being fired and bullets going over the river to Hadley side. Upon arrival I found two 19 year old subjects who were Id'd as Michael Kolakowski and Richard Shaw. They appeared to have been shooting at several small targets they had set up on range. The weapons being used at this time were one SKS 7.26 semi automatic rifle, which belonged to Kolakowski, and one 22. caliber rifle owned by Shaw. They stated to me that the owners of property, Mr Benjamin and Mr. Giusto, had given them permission to use the range. Within moments of my arrival, Mr. Benjamin arrived and I informed him of the above complaint. Mr. Benjamin at this time was very cooperative with this Officer and advised Kolakowski and Shaw they could no longer use the range. At this time area was cleared. On 06/07/96 I was advised by Sgt. Nicol to further investigate and document the conditions of this area. He also advised me to contact Environmental Police and informed them of the range set up.After speaking with one of the Environmental Officers, he informed me that he would advise his Sargeant to contact me at this Department for further investigation. I then responded back to Riverbank Rd, where I took several pictures and measurements of range.( See attached Pictures of Range.) The first measurement was taken from the edge of dirt wall to the the main entrance, which is set up with a chain attached to two large pieces of telephone poles. The measurements were taken with a measuring wheel with the length found to be 51917". The second measurement was taken from edge of Riverbank Rd, to dirt wall which read 46519". The third was taken from the edge of Riverbank Rd, to chain at main entrance where range starts. This measured at 5516". The width of shooting range measured at 3514" wide. I also was able to measure the distance where Kolakowski and Shaw were shooting their rifles, and it read 22713". The distance from the edge of river to the back of the dirt wall (Back Stop) measured approximately 160". I also noticed at the other side of the river there is a recreational area with what appeared to be three boat docks and two houses ; one to the left and the other to the right. This is all located to the back area of the dirt wall (Back Stop). The last measurement taken Date/Time : 6/11/96 15:13:44\---' ----------- Progrm; CMS301 Crimes Management System Incident Report P� ------------------ ----- Case No.: 1-96-001292 NORTHAMPTON -POLICE ---- ------- THAMPTON DEPARTMENT --------- (Cc was from the edge of Riverbank Rd, to the 100 yard marker, reading to 219'2with this ". While performing these measurements Mr. Giusto arrived in the area. Benjamin and Mr I informed them that I would be taking measurements and pictures of range, and that the Environmental Police would also be checking the safety and location of range. They stated they would cooperate with the investigation and to seek them out if needed. Netto that Lt. At approximately 2030hrs, I was advised by Desk Officer Tobin of the Environmental Police Dept. had called and left a message for me to call him at his home. I returned his call and advised him of the above. He stated to me that they have had several incidents involving this range, but the distance between the road way and houses in the area was legal. the houses and recreational area located behindvtheddirt wall, about he once again informed me there was no regulation in the distance oft range and river. He also informed me there was no State or Federal law that would prohibit them from having this range at that location. Lt. Tobin informed me that at one time his Officers were in the river and as they passed through the back side of range, bullets went over their head from this location. He stated his Officers checked the area, but weapons were all legal. Lt. Tobin advised me continue with this range, if further problems were to this if should set up a meeting with the Conservation Commission to allow the property owners to construct a higher dirt wall (Back Stop). * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * t ti�Fa� gloWnda �P7d• ur �` ,,,' 3 a t }{ Ntl Alptpn se h of for Girls Adv ft i1 st e It ,•^ '':E /f � e� '. ® Coastal Resource Area Inland Wetlands: Forested Wetland, p Station 11 wF tt Scrub -Shrub Wetland ® + f Emergent Wetland Other Resources: Rare Species Habitat u _ .., Area of Critical Environmental Concern �• *Note: 100 -year floodplain occurs within study limits. GEIR FOR TREE CLEARING IN WETLANDS AT PUBLIC USE AIRPORTS FIGURE A-28 0 .25 .50 10 ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS IN STUDY LIMITS AT Scale In Miles NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT CDM Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. Northampton, Massachusetts Cambridge, Massachusetts March 1993 � � • r r •. STUDY LIMITS 100 -Foot Elevation 20 -Foot Elevation tVNS t �• y jj[Jjj o t ti�Fa� gloWnda �P7d• ur �` ,,,' 3 a t }{ Ntl Alptpn se h of for Girls Adv ft i1 st e It ,•^ '':E /f � e� '. ® Coastal Resource Area Inland Wetlands: Forested Wetland, p Station 11 wF tt Scrub -Shrub Wetland ® + f Emergent Wetland Other Resources: Rare Species Habitat u _ .., Area of Critical Environmental Concern �• *Note: 100 -year floodplain occurs within study limits. GEIR FOR TREE CLEARING IN WETLANDS AT PUBLIC USE AIRPORTS FIGURE A-28 0 .25 .50 10 ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS IN STUDY LIMITS AT Scale In Miles NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT CDM Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. Northampton, Massachusetts Cambridge, Massachusetts March 1993 EZO Name of Establishment Business Address Mfg Address (If different) Naane I Title of Applioant _ #J ., . h®rne M(� �aIfcorporationor partners�P+givename, title & �nvNrEs B Ei/Name Title ddress f officers or Home Partners. C Address State of Incorporation Name & Address of Local Agent _ Retail Food Food Service Caterer Mobile Food Mobile Rem Residential Bed & Breakfast Annual ❑ - __ Temporary Seasonal ❑ .,ates of Operation TOTAL: JDDITION 1f not annual: / °152_ AL INJ'ORMt�+ION: Water Source -- Sewage Disposal 0 NORTHAmpTON CITY COUNCIL "- PORARY EVENT PERMIT pl pt�]C`CATION Applicant: Q1:ABOAG SCOTTISH FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION Applicant's address: P.O. Box 889, PALMER, MA 0109 Applicant's S tatus . c i v e:.- ) Non-profit c, no profit, religious organization, p educational) Contact Person/Teleonone Jane Robitille 1-(413) 783_(9(9 Festival Sandv Trubounis �- (41 ) 2(q3 r�rrr�+o,..>. person Name and Description of and CELTIC an a et FESIVAL cevent-'re-La- .. m . ven - re- a- • ilgenous ocurren naymonci 1(4.1-T677Py=_313( Event:WETERN MASSACHUSETTS HIGHLAND GAMES - This even is ane n1c, cu ura es lval ing o ac Zvi les a are is orlca Sco an . n o_ .. Y and -ctimed Locat_desent an; NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT = Old 'Ferrjr Road, Northampton, .MA -------------- Cwher O' Lccat_On i - different than) -� 1 i---------------- er:niss'cn) Richard Giusto (co-owner) App letter aattached�_�e_ of Dates)/^ me O= F-vent:Saturda - June 22 , 1996 open to the pub? i r,_z--r, -�—� �—. 9:OOAM to 5:OOPM -, . -- i •.. • - WA 1.1/ removal by 9: OOPM Rec_��ested signage: (attach sketch 22196 Eight Z pod directional sigh: placed at intersections Wo rsectiod dw e sint ions) 91 erected the ay e ore o i- ­par icipan s. Removed' -/23/9F T a� -c cant=o! o� �ov�s_ons/ 23 „,�i ng reaui cements: Parking on site Charri fo r7an a- 00 am ent . Pol i net• a b n notified of eve ffic ***Attach site plan showing area inciuding location osnow_r. re in which event is to be held -including to (1) structures to be used for event, �_mporary structures erected for event, displays ( including vehicles, model' tlt ( 2 ) exhi bi tS %O!' S.-ructure, , etc) if outside a permanent securit�r (3) devices, (4) fencing or other crowd control and/or vehicular ^ic�s' (5) signage, (s) pe,.es�rian access and access/parking, ( 7 ) a:�_r Otc:er �l e z - r.. -_van• inror:nati Date:April 24, 1(�6 r [ Q [ pp `-cant s!dent Quaboag Scottis Festival Assoc. r APR 2 5 Igg6 CITY NORT14AA MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor FROM: OPD RE: Airport DATE: 12/8/95 City of Northampton, Massacous Office of Planning and Development City Hall, 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 (413) 586-6950 (413) 586-3726 fax The brief history: 1990 enforcement order issued by C.C. for bulldozing. No rifle range shown in photos. Guisto ordered to restore the land. 1995 Spring: Guisto received a permit from the C.C. to remove sumac for airport safety purposes. No mention was made of personal use of the area. 1995 Fall: B.I. and Cons. Officer were doing inspections in the Meadows and noted a firing range. The B.I. called Guisto who said he had a permit for such activity. Since a firing range is not allowed under zoning and the C.C. has no record of his request or mention of Personal use, B.I. told him it was not permitted. Mr. Guisto called Mike V. C.C. will review the matter on Monday night. The B.I., as Zoning Enforcement Officer, has ety issues are the overriding concern.) authority to have this use stopped. (Saf • f NOTICE OF ZONING ORDINANCE VIOLATION EXHIBIT D jti:ss:cl�asetts DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTIONS 212 Main Street ' Municipal Building Northampton, Mass. 01060 AND Mr./Mrs./Ms. RICHARD GIUSTO/CITY AVIATION order. ORDER TO CEASE, DESIST, AND ABATE , and all persons having notice of this As owner/occupant of the premises, located at 152 & 164 CROSSPATH RD./OLD FERRY RD, Assessor's Map 2580 Plot 1 -&71, and known as NORTHAMPTON•AIRPORT you are hereby notified that you ar� in violation of e tL� its QfNorthampton's ZONING ORDINANCE(s), ARTICLE(s) IX 5.P�. ? y #5 SECTION(s)9.36 PG. 9-2 , and are ORDERED this date __ OCTOBER 7 1987 XIII to: 13.4 PG. 13-2 1. CEASE AND DESIST immediately, all functions connected with this violation, on or at the above mentioned premises. -CONSTRUCTION AUCTION TO -BE HELD ON YOUR PROPERTY IS IN summary of VIOLATION OF THE NORTHAMPTON CITY ZONING ORDINANCE AS LISTED violation ABOVE. SPECIAL CONSERVANCY DISTRICT. 2. COMMENCE within ( ) hours, action to,abate this violation permanently within days summary.of action to abate and if aggrieved by this order; to show cause as to why you should not be required to do so, by filing with Clerk of the City of Northampton, a Notice of Appeal (specifying the grounds thereof) within thirty (30) days of the receipt of this order. If at the expiration of the time allowed, this violation has not been remedied, further action as the law requires shall be taken. By order, INSPECTOR OF BUIL INGS Titu o N.or��tl��rrrptan MASSACHUSETTS In the Year One Thousand Nine Hundred and ---_-_- UPON THE RECOMMENDATION OF _May -or .... David B. Musante _Jr. ORDINANCE NO ..._...... _._......... ...__ An Ordinance of the City of Northampton, Massachusetts, providing that the Code of Ordinances, City of Northampton, Massachusetts, be amended by adding a section to be numb eredpENDIX A --5 •4 ............. : Aproviding for tem orar uses not ermitted in a z ' g............._....._..........P............._..�....__._....._......_.........wP............._..._....._......................_._...... Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of ,Northampton, in City Council assembled, as fol- lows: Section 1. That the Code of Ordinances of the City of Northampton, Massachusetts, be amend - A PEENDIX A ed by adding a section to be number _ . 4 ___.._ , to read as follows: Temporary Events A temporary event or use occurring on a parcel or parcels of la.nd located in a zoning district in which such event or use is not permitted, may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Northampton CODE OF ORDINANCES Chapter 4, Article V, Section 4-41 and Section 4-42. in City Council, APR 12 1990 Rules suspended, passed two readings, ordained and enrolled. AU St Christine Stcorupski , City Clerk Approved: David B. Musante, ?f. , Mayor A bue cop . Attest City Clerk 310 CMR 10.99 Form 2 Commonwealth = of Massachusetts _r DEP File No. (To be provided by DEP) CityoTown Northampton Apaicant NORIHAMPM- N AIRP9 T, INC. Date Asquest Fled 2/27/95 Determination of Applicability Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 & NORTHAMPTON WETLANDS PROTECTION ORDINANCE From Northampton Conservation Co mi ccinn Issuing Authority TO Northampton AIRPORT, Inc. Russ Benjamin A, Dirk C tistn (Name of person making request) (Name of property owner) Address P 0 Box 221, Northampton Address P 0 Box 1071, Northampton This determination is issued and delivered as follows: J by hand delivery to person making request on �a . / �� (date) D by certified mail, return receipt requested on (date) Pursuant to the authority of G.L. c. 131, §40, the Northampton Conservation Co miGsi nn has considered your request for a Determination of Applicability and its supporting documentation, and has made the following determination (check whichever is applicable): Location: Street Address Crosspath Road, Riverbank Road, Old Ferry Road Lot Number: (MAP ID #) 25 - 15; 25 - 18; 25 - 16; 25 - 19 3 2 17. 5 - 053; This Determination :Ls sit* ', 1. G The area descnbeSgelow, 1ch includes all/part of the area described in your request, is an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. Therefore, any removing, filling, dredging or altering of that area requires the filing of a Notice of intent. 2. E The work described below, which includes aWpartof the work described in your request, is within an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act and will remove, fill, dredge or alter that area. There- fore. said work requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. Effective 11/10/89 2.1 3. 7 The work described below, which includes alllpart of the work descrloet�•In your reouest, is within the Buffer Zone as defined in the regulations, and will atter an Area Subject to Protection Unaer the Act. Therefore, said work requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. This Determination is negative: 1 • D The area described in your request is not an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. 2• , The work described in your request is within an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act, but will not remove, fill, dredge, or alter that area. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent. 3• D The work described iri your request is within the Buffer Zone, as defined in the regulations, but will not alter an Area Subject to Protection tinder the Act. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent. 4. D The area described in your request is Subject to Protection Under the Act, but since the work described therein meets the requirements for the following exemption,as specified in the Act and the regulations, no Notice of Intent is required: Issued by Northam ton Conservation Commission Signature(s) This Determination must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission, On this 11 da of Perso,"lly appeared_ f--r-A �� I ��' t °9-' . before me wn to be the 'described in, and who e e ted he foregoing instrument, and ai;k QWIeto me 0aed tbatohe!shb executed ne as his/hPfect and (Public -% a My commission expires This Determination does not reifeve the aDDlicant from complying with all other aDDlicable federal, state cr Iota! statutes, ordinances. bY•laws or regulations. This Determination Shall be valid for three years form the date of issuance The applicant, the owner, any person aggrieved by this Determination, any Owner of land is to be done, or any ten residents of the city or town in which such land is located. are hereby otifteo of their right to reouest the of Environmental Protection to issue a Su abutting o^ which the proposed work delivery perseding Determination of Department ry to the Department, with the appropriate ficin f '�p11ebilifY. Droviding the re0est is made oy certified mail or hand the date of issuance of this Determination. A copy of trisereq esteShall at thie same Gins be sentttal Form as in 370 CMR 10.0 Conservation Commission and the applicant. h nd de ten Days from Dy certifisc mad or nand delivery to the All work must be completed 2-2A All vegetation removed shalll be disp •sesta biv 1, 1995. b� ' Properly and off-site and not within a resource area. - I J. -000l9e, 3s Itiona.., and and- , n page 6 )rian Brie T. yor Mary L. periencing the g a place that lessons," said Dy A. Fastiggi, ass. `But we besides our about friend- tt life." Life can be a te said. "After tough times, ose 'wonderful to top .and. a life can be -am was one; of Ilercoaster ride, graduates and their seats at M. Greene. Hall for a variety of I finally their ady chorus of ts, hollers, yells m the audience. n J. Sims . al)-. Qings 14000, proached the •stage to receive his, awards ho. principal Veronica Car- roll, she point6d out that .she had, �eL n him om a cable TV program the e said. alreadymalnng SiHeps lines,e decibel level rose when she said that. And when . Matthew P. Lie cheue's turn can► , n voices announced: ,We want you, Matt." But when the bearded. Paul D. Raskevitz Jr., wcoreceive his urtmeous. to teach - award for, being applause was ers . and students, ' a p mixed with laughter, for Raskevitz kept looking directly into theaudi- ence with, an intentionally goofy' smile on his face. eluates m Before he asked °;the gra switch their tassels froft m right to le meh. dation, student m signify John E. Mc- goverrinaent p � d'oAt VRlgli mention00 �w few M .the events ,Vt& W�,,.entered, such __ - He used: a _p0em.; that. MMaya_ Ange- lou read at that inaugdral- as an inspiration for • his remarks. "Now the sun is : about to .set on our day as high :school'. students, but, the darkness that comes; ,after the sunset, though sometimes frighten- ing and . filled with unknowns, shouldn't make us lose hope, staid. "Tomorrow there will be a- new morning, fresh wlth:.Aew possibill- tiis.00 pelp'lle complain about firing range NORTHAMPTON-' Northampton police said they received call Tuesday at 5:54 p.m.'ftom Radley police reporting that residents on the east side of the Connecticut River were complaining of bulletslanding nearby. Northampton_police investigated a rifle range on Riverbank Road, where of officers found two men shooting, ho whom had firearms identification cards. The informal rifle range on Riverbank Road consists of a _large burm next to the bank of the Connecticut River. Man said to leave scene of accident NORTHAMPTON Police arrested a city man Monday at 6:07 p,m; and were expected to charge hien .with operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol (a'second offense) and leaving thecen se' of a physical injury. accident. Police said that F4esh Patel, of 217 Conz St., had •been;driving a red 104 on Mng Street when he� collided with-. another vehicle, then drove away:. withoutleaying any'identifi�ation. Witness gave officers a license number of the vehicle and police traced it to the Days Inn; where. Patel, Is. a manager. officers, found Patel at: the motel: and arrested him there, after he' failed field sobrietytests. , 4 • new: court ions for he. Gothfe'.. S a r The city is investing 1188,000 in the Nouse to convert it - into, a council consti building. Nearly James Juvenile Court: The rent charged to the Administrative Office of the Trial ,,969 --would be oundation of the state Court, which will use most of the building for a Juvenile Trial Court, ch co unn, ey would\be used, . judges' chambers and probationOffides, 'repairs that cost will pay for the remodeling expenses. The statewill rent the space for four asked to transfer years, %W b a ;'one- ear renewal. option. pease, state wilt'+ iring#ding ed ta'pays the. According to ,the ,the. pa4y :i8 $0, in rent . irO1n_- he state -for as a Juvenile ae8, $� jsltut Ttte "► ` use of ,tie Jam"house Court over the u:w +s mer stY officials After the lease *00scity went to have the 3 es if. Das renovat- age- ed for use as a'Polloe Denartment. Hosts arrested.., after noise warning NORTHAMPTON,— Police arrested two women living at 206 State. St. Monday at 2:54 a.m., after they continued with a loud party despite warnings , f om officers - Police were, expected to charge Beverly O'Brieri;'Y=, and Megan Noonan,.260 with disturbing the peace. Police said that officers were first called to the house at 206 State St. because neighbors had complained about loud music and shouting at a party. Oflicers found more, than so people outside partying and told O'Brien and Noonan to quiet the gathering down. 'At 2:50 am., police receive more calls , from neighbors about the loud party continuiug4a,,thne police d hot warn, O'Brien and Noonan. Officers arrested the two. ^ STETTER ION NINE COPIES OF P`IMPLETE FILING TO THE NORTHAMPTON COn, SPRINGFIELD COMMISSION ` ONE COPY OF COMI�rE FILING TO DEP, Wetlands Div ? 310 CMR 10.99 $20.00 CHECK PAYABLE T0: THE CITY 0 NORTHAMPTON Form 1 Commonwealth of Massachusetts DEP File No. . 246 - (TO be prvvK10d by DEP) city'lown Northampton , A001,can:1/F� Request for a Determination of Applicability Massachusetts Wetlands ProtectionRA t9 G.L.ANc• 131, §40 & NORTHAMPTON WETLAND 1. I, the undersigned, hereby request that the Northampton Conservation Commission make a determination as to whether the area, described below, or work to be performed on said area, also described below, is subject to the jurisdiction of the Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40. 2. The area is described as follows. se request) s or plans, ATTACH 'LOCUS necessary,to tSHOWINGaSITErLOCATIONthe location of the area subject o Location: Street Address �_ Lot Number: / 5-v 1? -001 � c) 15 -o0t / �L5-(jS3-00 I �6-001 -00r / 2eo-o-71-o:Z 1 3. The work in said area is described below. (Use additional paper, if necessary, to describe the proposed work.) TPM(3VQ- !SvITNQ04' iv 1n 1-1 Effective 11/10189 FS �1 4. The owner(s) of the area, if n t the •,person making this request, has been given written notification of this request on a-1 I 915 (date) The name(s) and address(es) of the owner(s): v �oc-�h4mP\,N 11�N o \e'(' �.0 • 30� �1 \ N 60�Sme�60, 5. 1 have filed a complete copy of this request with the ap ropria)e regional office of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection a_ a1 r 9,5 (date) lDEP Western Regional Office i State House West, 4th Floor 436 Dwight Street Springfield, MA 01103 6. 1 understand that notification of this request will be placed in a local newspaper at my expense in accdr- dance with Section 10.05(3) (b)1 of the regulations by the Conservation Commission and that I will be billed accordingly. If owner, I also grant permission far the Conservdtion Cotmission to inspect my property prior to the Public Hearing. Signatu / — Name —j?,vs5 -Ba n 1r4. vni nl- r Address 1 Nod kti_ �nplaw AA` Tel. 6"'d`"1- -7 9 Ufa 1-2 SITE DATA (Continued) V u SITE MAP Western New England Appraisal -25- •66 ASSESSOR'S MAP Western New England Appraisal -21- dl t i = X32 _ rj 33— . ie: .� i - ----• e ASSESSOR'S MAP Western New England Appraisal -21- City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation • Historic Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals • Northampton Psr Crn"stS , VARIANCES & ZBA SPECIAL PERM-L-rs Permit Issued by: Zoning Board of Appeals Map ID File # Date Submitted 4 997 OPD Staff Review for fee and completeness & B.I. signature Planner Review V, Set up Public File Folder Legal Notice Gazette ?-47 9 3 q (Notice 7 and 14 days before hearing) Legal Notice Posted1547 Letter to Owner 97 Letter to Abutters/Towns COPY OF to B.I. 7 — APPLICATIONS Copy to DPW SENT TO: Copy to B of H Copy to C.C. Copy to Fire Dept. Copy to P.B. Members Planning Board Meeting Copy to ZBA members P.B. recommendations to ZBA members ZBA Hearing? 'qq-7 -! ZBA Decision47 Decision filed with City Clerk 3/97 J Decision mailed to: Owner/Abutters/Towns �al3�Qn Decision to DPW Decision to B.I. !°&3j9-7 Permit entered on computer 12319q Decision filed OPD (Memorex: ZBAInstr 4/3/92) i� L � City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 a (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 • Conservation Commission • Historical Commission • Housing Partnership • Parking Commission • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals DECISION OF NORTHAMPTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICANT: Richard Guisto/Northampton Airport, Inc. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: Old Ferry Road OWNER: OWNER'S ADDRESS: Northampton, MA 01060 Northampton Airport, Inc. Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA 01060 RE LAND OR BUILDINGS IN NORTHAMPTON AT: Old Ferry Road/Crosspath Road ASSESSOR'S MAP and PARCEL NUMBERS: MAP 25 PARCEL 1,15-19, 53 & 71 At a meeting conducted on September 17, 1997, the Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals voted unanimously 3:0 to Grant the request of Richard Guisto/Northampton Airport, Inc. for a FINDING under the provisions of Section 9.3 (1) (D) in the Northampton Zoning Ordinance, to extend a pre-existing non -conforming use at Old Ferry Road, Northampton, MA. Zoning Board Members present and voting were: Chair Alex Ghiselin, Mark NeJame and Associate Member William Brandt. The Findings of the Board under Section 9.3(1)(D) for an expansion of a Pre-existing non- conforming use were as follows: 1. The Board found that the proposed new structure for use as storage, an office and a balloon loft will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing non -conforming use because the new building will not intensify the use of the airport or increase existing traffic. 2. The Board found that the change of the pre-existing non -conforming use: i) will not extend any closer to any front, side or rear property boundary than the current zoning allows or existing structure already extends and will not create any new violation of other ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER zoning provisions; and ii) does not involve a sign. Conditions imposed with this Finding are as follows: 1. Any meetings taking place in the proposed building will be conducted in connection with current or usual airport uses; 2. No fee shall be charged for use of the facility as a meeting place, and no food shall be served in connection with the use of the meeting place. 3. The meetings will be limited to a maximum of twenty people; and 4. Any expansion, alteration or deviation from these conditions, or those set forth in the application shall require additional permits from City agencies. 5. The Finding is contingent upon permits being granted by all other Boards and Commissions as required. Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws (MGL) Chapter 40A, Section 11, no Finding or any extension, modification or renewal thereof, shall take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that twenty days have elapsed after the decision has been filed, or if such an appeal has been filed that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds or Land Court, as applicable, and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of title. The fee for such recording or registering shall be paid by the owner or applicant. It is the owner or applicant's responsibility to pick up a the certified decision of the City Clerk and record it at the Registry of Deeds. The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals hereby certifies that a Finding has been Granted and that copies of this decision and all plans referred to in it have been filed with the Planning Board and the City Clerk. Pursuant to Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40A, Section 15, notice is hereby given that this decision is filed with the Northampton City Clerk on the date below. If you wish to appeal this action, your appeal must be filed pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A Section 17, with the Hampshire County Superior Court and notice of this appeal filed with the City Clerk within twenty (20) days of the date this decision was filed with the City Clerk. Applicant: Richard Guisto/Northampton Airport, Inc. - Old Ferry Road This Decision is Dated: September 17, 1997 * This Decision was Filed with the City Q1erk on: October 3, 1997 Rkczl \—C--'�►SCtI`�. -_ City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall * 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 * (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 • Conservation Commission • Historical Commission • Housing Partnership • Parking Commission • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of Meeting September 3, 1997 The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals held a meeting on Wednesday, September 3, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Alex Ghiselin, Mark NeJame and Associate Member William Brandt. Staff: Senior Planner Paulette Kuzdeba, Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. At 7:01 p.m., Ghiselin opened the meeting. At 7:14 p.m., Ghiselin opened the Public Hearing on a request filed by Richard Guisto/Northampton Airport, Inc. for a Finding to extend a pre-existing nonconforming use under Section 9.3 (1) (D) of the Zoning Ordinance for property located at Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Assessor's Map #25, Parcels 1,15-19, 53 & 71. Ghiselin noted that the applicant was not present. The applicant also requires a Special Permit from the Planning Board because the property is located in a Special Conservancy district, and a Conservation Commission permit because the airport is in the floodplain, Kuzdeba said. The applicant has not yet applied for the Conservation Commission permit,she noted. The DPW comment was that, "Traffic generation data for the proposed use is not available." According to her understanding, the new building will house equipment and also have a loft for use as meeting space for people in the hot air balloon program, Kuzdeba said. This activity does not constitute a new use because balloon aviation is an accessory use to the airport, she explained. Ghiselin asked if anyone wished to speak in favor? ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER A man who identified himself as an abutter said he had not yet had an opportunity to talk to Guisto and learn what is proposed. He joined members in looking at the plan. Richard Guisto arrived at 7:29 p.m. Guisto presented the following details: The airport owners seek to construct a new, twenty-four by sixty -foot, two-story structure. Plans call for constructing the building and putting in electricity, with the possibility of adding heat and water later. The building is primarily for storage of vehicles and office space downstairs, and a balloon loft upstairs. Also, the building will be available for use by local service clubs if one needs space to hold a meeting. Guisto showed the location of the proposed building, which is an area of level ground. Construction would disturb the least amount of area possible and have no effect on compensatory storage, Guisto stated. The new building will actually look better than any other building at the airport, he commented. The new structure should not have an adverse affect because the owners will not be opening a new business or doing anything other than what they are doing now. The building will house three pickups with plows, a snowblower and lawnmower equipment which are presently stored outside, Guisto said. The balloon loft will be an open sixty- by twenty -foot area where balloonists can lay out their balloons for repairs, Guisto said. This space will also be available for meetings of groups such as the Lion's and Sheriffs groups. There are no plans for toilets at this time, Guisto said. Kuzdeba said it would be fine to use the space for meeting rooms for uses associated with the airport. However, using the space as a public meeting place is not allowed. Guisto clarified that the space would onlybe used by organizations which he belongs to, such as the Lions and UNICO. Building codes may require bathrooms prior to offering the building for community use, Kuzdeba informed Guisto. Kuzdeba said she did not understand the DPW's comment regarding traffic generation. The building will not increase traffic or business, Guisto said, except to add fifteen to twenty people for meetings once a month. The only effect of the addition will be to take some vehicles off the property. NeJame suggested continuing the hearing to talk to the DPW regarding their concerns, and Guisto said this would be acceptable to him. Ghiselin asked if anyone wished to speak in favor or against? No one spoke. Brandt moved to continue the Public Hearing to August 17, 1997. NeJame seconded. The motion passed unanimously 3:0. City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall * 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 * (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 • Conservation Commission • Historical Commission • Housing Partnership • Parking Commission • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of Meeting September 17, 1997 The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals held a meeting on Wednesday, September 17, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Chair Alex Ghiselin, Vice Chair Mark NeJame and Associate Member Larry Snyder. Staff. Board Secretary Laura Krutzler. At 7:02 p.m., Ghiselin opened the meeting. Ghiselin read the legal notice and introduced fellow board members. He explained the Board's procedure for reaching and filing a decision, and the procedure for appealing a decision of the Board. At 7:25 p.m., Ghiselin opened the Continuation of a Public Hearing on a request filed by Richard Guisto/Northampton Airport, Inc. for a Finding to extend a pre-existing nonconforming use under Section 9.3 (1) (D) of the Zoning Ordinance for property located at Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Assessor's Map #25, Parcels 1,15-19, 53 & 71. Richard Guisto presented the application. The previous public hearing was continued to clarify an ambiguous communication from the DPW, Ghiselin explained. NeJame said he had spoken to Kuzdeba, who confirmed that the DPW had not understood what was being proposed. NeJame showed Guisto a list of suggested conditions. Guisto briefly repeated his original presentation, since Larry Snyder was not present at the previous hearing. The proposed two-story building is sixty by twenty feet and will be used for storage of vehicles which are now left outside at the airport. No maintenance will take place inside the building, only shelter. There will also possibly be an office. The second floor will be left open to be used as a balloon loft, since the airport needs a facility to maintain hot air balloons. ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER The building will also be used for meetings of groups to which Guisto belongs, specifically the Sheriffs Department, UNICO and the Northampton Lion's Club. These groups now meet at various people's businesses, and Guisto presently holds meetings in his office. Approximately twenty people attend these meetings. Guisto pointed out the location of the building, which is quite a distance from any road, he noted. The building will have a concrete foundation and minimum windows. ` Ghiselin asked if anybody wished to speak in favor or in opposition? No one spoke. NeJame moved to close the Public Hearing. Snyder seconded. The motion passed unanimously 3:0. NeJame moved to grant the Finding as set forth in the application with the following conditions: 1. Any meetings taking place in the proposed building will be conducted in connection with current or usual airport uses; , 2. No fee shall be charged for use of the facility as a meeting place, and no food shall be served in connection with the use of the meeting place. 3. The meetings will be limited to a maximum of twenty people; and 4. Any expansion, alteration or deviation from these conditions, or those set forth in the * application shall require additional permits from City agencies. 5. The Finding is contingent upon permits being granted by all other Boards and Commissions as required. Snyder seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously 3:0. r, City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 * (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 • Conservation Commission • Historical Commission • Housing Partnership • Parking Commission • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals will hold a meeting on Wednesday, September 3, 1997 at 7:00 P.M. in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton to conduct Public Hearings on the following: ---- Public Hearing on request filed by Edmund Ryan for a Finding to extend a pre-existing, nonconforming structure under Section 9.3 (1)(D) of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance at 15 Sumner Avenue, Florence, also known as Northampton Assessor's Map #235, Parcel 3. ---- Public Hearing on request filed by Richard Guisto/Northampton Airport, Inc. for a Finding to extend a pre-existing nonconforming use under Section 9.3 (1) (D) of the Zoning Ordinance for property located at Old Ferry Road, Northampton, also known as Assessor's Map #25, Parcels 1, 15-19, 53 & 71. ----PjAajic Hearing on request filed by Edythe M. Ambroz Finding to alter a pre -ex' nconforming structure under Section 9 ping Ordinance for proper a at 129 Ring Street, Northampton, ai-aa as Assessor's Map #3.2A, Parcel 169. PUBLISH: August 20, 1997 and August 27, 1997. BILL: Office of Planning and Development, Account #71350 210 Main Street, Northampton, MA 01060 08/15/97 15:19 0413 586 3726 NORTHAMPTON, MA 16 001 $xxxx ACTIVITY REPORT xxxxx aaaaxxaaaaaaaaaaaxaaxxaaxxx TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. 9618 CONNECTION TEL 95855222 CONNECTION ID - �= City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall a 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 FAX (413) 586-3726 • Conservation Commission • Historical Commission • Housing Partnership • Parking Commission • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals August 28, 1997 Richard Guisto Northampton Airport,Inc. Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. Guisto: Your application for a Finding to extend a pre-existing nonconforming use at Old Ferry Road, Northampton has been accepted by the Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals, and the Public Hearing will be conducted at its meeting scheduled for September 3, 1997 at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton. -You and/or your representative(s) are required to attend this meeting to explain your application and discuss the merits of the application. Approximately two weeks before the Public Hearing is scheduled before the Zoning Board of Appeals, a legal notice announcing the meeting will be published in the Daily Hampshire Gazette (copy attached). All the abutters listed in the application will receive a copy of this Notice in the mail. If you have any questions, please contact the Office of Planning and Development, City Hall, Telephone 587-1262. r Sincerely, '_Ieoull Al Laura H. Krutzler Board Secretary Enclosure ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER (Change of 1. Applicant Address: CITY OF NORTHAMPTC.--,/ FINDING APPLICATION ?-Exiing f�lgnconformi�g U� affl,r -,# e or.Stru�pture) 2. PropeOwner's Name: Address: Telephone: ' 3. Status of A ant: _Owner _Contract Purchaser ,Lessee �-Cther (explain: 4. Parcel Identification: Zonin� Map #arce Z District(s) C— Street Address '°-� h� S 5. Finding is being requested under Zoning Ordinance Section _ _, Page 6. Narrative Description of Proposed Work P o'e t: /Xuse ad t' n heet if , ary) 7. 8. Attached Plans: P<Sketch Plan � Site Plan None Required 9. Certified Abutters List from Assessors' Office must be attached. 10. Certification: I hereby certify that I have read the FINDING CRITERIA and that the information contained herein is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. (or the landowner, if I am not the landowner) grant the oa and Planni oard permis ion t enter the property to review t ' ermit io Date:-2� ' ` Applicant's Signatur Date Filed: ��GC'ElVE � Filo #: (memo rex\wp\zba\finding.zb a 10/20/92) AUG 1997 N 1 t.. Q 1. Name of Ap 2. Owner of Property Address: t`)i i n 3. Status of Applicant: 4. Job Location: 5. File No. a PERMIT APPLICATION (§10.2). TYPE OR PRINT ALL INFOMaTION -T Owner Contract Purchaser Other (explain) Parcel Id: Zoning Map# 5 Parcel#J District(s): s (TO BE FILLED IN BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT) Existing Use of Structure/Propertyf!% 0=& 6. Des'tion of Propo k/Pr 'ect/O i tion: se al she is if c�sary): I tAle"AA C NI 7. Attached Plans: _ Sketch Plan Site Plan Engineered/Surveyed Plans Answers to the following 2 questions may be obtained by checking with the Building Dept or Planning Department Files. 8. Has a Special Permit/Variance/Finding ever been issued for/on the site? NO DONT KNOW YES IF YES, date issued: IF YES: Was the permit recorded at the Registry of Deeds? NO DONT KNOW YES IF YES: enter Book Page and/or Document # 9. Does the site contain a brook, body of water or wetlands? NO—X-00' DON'T KNOW YES IF YES, has a permit been or need to be obtained from the Conservation Commission? Needs to be obtained. Obtained , date issued: (FORM CONTINUES ON OTHER SIDE) 90. Are there any proposed changes to or additions of signs Intended for the property? YES NO -X IF YES. describe size, type and location: 11. ALL INFORMATION MUST BE COMPLETED, or PERMIT CAN BE DENIED DUE TO LACK OF INFORMATION. This colmm to be tilled by the Bvilediag Departma "13. Certification: I hereby c��1 �Ic� _ 4a is true and accurate to I 3 U / D=E: - APPLI t{r. NOTE: uan o a zoning permit does n.+.. __ to oompfly. vi zoning ui =ants and obtain all required permits from ..._ _ Health. Consa Commission. Dapartment of Pubiio Worcs and other applicable permit granting autNo, FILE if t..:r. Existing i \V \'Mii VY Proposed By Zoning Lot size Cry ' Frontage Setbacks - side - rear L• R:_,,_ L:_CcgjR•� Building height (- Bldg Square footage AA 1 C I u (jr-) y a % %Open Space: (Lot area minus bldg &paved parking) # :pf -Parking spaces sof Loading Docks Fill: vohime -& location) "13. Certification: I hereby c��1 �Ic� _ 4a is true and accurate to I 3 U / D=E: - APPLI t{r. NOTE: uan o a zoning permit does n.+.. __ to oompfly. vi zoning ui =ants and obtain all required permits from ..._ _ Health. Consa Commission. Dapartment of Pubiio Worcs and other applicable permit granting autNo, FILE if t..:r. FILE # JC�-i�.�i APPLICANT/CONTA PERSON: AD�RESSIPHONE: PROPERTY LOCATION: / MAP NV PARCEL: 7 i nr 7 THIS SECTION FOR..OFMCIAL USE ONLY: PERAM APPLICATION CHECKLIST Approvea as presented/based on information presented Denied as presented: XSpeci 1 ermit and/or Site Plan Required under: L0. VJeA D Strw-kuq, itn C+ PLANNING BOARD ZONING BOARD Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed %Finding Required under: § , 7 w/ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 4-:V j--2a-n s,'dY-) Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed Variance Required under: § w/ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed Other Permits Required: Curb Cut from DPW Water Availability Sewer Availability Septic Approval-Bd of Health //fJ, Well Water Potability -BCd Health % Permit .from Conservati(IOA.ommis.iMA -- wo I lV � 11 `1 � 00 AJD la's � Signature NOTE: Issuenoe of at zoning permit does not relieve an applioant's burden to oomply with all zoning requirements and obtain all required permits from the Board of Health, Conservation Commission, Department of Publico Works and other epplioable permit granting authorities. W, E CANDE11IRMINE FROM THE APPL'J-CAnO' NAND THE,•• • WHAT THE FUTURE CONDMONS WILK 'CCOAPANY]NG PLANS WHAT THE 0MMXG CONDITIONS AR.EAND Plans, in duplicate, must be fj,66.with of the permit shall this application before a permit will be -ze0ne of which, upon issuance be kept at the site during the progress of the work. grana 73 '1 New NO, - - -D, ... . .............. .Type .................. . Map .................... . Parcel Addition ........ C3 Alterations .... C3 JN 2 5 1997 Repair ............ C3 CITY OF NORTHAMPTON Demolition .... C3 MASSACHUSETTS —Application for other than a Dwellsng Permit To the Building Inspector:(O Tbe filled out in ink OR on a typewrite,) Date. oC . . . ..................... 19 9�/ Application fora Permit is hereby made according to the following: - Location, Street and 2. Nearest name t...3. .................................... Owner's ... . ... .... ... ... ..... ...... ... .. - ...... Lot.......................... o 4. .. .. ..... ... .... .................................. ...... . ..... . Ad5i;ss Architect's name... ....... ....... .......... ............... Address 5. Builder's name ..... . .... . .... .......... ........ 0! .. .... • .... ...................... Address 6- Use Of building, Present .. ......... .... 7. Building fronts on how many Streets? ........ e�.............................................. Prop os e d ...... 8. Is building in f— -j- ........ ... . .. .... ................... 9. IM tract. ........... . (, ................................................. Size of building, Width in ft . ..... 17 ;;*---11- ............................ ................................................ ........ T., Length in 0 ............ . Height in Distance of building from Street Line./fl() 1-r. <-A 1 1— J, 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 0 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. Soil under footing is Depth of footingbelow grade.. A# ............................................................................................................. ft Will pile be used'? 1724 ......................... Area of entire building (Present plus new ....... A.-Cmy - d...... ' , ---- - ...... sq. ft. f covering Type of roof -flat ...................... . pitched ..... ........ material of roo No. of elevators .2-1za .... Method of heating .............. System ........ ........ . Zx� ................. Fuel Are live loads noted on drawings? ................ Are all other structural conditions noted on drawings?.-V-gl Building (will be) (is) equipped with sprinklers? .... 1:11za....a)arm....... Is buildiner g to be used as a factory, workshop or mercantile .............................. -2 -Z4 ................................................................................ or other establishment employing 10 or more persons? ...... Is building to be'used as an office building, dormitory, hotel, family * ... ­­ .... hotel, apartment or boarding house, lodging house Or tenement house having 8 or more rooms above the second story? How many exits (per floor) to street? ..... 11-q Is building a "Place Of assembly" as defined by the General Laws? .... Will building conform to the General Laws? If a garage, distance from nearest building? .... Building and Zoning Ordinances? . . ........ ....... 15..Q ......................................................................................... If an addition, alteration Or demolition, when was buildin --1) 26. Estimated costs:- 5 .......................................... . ......................... General $../.Q,.000 Plumbing ....1 Gas Piping.12D Sprinklers./'?'Zo Heating ... 2*11,24 Electric..' 00 .. Other Total ...................... The i .................... t"..'L,46c- owner, architect or engineer true to the best WRITTEN DISCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE DONE (use blank half of reverse side, if necessary) ... ... . .... ..... .......... A ..........Q .......... ............ .................................................. ....... 4-f i - , U DECISION OF NORTHAMPTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS At a meeting held on March 16, 1988, the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton voted unanimously to issue a Finding that the construction by Northampton Airport, Inc. of a new airplane hangar at their property at 152 Crosspath Road, Northampton, MA (SC Zone) would be an extension of a pre-existing, nonconforming use that will not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood. Present and voting were Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Dr. Peter Laband, and M. Sanford Weil, Jr. The Board's findings were as follows: The proposed five -airplane hangar, in and of itself, was not substantially more detrimental than the existing !nonconforming use to the neighborhood, except to the extent !that it allows the expansion of the number of airplanes !which might be based on the site. Such an increase in the 'potential number of based airplanes would be substantially jmore detrimental. +A condition of this Finding ,spaces at the Airport be lower number is that the number of tie -down decreased by five, and that new, or tie-aown spaces not be increased. r . Robert C. Buscher, Chairman Dr. Peter Laband r M. Sanford Weil, Jr. c Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals February 3, 1988 The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals met at 10:55 p. m. on February 3, 1988 in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building to conduct a Public Hearing on the Application of Northampton Airport, Inc. for a Finding relative to their intent to construct a new airplane hangar at their property at 152 Crosspath Road, Northampton, MA (Special Conservancy Zone). Present and voting were Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Dr. Peter Laband, and M. Sanford Weil, Jr. Chm. Buscher read the Legal Notice as published twice in the Daily Hampshire Gazette, and read Section 9.2 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Northampton relative to extensions of pre-existing nonconforming uses. Atty. Robert Ritchie appeared representing the Applicant, and displayed an aerial photograph showing the presence of two hangars already located at the airport, each housing ten planes. He pointed out the location of the proposed hangar, (roughly in between the two and parallel to one of them) which would hold five planes. He said there is a waiting list for hangar space, that this hangar would be sold as condominium units, and that it is not an extension of use since it "merely puts a roof over five planes that are already tied down at the airport." He stressed the utility of a hangar as a safety consideration. Mr. Chet Judkins of Quabbin Construction described the proposed hangar as being 50' x 250' with five bays. He stated the Conservation Commission had issued a Wetlands Permit, and Mr. Gengler, Chairman of the Conservation Commission who was in the audience, agreed that was so. The Chairman asked for speakers in favor of the Application, and there were none. He asked for those opposed, and Emily Saur rose, stating that the Board should rule on the "first issue"' (i. e., the complaint of Emily Saur and Lionel Delevingne that the airport is operating in violation of Section 9.3 b and a of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Northampton) before we consider this Application for a Finding. Ms. Rose agreed, saying that "use" and "expansion" are at the heart of the issue, and that the hangar is an "extension." Mr. Judkins disagreed. Mr. Giusto emphasized that he has 35 tie -down locations currently not being used, and the hangar "does not give me more room." Atty. Ritchie quoted from the Assistant City Solicitor's memo, particularly the Bridgewater test criteria for determining whether a pre-existing nonconforming use has been improperly extended. Atty. Ritchie further pointed out that to deny the Applicant's request, the Board must find that the proposed use is substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing use. He defined "the neighborhood" of the proposed Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals February 3, 1988 Page Two hangar location as the Connecticut River, farmland, Route 91, and the Three -County Fairgrounds, and stresses that at this site at this location, the addition of a hangar is not substantially more detrimental to this neighborhood. Dr. Laband expressed the feeling that it was "unfair" for the parties to expect the Board to exercise "Solomonic wisdom" in the matter at hand, and asked that both parties submit short briefs that responded to his query, "What do you feel you can do to accommodate one -another?" He then moved that we close the Public Hearing and take the matter under advisement. Mr. Weil seconded, and the Motion passed unanimously. The Meeting adjourned at 11:15 P. M. Also present, in addition to those mentioned, was R. J. Pascucci, Board Secretary. Robert C. Buscher, Chairman Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals March 16, 1988 The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals met on March 16, 1988 in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, to render a decision on the Application of Northampton Airport, Inc. for a Finding relative to their intent to construct a new airplane hangar at their property at 152 Crosspath Road, Northampton, MA (SC Zone). Present and voting were Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Dr. Peter Laband, and M. Sanford Weil, Jr. Dr. Laband moved the Minutes of the last Meeting be accepted without reading. Mr. Weil seconded, and the Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Weil opened by referring to Section 9.3 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Northampton, and it's condition that the extension of a pre-existing, nonconforming use cannot be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood. Mr. Weil found that the proposed new hangar will not increase use, but will only house planes that are already at the airport. He felt this was not an expansion. He allowed that the construction of a hangar would free up five "tie -down" spaces, and wondered how the Board could control expansion. Dr. Laband applied the criteria of Section 10.10 to the proposal for construction and found that the Application - meets those requirements. He felt the Board should make it a condition that the number of tie -downs remains constant. Ch. Buscher, on the subject of controlling growth, commented that there is no way this Board can control the growth of a business except by limiting the size of the business' building. In the case of the Airport, we cannot control the number of takeoffs or landings (nor, for that matter, can the Airport's owners), but we can say "You have 'X' number of tie -down spaces today, and that number cannot increase." Dr. Laband suggested we freeze the number of tie -down spaces, and Ch. Buscher suggested we reduce them by five. There was a discussion among the Members as to the number of tie -downs that can be called "the limit," with Chairman Buscher saying that we are allowed to make stipulations, i. e., "OK, you can have a hangar for five planes, but now take five tie -downs "out of stock." Dr. Laband moved that we find, under Section 9.3 (b) that the proposed alteration is not substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood, and the Applicant's request be granted, with the stipulation that the number of tie -down spaces be reduced by five, and that new number not be increased. Mr. Weil seconded. Ch. Buscher stated his belief that if we simply allowed the addition of the hangar, we would be permitting an expansion, but by decreasing the number of tie -downs by five, we are not allowing intensity of use to Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals March 16, 1988 Page Two increase. Mr. Weil seconded, and the Motion passed unanimously. Also present, in addition to those mentioned, was R. J. Pascucci, Board Secretary. Robert C. uscher, Chairman DECISION OF NORTHAMPTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS At a meeting held on May 31, 1989, the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton voted 2-1 (Laband) to DENY the request of Northampton Airport, Inc. for a Finding under the Provisions of Section 9.3 of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance that conducting occasional auctions of heavy equipment on Airport property is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the pre-existing, nonconforming airport use on Parcels 15 and 71 of Sheet 25BD located on Cross Path Road and Old Ferry Road. Present and voting were Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Dr. Peter Laband, and M. Sanford Weil, Jr. The Findings are as follows: The use requested is improper because it does not reflect the nature and purpose of the current nonconforming use (i. e., the operation of an airport). The use requested is a potential pollution source and an increase in activities which are incompatible with the purpose and intent of the Special Conservancy (floodplain) District. The use requested will cause damage to the public right-of- way, traffic congestion, environmental concerns, commercialization of the Special Conservancy District, and safety issues for children and other residents of the area. The use requested alters the character of the area, and is in fact substantiall more detrimental to the neighborhood than the airport us . Robert C. Buscher, Chairman if " J 'i Dr. Peter Laband M. Sanford Weil, Jr. Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals May 31, 1989 Meeting Page One The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals met at 10:10 p. m. on Wednesday, May 31, 1989 in Council Chambers, Wallace J.Puc onsof Municipal Building, to announce a decision on the App licatNorthampton Airport, Inc. for a Finding that conducting occasional auctions of heavy equipment on airport property is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the Were existing nonconforming airport use. Present and voting Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Dr. Peter Laband, and M. Sanford Weil, Jr. The minutes of the May 3, 1989 meeting were accepted without reading, upon a motion by Mr. Weil, a second by Dr. Laband, and a unanimous vote. Mr. Weil presented his position by reading from a prepared statement, a copy of which is attached. He concluded, "Unless other members of panel can produce preponderance reasof oning negative and propose safeguards to offset evidence, I will be forced to recommend denial." Dr. Laband stated that the Applicant is looking for a Finding in an area where there is traffic of heavy vehicles. "There are some residences, but mostly open fields. Holding the auctions at the old Atwood Airport really messes th onditi nsc'on The conditionsmare in favor of this application, as follows: -year limit. If, a 1. A time limit. Grant this for a four the end of four years we find it is a real detriment, we can reverse ourselves. 2. If the dirt roads need re -grading due to the heavy use, have the DPW re -grade and charge the Airport. 3. Traffic --no need to have cars parked on Old Have err Airport There's plenty of parking on Airport property. hire an off-duty policeman to enforce parking onl on Airport property. of 4. Even though the area will not flood without plenty notice to remove the equipment, t, auctions TheAirportd shoulnot dhprepareeld at tha time of the Spring runoff contingency plan for oil spills and clean-up. 5. Limit the auctions to two per year, with two days in, one day auction, and two days out. He concluded, "The Airport is an integral part of Northampton. It is not a huge moneymaker. I'd 1 help see a vital airport, and the revenue from the auctions and eeds Mr. Weil interjected, "This is Special astipulationsy are amore a Special Permit under 13.4. a Finding." appropriate to a Special Permit than is Ch. Buscher pointed out th that thethe irportpuseRj2osea andelooked to substantially more detrimental Y "_- Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals May 31, 1989 Meeting Pacie Two Section 10.10 for guidance. He found that the proposed use is allowed by Section 5.2. He went on, "The Applicant placed a great deal of emphasis on similar activities in the area, such as tractor pulls at the Three County Fairgrounds, but I think that tells us we should be watching what the Fairgrounds is doing. The Fairgrounds is located just off Bridge Street, and surrounded on three sides by dense residential areas. The Airp rt is and oin tan other side of a significant_ "barrier," Route agricultural area. It is not in the same neighborhood as the Fairgrounds. The Airport use is out of place, but it's OK. We can and should stop alterations and increases of use at the Airport. I really think these auctions alter the character of the area. They create trafficcongestion, peope park on tions won't work - -I fear fortenforche eae of the bility. conditions I agree with Sandy and vote to deny." Mr. Weil moved to deny the Finding. Ch. Buscher seconded, and the motion passed 2-1 (Laband). Also present, in addition to those mentioned, was R. J. Pascucci, Board Secretary. /11\ Robert C. Buscher, Chairman U Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals May 3, 1989 Meeting Page One The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals met at 7:4 p- m. on Wednesday, May 3, 1989 in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Pl ication Municipal Building to continue a Public Hearing on the App of Northampton Airport, Inc. for a Finding under the Provisions of Section 9.3(a) and/or (b) for the purpose Present allowing occasional sent and voting were auctions of equipment on Airport property. Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Dr. Peter Laband, and M. Sanford Weil, Jr. Ch. Buscher opened the Hearing, commenting that, at the Public Hearing originally held on April 5, 1989, Atty. Seewald, representing the Airport, heas asked minutes tomemorialize the lApril 5th meeting ebe s. Dr. Laband moved that approved without reading. Mr. Weil seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Atty. Seewald announced that he did more investigation on the historical aspect of auctions, and had to concede that he can't prove grandfathering --"peoples' memories aren't clear," and concluded, "We are here for a Finding." Of Ch. Buscher read a letter her am the DPW bear concerning the loads thatythe the roads leading into t Atty. trucks loaded with heavy equipment would be carrying. Seewald said he "finds it hedshows them] dd that this sofuthe ld ctypes ome rof vehiom the cles I had photos taken today that routinely use thesWen� aOdn; He suggest to you photo that one day junkyard. Mr. Seewald "I sugg auctions held twice a year than the oad are airpornot tbusenif tially more detrimental to that neighborhood Mr. Weil read a memo from the ConsComm dated Octobet isar potential recommending "that the request be denied, a pollution source ... and Inco He tthen read eble with the he minutes of thepurpose and eMarch the Special Conservancy. and a March 31, 1989 memo from them to 27, 1989 ConsComm meeting, Ch. Buscher. Mr. Seewald antifreeze. ed that 1We bring in thiseequipment there full of oil, gas we have a and and that's s„bst�antiallY more for five days twice a year, There may be limited detrimental than the airport use. more possibilities for pollution, but this is,Iftwh�sat thetarport is detrimental." Mr. Weil's response was, doing now is detrimental, then to exacerbate that is m_ plied thathe didn ' t think it was detrimental." Mr. Seewald reargument about planes full of exacerbating, and repeated his prior gasoline, etc. er of the stO, Own The Chair called for proponenof �thedRichard DPW leer, he "measured Old airport, said that in light a spot that's 18' wide. If that's Ferry Road today, and there is Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals May 3, 1989 Meeting Pac_te Two a concern about the auctions, then it's a concern of the Fairgrounds, wl.ottheir torlfuigs-ishe farmewith their a reason to deny me,sthen ray equipment and pato trucks all the others should be denied." There being no other proponents, the Chair called for opponents, and the following people spoke: Patricia Stone Riverbank Road, said she didn't object to the Airport, "but we are SC --we don't want to open it up. If Giusto gets a permit, then others will want permits for God knows what. The farmers have to use the road." Coun. Budgar was afraid that "this just opens up the door." Ch. Buscher reminded him that the Board could condition any permit to limit uses." Coun. Brooks said "I feel like Mrs. Stone. Preserve what we have. I don't want auctions in my meadows. The planes are in far better shape than this old equipment." Mr. Weil asked if there could be a limit of "one day in, one day auction, and one day out?" Mr. Seewald felt that would make for too heavy traffic. The auction itself would be 10 a.m. to 3 p.m., but a week is needed for logistics. As to Mr. Brooks' comment about the condition of the equipment, he added, "These are not junk vehicles, they are extraordinarily expensive." Mr. Gengler of the ConsComm asked, "Who will enforce whatever conditions you write? It will be very difficult, and I want to go on record as saying that." Mr. Weil asked, "Are auctions an airport activity?" Mr. Seewald's response was, "This is an extension, change or modification of the airport use. The airport Fallonsells said I need a Finding, andselling something else. Kathleenthat's why I'm here." Rose Zamburowski [sp?.1 said, "We have enough traffic now." Cynthia Mellow said, "Any extension in the SC District should be looked at very carefully. Why let 'ungrandfathered activity' come in?" Mr. Seewald said, "I don't want to minimize the Riverbank Road people's concerns, but there's an awful lot of activity there now. Are two auctions a year substantially more detrimental?" moved There being no others who andd to the matter speak, t ken underLaband advisementt the PPublic Hearing be closed Mr. Weil stated, "I'm ready to decide tonight." Ch. Buscher opined that he would ,just �� as soon o We 1 ksecondedd theer moti advisement, to lose l the decide if you want. M Hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Dr. Laband said, "To to recommendde auctions approval withallow three-yearptime is unfair. I'd like to Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals May 3, 1989 Meeting Parte Three limit so we can re-evaluate it, to see if there are spills and contamination, or compliance. The airport has lived by our conditions in the past. The viability of the airport is important to Northampton. If we can do something that's no harm to the neighborhood, it's worth a try. I asked George A[ndrikidis] about the likelihood of the road coming apart, and he said that was remote. The note from the ConsComm wasn't a clear-cut 'no -no.' Because of all the concerns, though, we might want a bond posted to cover road repair." Mr. Weil commented, "A Finding is a judgement call at best. Is this substantially more detrimental? As to the viability of the airport, are the auctions a 'make or break' situation? I have reservations. You [to Dr. Laband] are much more positive than I. I'm not persuaded at this point. The fact that others in the area are doing things is irrelevant." Ch. Buscher said to Dr. Laband, "You want to think over conditions?" Dr. Laband's reply was, "Yes, I want to be ver specific." Mr. Weil asked that Mr. Smith's memo be made a part of the record. Also present, in addition to those mentioned, was R. J. Pascucci, Board Secretary. Robert C. Buscher, Chairman Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals April 5, 1989 Meeting Page One The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals met at 8:30 p. m. on Wednesday, April 5, 1989 in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, to consider the Application of Northampton Airport, Inc. for a Finding under the Provisions of Section 9.1(a) and/or (b) that the conducting of occasional auctions of heavy equipment on the airport property is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the operations of the airport itself, a pre-existing, nonconforming use and structures. Present and voting were Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Dr. Peter Laband, and M. Sanford Weil, Jr. Ch. Buscher opened the Public Hearing by reading the Application, and commenting that on November 16, 1988, this Board of Appeals did hold a Public Hearing that was not attended by the Applicant, and voted to deny Applicant's request. The Applicant sought judicial relief, the Court felt that Applicant should be allowed to present its case, and the matter was remanded. He read an October 26, 1988 memorandum from the Conservation Commission, a November 1 memorandum from the Planning Board recommending denial, and a March 311, 1989 memorandum from David Gengler, Chairman of the Conservation Commission. He also read Sections 9.3 (a) and (b). Atty. Alan Seewald appeared for the Applicant, who opened by saying, "We are here for a finding that no Finding is necessary, because this use is grandfathered." He presented the Board with copies of a letter from one Bill Backiel, along with a copy of an advertisement for a sealed bid auction of equipment to be held March 14-23, 1975, and another held in late September, 1984. He said that auctions were routinely held twice a year, each lasting a week. He said they were held almost annually. He stated that Mr. Giusto bought the airport in 1982, and held an auction in 1983. He added, "I suggest it's now too late to take enforcement action on something that began 14 years ago." He added that "Giusto held one in 1983, and every year since, semi-annually, until there was a Cease and Desist Order." He added that the last auction was held on Route 5, just South of the Hilton. He went on, "I am here tonight because Atty. Fallon and I agreed I should be here." Mr. Seewald went on, "The use was established 14 years ago. The Statute of Limitations has run, and the Board can't stop them now. We are willing to submit to a Finding with conditions that will satisfy the neighbors." As to the issue of being substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood, Mr. Seewald pointed out, "The 'neighborhood' is Route 91, cornfields, a baseball field, four or five houses and the Three County Fairgrounds. The only houses that would be passed by the equipment are those on Old Ferry Road. The Fair brings in tractor pulls, motorcycle races, etc. This is not a residential neighborhood. The equipment auctions are use of the land in an appropriate manner. Most of the listed abutters don't live next to the airport --they are farmers. There may be some Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals April 5, 1989 Meeting Page Two incidental inconvenience to Old Ferry Road neighbors, but not to the point of 'substantially more detrimental.' We are willing to stipulate to no parking on the road, we will pay policemen, post a bond, limit the auctions to twice a year, Spring and Fall, .and only one day long. This airport is used for a gathering place for many things --skydiving, charity events; there is not substantially more detriment to the neighborhood." Dr. Laband opined that Section 9.3(b) applied here, since it is a use question. Ch. Buscher said that the ConsComm was concerned about pollution, and Mr. Seewald commented, "Their opinion is only an opinion." Mr. Giusto pointed out that there is only a small amount of fuel in the pieces of equipment. "They are started, sold or not sold, and taken away." Mr. Seewald pointed out that there is a history of animosity between the ConsComm and the Airport, "especially Gengler." Dr. Laband cautioned, "Don't make too light of the ConsComm's opinion. They are concerned." Mr. Seewald replied, "I have a high regard for the ConsComm and their mission." Dr. Laband asked, "What happened at the Planning Board?" Mr. Giusto replied, "One in favor, all the rest against. They were concerned about the streets' ability to support the trucks. Ch. Buscher called for proponents, but there were none. He called for opponents, and the following people spoke: Patricia Stone, 129 Riverbank Road, said, "In 1974 they brought all this equipment down --no one knew anything. They were held on Airport property next to Mr. Paquette's house. It rained for a week --the road was a disaster. The next one we stopped. They didn't start again until 1983. We don't want our Special Conservancy changed in any way. That's why we're here." She added that the auctions have not been held since 1926, as reported in a newspaper. She concluded, "We can't see upsetting our neighborhood for something not connected to airport operations." David Gengler said he was here "as a citizen of Northampton, and could represent the ConsComm if someone wants. He said he felt, "The root of the problem is with the Pre-existing nonconforming use. Is the auction an extension? No one has ever defined what goes on at the Northampton Airport. My strongest desire is that someone sit down and clearly define what uses and structures exist at the airport. A potential buyer would want to know what he could do there. Can you once and for all clear up what can and can't be done there?" Dr. Laband commented, "We are talking if the airport were not there, you couldn't put one there now. It is there, and it's pre- existing, nonconforming. 9.3 says you can alter a pre-existing nonconforming use if it's not substantially more detrimental to the Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals April 5, 1989 Meeting Page Three neighborhood. Mr. Seewald interjected, "I have not dropped the argument that we have a pre-existing, nonconforming use. We are willing to put conditions. I have not conceded the auctions are illegal." Mr. Gengler stated, "I believe the job the ZBA must do is decide what sort of growth and development can happen at the Northampton Airport. Nobody is determining whether what they are doing is allowable. Flood storage is a real issue. Where do we draw the line? The Special Conservancy is not suitable for development. We object to heavy oils and transmission fluid where they shouldn't be." Coun. Budgar commented, "If we allow this, does this mean we open up the Special Conservancy? What does heavy equipment have to do with running an airport? I'm fearful." Alba James, 81 Riverbank Road, stated, "I have nothing against the airport or its- owner. I would like this Board to look at how many years in sequence have auctions taken place. Was there nothing between 1975 and 1983? I don't think there's a history of continuous auctions. This equipment is gigantic --it's carried on trucks that fill the whole street. That in itself presents a danger. The airport has no business with heavy equipment auctions." Coun. Brooks stated, "I am generally against putting any more pollution in our flood plain with no regulations." Mr. Seewald used his rebuttal time to make the following points: "As to Mrs. Stone's feelings about the 1974-75 auctions on Riverbank Road, this is to be on Crosspath Road. As to Mr. Gengler's comments, there is a history of animosity between the ConsComm and the airport. As to growth and development, Kathleen Fallon has said what can be done and what can't. The only issue here is two one -day auctions, and are they substantially more detrimental? We will post a bond, work with the ZBA for conditions that everyone can live with, but this is not Elm Street --it's farmland and an airport." Mr. Giusto pointed out that he knows of "100 junk cars in the floodplain now." Mr. Gengler's response was that it makes no sense to increase that activity. Mrs. James said she agreed with Mr. Gengler, was worried about the traffic, and felt it would definitely be substantially more detrimental. Ch. Buscher brought up three of Mr. Seewald's points --1) "Your argument that you don't need a Finding," 2) Your statement that simple discontinuance is not enough --there must be intent, 3) The Statute of Limitations has run and we have to accept this illegal Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals April 5, 1989 Meeting Page Four activity. He asked Mr. Seewald "to memorialize these issues," and added that, although he didn't have a copy of 40A with him, he was quite sure there was no Statute of Limitations longer than 10 years. He added, "I'm not going to reach a decision tonight. Provide us with citations, and the names of people who gave permission to run auctions." Mr. Brooks asked that the Public Hearing be continued, not closed. Dr. Laband said that, if we continue the hearing, we should get the DPW's opinion on the load limit for the roads involved, contact the ConsComm to see if they have particular problems concerning pollution and compensatory flood storage, and determine "how many days in and out" around the one -day auction. He moved that the Public Hearing be continued to May 3, 1989. Mr. Weil seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Also present, in addition to those mentioned, was R. J. Pascucci, Board Secretary. Robert C. Buscher, Chairman Paul O. Hadsel Director o/ Public Works Peter J. McNulty, Sr. Assistant Director o/ Public Works CITY OF NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 125 Locust Street Northampton, MA 01060 413-582-1570 May 1, 1989 Robert Buscher, Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Ref: Northampton Airport P - Heavy Equipment Auction Dear Mr. Buscher: In response to your April 28, 1989 request re mentioned ZBA case we have the followinggardin the above comments: g 1• The width of Old Ferry therefore the roadway cannot Road iaccommodates in ntrailersscarr heavyequipment. wide, The roadway width of Cross Path Roadis22 feet wide. 2• The pavement of both streets is in Road has been paved recentl good condition and t e y)• We have no record of (Cross depth yp of the sub -base material used to construct the road- way, however the subgrade material should be comprised of silts (part of the Connecticut River floodplan), which do not have great bearing capacit that heav y• Based on the above we are of the opinion y construction traffic over these two roadways might damage the existing pavement. If you have any questions please call me or George Andri at 582-1574. kidis POH/GA/k cc: Nancy Duseau, Planning Board Very truly yours, Paul 0. Hadsel, Director of Public Works City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation* Historic Preservation • Planning Boards Zoning Board of Appeals NORTHAMPTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes: March 27, 1989 The Northampton Conservation Commission met on Monday, March 27, 1989 at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton. Members present were Chairperson David Gengler, Richard Carnes, Ralph Emrick `Frank"' Peters, Mason Maronn, and Susan Roy. Planning staff Wayne Feiden and Larry Smith and associate members Robert Dostal and Mark NeJame were also present. Executive Session: At 7:00 PM Gengler requested that the Conservation Commission go into executive session to discuss negotiations for quiring property. On a roll call vote Gengler, Carnes, Emrick,,,Peters, and Maronn agreed to go into an executive session (Roy came in at 7:05, after the roll call vote). The executive session ended at 7:15 PM. Minutes: Upon motion by Maronn and second by Peters the minutes of March 13, 1989 were unanimously approved as submitted. Correspondence: Site visits for March 30 were set for Malinoski at 3:30 and Fitzgerald Lake and Burke Conservation Areas at 4:00. Dates and times for photo for identification cards for Commission members were also arranged. Feiden presented plans to apply for a grant from the Wharton Trust for seed money to establish a revolving loan fund for protecting open space in Northampton as part of the•Conservation Commission's Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Valley Land Fund. Upon motion by Peters and second by Emrick the Commission voted unanimously to authorize the grant application and to accept the grant if it is awarded. In reference to the Northampton Airport's request for a finding to allow equipment sales, the Commission voiced concerns about the requested activity in the f loodplain. Upon motion by Roy and second by Carnes, the Commission voted unanimously to write the Zoning Board of Appeals indicating that the request could not be adequately evaluated by the Commission because of a lack of information on the duration and timing of the proposed equipment sales and on water quality concerns relating to how the equipment is stored. 1 INSPECTOR William A. Nimohay of X't DEPARTMENT OP BUILDIXG INSPECTIONS 212 Main Street ' Municipal Building Northampton, Mass. 01060 To: Zoning Board of Appeals From: William A. Nimohay, Building Commissioner Date: May 4, 1988 Dubject: Northampton Airport, Cross Path & Old Ferry Roads, Northampton 1. PARACHUTE JUMPING A. Mr. Goodman as been jumping for the past thirty four (34) years. Approx. May 1966 to present. B. John Fulmore logs 1972 on. From evidence shown to me jumping has been conducted since 1935 to present. 2. SIGN ON ROOF A. Lobby pictures show sign existed in 1969 B. Other pictures 1974 until present time 3. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY A. Letter form Daily Hampshire Gazette dated April 26, 1988, indicating that they have done this for the past twenty (20) years (editor, James Foudy) . B. Pictures shown in lobby 1974-1975, also 1968. C. Parachute pictures could be obtained prior to 1950 if necessary. WILLIAM A. NIMUH-AT— BUILDING COMMISSIONER WAN/lb f April 18, 1989 The world seems likely to last a long, long time, and we ought to make provisions for the future... We are trustees of the future. We are not here for ourselves alone. James Bryce, from "Trustees of the future" (1913) Dear Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals: Inmaking your decision regarding the Northampton Airport's request to hold auctions of heavy that site, please consider the followin that at g points: I. Grandfather clause: is a clause creating an exemption in some laws because of a condition existing prior to that particular legislation. The airport itself could be considered to have been grandfathered and exempted from certain present zoning ordinances. Auction of heavy equipment, on the other hand, cannot be. Auctions which took place in 1975, 1976 and 1983 and were met by heavy Opposition from the residents of the community, and were followed by a cease and desist order, cannot be considered to have been a condition existing pr ordinances; and exempt, ior to zoning 2• Statute of Limitations: No right to hold auctions had accrued to the airport, therefore no statute of limitations applies. Opposition 1975, 1976 and 1983, folly to owedby aceased andsdesistcordes in toiledany statute of limitation that could be a r pplied. 3. Detrimental effects: they are, damage to streets, traffic, congestion, environmental concerns, commercial- ization of the meadows, safety issues for children and other residents of the area. If you allow the airport to hold auctions of heavy equipment, you will in effect take the Position interests are greater than those of theCommunityhin wtheir hich it is located. Auctions bring in a few thousand dollars in revenue to the owners of the airport - balance that against the detrimental effect of that activit y. go out of business ifit does not hold The io ort will not Guisto's promises and suggestions and his availability for signs meadows is all very interesting but of very li tleo min to the residents since the ai or PR 2 5 1989 Guisto's lawyer suggested that thoseportsobl obligations for sale. wrould "run O�PICE OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT r` with the land". If the auctions are to be considered revenue -raising, why would new owners be interested in spending a good portion of that revenue for police, signs and parking and also abide to numerous conditions before they can hold an auction. Such obligations would prove cumbersome and make title less marketable. In addition, the language of such a conveyance will be subject to constant re -interpretation. This suggestion is short term and unrealistic. Finally, the activities of the fairgrounds cannot be equated with those of auctions at the airport. The fairgrounds engage in activities consistent with New England fairs, i.e. horse shows, circus, 4-H activities, the fair itself and other events of similar type appealing to a broad cross section of Western Massachusetts, and a source of revenue for the City of Northampton. If you make a statement now, and deny their request to use the airport in a non -conforming way, you will take a position that encompasses the best interest of all parties. The airport will remain an airport: nothing added, nothing taken away. The meadows will be protected and will continue to enjoy special conservancy status: nothing added, nothing taken away. Thank you for your consideration. Si »r•crnl •T CITY of NORTHAMPTON 66'4UT2Tdwoo aqq ;O SUOTgaod asogq 'UOTg2bTgsqAUT za14-4zn; zoo 90T;J0 9nTq2zqsTUTwpY 914,4 o,4 pu2waz O-4 ATsnowTu2un P940A papog aqq 'Uospea sT14q .103 •9OuTs ATsnonuiquoO PUP ' 90U2UTPao bUTUOZ 2 ;O uoTgdop2 aqq oq aoTad uo paTaapo uaaq 9A214 S9T4TAT402 9s9g4 40u aO a9g4914M 14sTTgpgsa oq papaau S2M UOTq2w10;UT9aOw 42144 paUTw.z9-49p paws aqq Os ' avbupq 2 ;O ;OOa aqq uo paquT2d ubTs 2 ;o aouasead aqq pup ' Agdpabogoqd T2Ta9Y 'bUTdwnr 9gngo2z2a 04 9AT,42Taz butz29x OTTgna 886T IE Aalenzga3 a144 q2 paquasead aouapTAa Ou aO 9T44TT s2M 9.1914.1„ :,4214,4 Z# uT ATT2oT;Toads pagTo '886T ' ZZ Aaenaga3 uo panssT l aagquw ST144 UO UOTST09Q S,VSZ 9144 UT '402; UI *SS9UTsnq buTdwn[/UOTgona4SUT 9gngopapd pup SS9UTsnq Agdpabogoqd T2T za2 a14q o'4 paeba.z 14'4TM j`azaq 14,4TM paazbp za14gTau 'SUOT-4on2 quawdTnba UOT-4onz-4suoo Pup abraogs aTTgowogn2 aqq ;O UOTq2qazdza4Ut 91914 UO UOTT2.3 sN 9144 144TM paazb2 vaz.pup p12og butuupTd 914-4 14-4oq 9TT14M 4jPa0aT2 TT2wS 90 asn a144 ao; gaodaT2 u2 ;o saTgTATgop pup UOTgpaado aqq ;o '4ard OTSUTa4UT U2 9a9M 5914q asnpoaq buTuoz 14,4TM 90U2w10;U00 UT 9z9M SS9UTsnq 6UTdnm1/UOT4Ona4SUT 9gn14oered 914-4 pup SS9UTsnq ATAd2zbo-4ogd T2T-192 914-4 -4214-4 pup (asn buTwzo;uoouou buT4STx9-aid s,,zod-TT2 9144 ;o g12d qou azaM 15;9144) 9oueUTP-10 bUTUOZ 914-4 ;O UOT-42TotA UT 9.z9M SUOT-4On2 quawdTnba UOTgonagsuoo pup 952zo-4s 9Ttgowo-4n2 aqq gpgq 'L86T 'T aagwaoaa pagpp aogoadsul buTpTTng aqq Oq .z9gg9T .1914 UT 'panbl2 p214 .10-4TOTTOS S4TO -4u2-4s914 'q02; UI • gspd aqq UT 4UTOd ST144 P9UTW949P P214 aO4TOTTOS AgTO 4u24sTSS-► 9qq 42144 9OU9a9g9a 9144 144TM 4UTod ST144 p9SSTwSTp ATqueaedd2 Xauaoggp s,gaodaT2 914.1 *ST asn PTO aqq gp14M ATgopxa MoUX q,Uop nOA ;T asn PTO 9144 U2144 T24U9wTa49P GaOw ATT2Tqupgsgns ST UOTSU2dx9 ao asn Mau 9144 ;T 9UTma949P 9UO scop Moq 'S2 anssT 4UPgaOdwT put T29a 2 aq oq aradd2 PTnOM STgl •dn aw2o asn bUTwzO;UOOUOU buT4STxa-ead T259T s,qzodzT2 914q P94n4T4SUOO 4214M ;O anssT 914-4 '14-S TTad`d Uo pTa14 UOT42oTTdd2 paouaaa;aa anog2 aqq UO bUiaP9x OTTgnd anoA qV :311A 686T '8Z TTadY :31da 4s9nb9g bUTPUT3/•ouI 'gaodaTy uogdumgqaOH :1p3('8f1S a9UU2Td aOTU9S '14,4TwS sv, , sT2addv ;o WnONVV0VJ3W 1 q 13A30 PUB JNINNVId ;0 30Idd0 4 � • g aougampa P.z2Og BUTUOZ :woHA :01 NO1dYYVH1aON 10 A113 In going through your ZBA file on this matter, I found a letter to the ZBA from Building Inspector William Nimohay, dated May 4, 1988 (a copy of which is attached) in which he has determined that: 1. the current parachute instruction/ jumping business is legal because a Mr. Goodman has been jumping there since 1966 and a John Fulmore has been jumping there since 1972, 2. the new sign on the roof is legal because there are pictures from 1969 and 1974 showing old roof signs, 3. the aerial photography business is legal because a) the Daily Hampshire Gazette has taken pictures from planes flying out of the airport for the past twenty (20) years, b) there are aerial photos of the airport in the airport's lobby taken in 1974-1975 and 1968, and c) parachute pictures could be obtained from prior to 1950. However, I can find no record in the ZBA file that the ZBA ever discussed, concurred with or accepted these interpretations. Has the ZBA in fact ever discussed these findings of the Building Inspector and concluded that the current parachute instruction/ jumping business, aerial photography business and new roof sign are part of the airport's pre-existing nonconforming use? It would seem imperative that the ZBA would have to determine this prior to establishing whether any further expansion of the airport is substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood. I would like to point out that neither Ms Fallon nor I had ever seen a copy of Mr. Nimohay's interpretations (and we were both quite surprised to find it in the ZBA file) nor had we ever discussed it with Mr. Nimohay. In light of this, I would like to offer you my perspective on the above. 1. I don't think that anyone would argue with the fact that occasionally individuals have parachuted, and perhaps even exhibitions of parachute jumping have occurred in the past at the airport. However, how does that relate or manifest itself into a full-fledged business that occurs every day, all day long over the course of the full season. 2. I don't think that anyone would argue with the fact that there have been previous signs on the roof of the hangar at the airport in the past. However, a) signs of that size are not permitted in that Zoning District, b) changing the lettering or message of a sign is considered to be a change, alteration or modification of that sign, and c) Section 7.6 of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance quite clearly and explicitly states that a pre-existing nonconforming sign may only be altered or modified so as to be in conformance with the Zoning Ordinance. So, contrary to Mr. Nimohay's opinion, without receiving a Variance, the current sign on the hangar roof is unquestionably illegal. 3. I don't think that anyone would argue with the fact that people have taken photographs from airplanes which have taken off from the Northampton Airport. However, how does that relate or manifest itself into a full-fledged, bonafide, advertised business. I have had people over to my house for dinner but I don't think that entitles me to now open up a restaurant there. I think it is extremely important that it be definitively and clearly established as to exactly what constitutes the airport's pre-existing nonconforming use. This is in everyone's best interest including the city, the neighbors and the airport. Especially in light of the fact that certain activities and operations at the airport are now being sold off individually, including the new charter service, a use that I believe ZBA Chairman Buscher specifically cited as needing a ZBA Finding as an expansion of the airport's pre-existing nonconforming use when this original Appeal was being considered. As I will be unable to attend your meeting on May 3rd, I would like this letter read at the meeting, and incorporated into the minutes. Bill Backiel's P.O. Box 5.30 Elm Street, Hatfield. Mass. Olou Used Equipment Newsletter Atty. Allan Seewald Five East Pleasant Street Amherst, MA 01002 Dear Mr. Seewald: Telephone: 247-5404 & 247-5975 April 13, 1989 The dates of our sales at the airport property were September 20th through the 23rd 1974, and March 14th through the 23rd in 1975. Both sale sites were located on the property abutting Riverbank Road although we did utilize the area south-west of the air strip off Cross Path to load, unload, and store equipment. We were not stopped from holding the sales, but moved because the airport owner more than doubled the proposed rental. There was a subsequent auction which I attended (but did not organize) sometime during 1976 (I beleive) which took place on the southerly side of the airport adjacent to the airplane parking lot. I did obtain permits from the City Clerks office prior to both sales. Initially, no one at the City Clerks office knew what type of permit to issue and I was required to return, meeting directly with the City Clerk. The fee was nominal and apparently paid in cash. The permits are long since gone. Sincerel , William H. Backiel CITY of NORTHAMPTON OFFICE of PLANNING and DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: George Andrikidis, DPW FROM: Bob Pascucci SUBJECT: Heavy Equipment Auctions, Northampton Airport DATE: April 28, 1989 FILE: I just had a call from Peter.Laband re: the weight of trucks that Old Ferry Road can handle. Attached is a little background material. _I think they are talking primarily flatbed tractor -trailers with enormous pieces of construction machinery on them. Can you give us your opinion in time for next Wednesday's meeting? Thanks. CITY OF NORTHAMPTON ,1° 7l � Map Nob'�� Lot o• �s ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION+, , . Zoning Ordinance Section 10.2 `�1vad� F� Plan File Owner North n Fon-Ai ort, Inc. Address Old Ferry Road, Northampton MA 01060 Address Old Ferry Road, Northampton MA 01060 Telephone 584-1860 Telephone 584-1860 ■4i� This section is to be filled out in accordance with the "Table of Dimensional (Z.O. ARTICLE VI) Zoning Use Lot Front Depth p Setbac �l.Md. Min. Op. District Area Width ❑ Subdivision Front Side ear Coke Space Past � Existin 49.4 0� 3�3�' Dov �,oSC_' b o', e1 /� F � L i3 % / /�.J % Present Proposed ttnmx tj Lt a. 4 rsc- 3-,--31 } -7 oo ' } 4 TO , 9 ts `Sr k v% �3 g .2. J Mark the appropriate box to indicate the use of the parcel: l Non -Conforming Lot and/or Structure. Specify 1c4 64 ❑ Residential ❑Single Family Unit ❑ Duplex Business ❑ Individual ❑ Institutional ❑ Subdivision ❑ Regular ❑ Cluster ❑ Subdivision with "Approval -Not -Required" -Stamp: ❑ Planning Board Approval: ❑ Zoning Board Approval (Special Permit 10.9: Variance) ❑ City Council (Special Exception S. 10.10) ❑ Multi -Family ❑ Other ❑ P.U.D. ❑ Other Watershed Protection District Overlay: (Z.O. Sect. XIV) ❑ Yes No Parking Space Requirements: (Z.O. Sect. 8.1) r,1�p, Required Proposed Loading Space Requirements: (Z.O. Sect. 8.2) Required Proposed Signs: (Z.O. Art. VII) ❑ Yes to No Environmental Performance Standards: (Z.O. Art. XII) ❑ Yes IV No Plot Plan (S.10.2) ❑ Yes ❑ No This section for OFFICIAL use only: ❑ Approval as presented: p Modifications necessary for approval: ❑ Return: (More information needed) � I Denial: Reasons: 2r,a)i Gl,, ral Signature of Applicant/Date Site Plan) Yes ❑ No (S. 10.2 and 10.11 Waiver Granted: Date ❑ ldlh Signature of Admin. Off cer &ate t' V , ~- v+�t tla t�r3as es Red"' Redd B 1 nth ked Filed Fee Pd. Application Number: 931 Rec'd. ZBA Map(s) Parcel(s) BY 0E Y t to 11 Oats Amt. tw Opt �,�p BY Date Name of Applicant NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC. Address Old -Ferry Road, Northamoton, Massachusetts, 01060 2. Owner of Property NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC. Address Old Ferry Road, Northamnton, MaaRachusetts- 01060 3. Applicant is: ®Owner; OContract Purchaser; OLessee; OTenant in Possession. 4. Application is made for: `1 VARIANCE from the provisions of Section page of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Northampton. OSPECIAL PERMIT under the provisions of Section -page -of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Northampton. 10OTHER: Finding cinder 7.nning Ordinance. Section 9.3(B) 5. Location of Property 152 + 164 Cross Path Rd./Old Ferry Road being situated on the easterly side of Cross Path Roadi and shown on the Assessors' Maps, Sheet No. 25Bn Parcels) 15 + 71 6. Zone Rper4al rnnaervaney Zone 7. Description of ';proposed work and/or use; See Exhibit A attached. See Exhibit ]C attached 8.(a) Sketch plan attached �13 Yes ONO Attached to this Application is the Notice of See Exhibit 0 attached Intent which the Applicant filed with the Conservation (b) Site plan:/KJAttched O Not Required Commission, which provide additional detail about the Proposed Work. 9. Set forth reasons upon which application is based: The new hanbpr whi rh t g. to he rnnRtrurtAd will provide protection for aircraft which otherwise would remain at n,vta4Aa rte An&m spaces. The Proposed Work will not be substautd uses, and will in all likelihood render the Aov] the area, and more beneficial to the anu4rnnTnont viability of the Applicant's operations at Northampton Airport. 10. Abutters (see instructions; list on Exhibit B attached. 12. 1 hereby cerat information contained herein Is true to the best of my knowledge. tif t Date za ppllcant's Signature Exhibit A�; j frg f'x � l DEC 2 11987 # DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECE €?' The Northampton Airport is proposing to construct an airplane hanger on land it owns adjacent to Cross Path Road. The 12,500 square foot building, to be con- structed by Quabbin Construction, will be located 75 feet off of and parallel to an existing hanger, as shown on the attached plans. The •site of the proposed hanger is completely within the 100 -year flood plain of the Connecticut River, as is most of the airport. This Notice of Intent is being filed in compliance with the Wetlands Protection Act for bordering land subject to flooding. The plan and calculations attached show that the proposed work will satisfy the per- formance standard for bordering land subject to flooding (Sec. 10.57 (4) a (1 & 2). In fact, to satisfy cut and fill requirements at each 1 -foot interval ele- vation, about 650 C.Y. (0.4 AC -FT) of additional storage had to be provided. The elevation of the 100 -year storm.for this site is about 125 feet. This Notice of Intent also contains site runoff calculations, although they are not expressly required by the Act for this type of resource area. Since the watershed drains to a somewhat isolated area with minimal outflow through the nearly buried existing 12" V.C. pipe, these calculations were performed, assum- ing essentially zero outflow. The analysis of the .10 -year event for the .8.6 acre water shed showed that, due to the added storage provided, the water level in this depression is actually reduced from 119.5 feet to 119.4 feet (see hydro - graphs attached). This would be the governing 10 -year flood for the area since the 10 -year flood of the river is about 118.5 feet. As the storm intensity increases, however, the flood levels, due to the site runoff, becomes insigni- ficant, as the flood of the river is more intensive. As stated above, the general contractor for the work will be Quabbin Construc- tion Co., Inc. of Belchhertown, MA. The proposed steel building will be pro- vided by Erect -A -Tubs Inc. of Harvard, IL. The building frame will be set on concrete footings which will be set at finish grade (121.00). The only flood storage occupied by the building would be the steel I -beams and 28 gage siding. This volume is less than 1 C.Y. at each one -foot elevation and is negligible. In the event of a severe flood, the planes will be moved out and the hanger will flood (4 feet deep for 100 -year flood). The floor of the hanger and• the access road will be constructed of about 3 inches of bituminous concrete laid on about 12 inches of compacted gravel. In addition to the estimated total of 650 C.Y. of material to be removed, matching volumes of the gravel and bituminous concrete must also be removed and properly disposed of so that the finish grades on the attached plan are achieved. After final grading and paving, remaining areas will then be seeded as soon asis• practical. Exhibit B Lyle E. Haggerty 20 Riverbank Road Northampton, Mass. Sheet 925 Parcel 32, 33 George Reynolds t� ' 85 Main Street Florence, Mass. Sheet 25 Parcel 20 Mary Muzyka pl l DEC 2 359 Bridge Street � Northampton, Mass. Sheet 925 Parcel 35 William and Victoria Jasinski DEPT. P;7 BUILDING INS rc " 29 Fair Street N Ri}i•,�� OaC1f1 Northampton, Mass. Sheet 925 PParcel arcel 26. 37, 38,.'41 Joseph and Jane Bobala 17 Old Ferry Road Northampton, Mass. Sheet 925 Parcel 39 Robert Zuraw 321 Bridge Street Northampton, Mass. Sheet 925 Parcel 40 Frank Gnacek 80 West Street Amherst, Mass. Sheet 925 Parcel 42 Hampshire, Hampden and Franklin County Agricultural Society P.O. Box 305 Northampton, Mass. Shuat 925 Parcel 44 Irene T. Hoynoski i Bernard S. Borowski 26 Williams Street Northampton, mass. Sheet 925 Parcel 45 Stacia A. Borowski 128 Cross Path Rodd Northampton, Mars. Shave 925 Pnrcai 46, 56 Stephan and Emily Koszala 140 Fair Street Northampton, Mass. Sheet 925 Parcel 52 Sheat 933 Parcel 1 John R. Szawlowski 126 North Maple Florence, Mass. Sheet 925 Parcel 54 Sheet 932 Parcel 6 �r John Zigmont 60 West Street Hadley, Mass. Sheet 925 Parcel 14 Charles and Joseph Zigmont 60 West Street Hadley, Mass. Sheet 925 Parcel 13 Raymont Paquatte 58 Line Street Easthampton, Mass. Sheet 925 Parcel ,12 Joseph Buckowski 175 Grove Street Northampton, Mass. Sheet 925 Parcel 11 Mary, Joseph and Adam Czarniecki 291 Riverside Drive Northampton, Mass. Sheet 932 Parcel 5 Allards Farm, Inc. 41 South Maple Hadley, Mass. Sheet 932 Parcel 7 Sebastian Chunglo Hadley, Mass. 01035 Sheet 933 Parcel 2 EXHIBIT C r t DEC 2 1 1987 Iles • \ 1 � .12]..x- . • - II 135.3 I1 1 IN NS 123. `. \ \ / \ \ 11 \ � Civ. \ \ .122.0 .`:. •119.7 �. , � \ \\ \ \ �... j�.12 . � � ,� .. � � 1 • 1$20 \ .` \\ \\ �� ". i 40 L A F ` 1 v ROAD 14s 141L x�.014.0, t ' Up • 014.0 33 , '+ -" PJ�AIN9G� Alec ✓�pP e i i EXHIBIT D 1 � 'C 1987 ► Z �A WjI -*, 'i . Tib, ref. iti. �)ll"it to m PAT H m �, A RISS 111111 �—•�_��— .� -------------- �—� — „_�•�•�� —i20_-� Gl a \ m o� / ti \ 'yc 00 r r 90 A LA N L -1 N srq 0 11 1 Ti x m r1DX 11 Z N rorr*i� w�C) i, RITCHIE 8 ENNIS P. C. ROBERT W. RITCHIE JOHN R. ENNIS ALAN SEEWALD FIVE EAST PLEASANT STREET AMHERST, MASSACHUSETTS 01002 (413) 549-0041 253-3405 February 25, 1988 Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals City Hall Northampton, Massachusetts 01060 RE: Application of Northampton Airport, Inc. / §9.3(B) Finding Dear Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals: You requested a brief brief in connection with the above application by Northampton Airport, Inc., to construct a hangar on its property in the SC Zone. AFTICLE IX of the Zoning Ordinance makes provision for actions in connection with nonconforming uses, with Section 9.3(B) permitting the extension or alteration of pre-existing nonconforming uses where the Zoning Board finds that the proposed change, extension or alteration "...shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood." By this application the Airport seeks to offer enclosed space for aircraft otherwise having to be parked at outside tie down spaces. This will result in protection for the aircraft and safer aircraft operations. Since the Airport has vastly more space for outside tie down spaces than currently used, the availability of enclosed aircraft spaces is not designed or calculated to increase the number of aircraft at the airport; but rather is designed and calculated to achieve more desireable and safer space for the aircraft already using the airport. Under reasoning announced by the Board in a companion matter, fluctuations in the amount of air traffic and in general airport use does not in itself violate applicable zoning laws. The issue before the board focuses on whether the airport property with the hangar is (or is not) substantially more detrimental than that property without the hangar. The criteria for this decision properly ought not include consideration of which (by the board's own analysis) are not relevant. The applicant believes that the Board's own familiarity with the Airport property, and properties neighboring the Airport, should persuade the Board to make the required finding, and permit the Airport to construct the much needed hangar space. 4er trul y urs, Rob rt W.' Ritchie, Attorney for Northampton Airport, Inc. c: Northampton Airport Quabbin Construction Company March 11, 1988 129 Riverbank Rd.- Northamptong Mass., 01060 To% Zoning Board of Appeals, City of Northampton, Dear Sirs, Having had the Northampton Airport (formerly Lafleurs) as our �acic yard neighbors for the past 50 years we feel we are as qualified"as any of the members of your board to voice our opinions on the matter of what constitutes guidelines in the operation of an airport. Approximately two or three years ago we attended the first complaint meeting against the airport (which at that time we felt there were no grounds for.) The noise level from I791 and in the warmer weather the raining motorboats on the Connecticut river which is directly in front of our house is far greater than any we have ever heard from the airport. As far as sky diving and aerial photography, if you will review photos in the Daily Hampshire Ga tette taken by air during the flood of May, 1984:ich showed many areas heavily flooded, how else could they have been taken except by air. This type of photography is beneficial to our community and in our opinion certainly conforms to airport services. We cannot begin to tell you the enjoyment we have from watching the sky diving from our back yard -Where else could we have this entertainment without having to pay for it. Speotators 4nd sky divers alike share in this activityv and has alirays gone on in one way or another at the airport. As far as the sign painted on the roof of one of the hangars is concerned, to our recollection the old original hangar had Lafleurs painted on the roof. It also serves as reminder to other planes in the area to be watchful for possible parachute jumping. ',fie do however agree with your decision that heavy equipment auctions and automobile storage are in violation of our zoning ordinances. We hope that you will take th4W'a into consideration in making your decisions on future matters concerning the Northampton Airport., `No remain,Respectfully Your�By 4 INSPECTOR Edward J. Tewhill (riit�r of 1nx#l� nt tmt j1:ss:c4usctb DEPARTMENT OF BUILDDQG INSPECTIONS 212 Main Street ' Municipal Building Northampton, Mass. 01060 November 17, 1987 Mr. Richard Giusto City Aviation 152 & 164 Crosspath Rd./Old Ferry Rd. Northampton, Mass. 01060 Dear Mr. Giusto: As we discussed at a meeting in your office last week, the storage of reclaimed vehicles on the airport property, is in violation of the City Ordinances. In our opinion this operation is classified as a business and is not an allowable use in SC (Special Conservancy) Zone. Also the Airport is non -conforming, and any added use, such as storage of vehicles, is prohibited. Please cease and desist of this reclaiming of vehicles upon receipt of this letter. incerelry Edward J. Tewhill Building Inspector EJT1l b U INSPECTOR Edward J. Tewhill Emily Saur 45 Marshall St. Northampton, Mass. 01060 Dear Ms. Saur: )KNssschusetts DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTIONS 212 Main Street ` Municipal Building Northampton, Mass. 01060 December 9, 1987 0 Regarding the complaint filed in this office November 3, 1987, against the Northampton Airport located at 152 Crosspath Rd., City Tax Map 25BD - Lots #71 & 15. Enlosed please find the opinion from the Northampton Legal Department. However, if the Airport fails to cease and desist on the storage of vehicles and the operation of a heavy equipment auction, court action will be processed by the Building and Legal Departments. Sincerely, 19 Edward J. Tewhill Building Inspector EJT/lb enclosure CITY of NORTHAMPTON - OFFICE of PLANNING and DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: R. J. Pascucci, Secretary, Northampton Planning Board SUBJECT: Appeal of Emily re: Northampton DATE: February 2, 1988 FILE: Saur and Lionel Delevingne Airport, Inc. The Applicant's Appeal under Section 10.7 of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance was the subject of the Planning Board's attention at their meeting on January 28, 1988. After extensive discussion of the Applicant's allegation that the Airport has extended, without the issuance by the Zoning Board of Appeals of a Special Permit Finding, a pre-existing, nonconforming use, the following Motion was made: "I move that we vote to support the appeal because it seems to us there has been an expansion of volume sufficient to warrant a request for a Finding relative to whether the extension and expansion by the Airport of a pre- existing, nonconforming use is in fact substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood." The vote was four in favor, one against, and one abstention. After the vote, Atty. Ritchie for the Airport questioned the legal effect of the above motion. His position was that the only matter before the Planning Board was the specific application made by Mrs. Saur and Mr. Delevingne, i.e., an Appeal to force the Building Inspector to respond to their written complaint dated Nov. 3, 1987. He stated that since the Building Inspector did in fact respond, there is nothing for the Planning Board or the Zoning Board of Appeals to do. On Monday, February 1, Mr. Nimohay, the Building Inspector, delivered to me a copy of his letter dated December 9, 1987 to Emily Saur, which enclosed a copy of the Assistant City Solicitor's position, a copy of which you have. As far as the Building Inspector is concerned, he has fully responded to the Applicant. THE NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT IN RELATION TO THE NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY 1949: Northampton's first Zoning Ordinance included the airport in the Residence "A" district which allowed aviation fields by Special Permit... Because the airport was legally in existence prior to the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance, it was allowed to continue as a"pre-existing nonconforming use". (Status Report to Northampton City Council) 1978: Zoning Ordinance amended to read:"Pre-existing non -conform- ing structures or uses may be extended or altered..,provided that ...such change,extension or alteration shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming -use to the neighborhood,.," (as above) 1982: Richard Guisto and Russ Benjamin take over the Northampton Airport. (Daily Hampshire Gazette: 4/2/86) 1986: public meeting to air complaints raised by residents about noisy and low-flying planes in the city. (Daily Hampshire Gazette: 4/2/86) 1978-86: "The activities at the airport up until 1978 appear to be in conformance with provisions of the Zoning ordinance... Those expanded activities beyond the pre-existing,general aviation activities (recreation,charter, sales and service) since 1978 should have first received a Special Permit Finding from the Zoning Board of Appeals.The records of the ZBA do not indicate that such findings were ever applied for or issued. Thus it appears that said expanded activities are not in compliance with the provisions of Zoning. (Status Report to City Council) 1987 Oct.: A PETITION with over 100 signatures voicing concern about increased air traffic over neighborhoods near the North- ampton Airport has been sent to local officials,legislators and news media, (Daily Hampshire Gazette: 10/28/87) 1987,Nov. 'There has been an expansion and change in use by Adding aerial photography and parachute jumping instruction as well as the periodic storage and auction of heavy equipment and automobiles. Also an extension of use by increased volumne in general aviation operations..,, 1978: total peak monthly operations were 3000.while in 1986: "..."operations" (takeoffs or landings) averaged out to 533 per day.,."...a figure that Guisto said was a quite possible" figure for a peak day". (Daily Hampshire Gazette:8/13/87) "Guisto said..."On a busy day the airport has as many as 1000 to 1500 operations,which are takeoffs & landings", (Daily Hampshire Gazette: 10/28/87) (City Council given figures based on Airport's Facility's Records obtained from the Mass. Aeronautics Commission and t h e FAA . ) U U 1987.AP... airport administrators failed to comply with the city building inspector's order not to hold an auction on airport grounds .... according to assistant city solicitor... zoning ordinances do not permit (this activity).This land has been zoned "special conservancy"...is part of the Connecticut River flood plain. (Daily Hampshire Gazette: 4/87) 1987:Aug.: "AIRPORT LOOKS TO EXPAND" with "...larger airplanes... a commuter airline... larger commercial... usually corporate... airplanes,military training flights,corporate helicopters... commuter airline,...new hangar... corporate turboprop planes... jet Cessna Citation," (Richard Guisto: Daily Hampshire Gazette: Aug. 13,87) Oct. Open letter from residents and taxpayers sent to local officials,lectislators and news media: "We are very distraught over the Growing air traffic at the Northampton Airport ... well over 100 signatures collected..." (Letter: Oct. 2'6.1987) 1987:Mar.:Airport in violation of wetlands act restrictions. The airport owners... bulldozed... along the Connecticut River portion or their land ... violat(ing) wetlands act restictions. (Daily Hampshire Gazette: Mar. 31,1887) Spokespersons for the Audobon Society's Arcadia Wildlife Preserve; Connecticut River Watershed Council;Connecticut Valley Action Program and Recreation officials repeatedly express concerns about potential dangers and detrimental effects of low-flying aircraft on wildlife and large numbers of people who ctather to enjoy the quiet recreational nature of these areas. RECREATION AREA planned for corner of Damon Rd. and Bridge St.... There will be a continuous river -side park "geared to lower -key kinds of recreational pursuits".(Daily Hampshire Gazette. 7/20/87) Canoers and swimmers in the river are fearful for their safety when seaplanes land and take off close to them. HEALTH CONCERNS "Constant noise is linked to high blood pressure,heart disease and ulcers" (Dr, Lipota,Chief of Rutgers University's Noise Technical Assistance Centers) There's also some evidence that birth defects ... low birth weight babies ... more prevalent among people living near airports...._ Surveys in both the U.S. & England... recorded higher rates of admission to psychiatric hospitals among people living near airports. (Letter to the editor: Feb.24,1987;Springfield Union;, Daily Hamp.Gazette: Peggy Gillespie: stress management expert and co-author of the book: LESS STRESS IN 30 DAYS) u � _ "COD FEB ` 31988 Re: Residents' ZONING COMPLAINT � �1ypA�I� Airport dVELGrg - "Northampton's first Zoning Ordinance,aco Ld in 1949,included the airport in the Residence "A" District, which allowed aviation fields by Special, Permit...the airport ... was legally in existence prior to the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance ,,.it was "grand- fathered" or,in Zoning terminology,was a "pre-existing nonconform- ing use".... In 1978 ... the Zoning Ordinance... was... amended to read: 'Pre-existing nonconforming structures or uses may be extend- ed or altered provided that—such change,extension or alteration shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood.' This appears to be pretty straightforward. Since 1978,in order for a nonconforming use to be changed,extended or altered, the Zoning Board of Appeals must first issue a Special Permit Finding... Conclusion ... The activities at the airport up until 1978 appear to be in conformance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance ...Those expanded activities beyond the pre-existing general aviation activities... since 1978 should have first received a Special Permit Finding from the Zoning Board of Appeals.The records of the Zoning Board of Appeals do not indicate that such findings were ever applied for or issued. Thus it appears that said expanded activities are not in compliance with the provis- ions of Zoning." (STATUS REPORT:to Northampton City Council: 3/27/87) "...Massachusetts case law has established for General use a THREE PART TEST for determining whether a non -conforming use has been improperly changed,altered, or extended... Bridgewater v, Chuckran 351 Mass. 20 (1966) that test is as follows: (1 )Whether the use reflects the "NATURE AND PURPOSE" of the use prevailing when the zoning by-law took effect; (2) Whether there is a difference in the QUALITY or CHARACTER as well as THE DEGREE OF USE; (3) whether the current use is "DIFFERENT IN KIND in its affect on the neighborhood. ...operation of an airport for the use of small aircraft and activities which are an intrinsic part of that operation con- stitute a valid pre-existing non -conforming use. (Letter from Assistant City Solicitor to Northampton Building Inspector: 12/1/87) In applying this test to the airport operation,neighborhood residents are aware of the extreme differences,in terms of all three categories,between the airport of 1978 and that of the present facility. Re: Residents' ZONING COMPLAINT --Northampton Airport The 1978 airport provides the standard for the present airport to abide by according to the 1978 amendment to the zoning ordinance. The changes in size and character and function of the airport since 1978 is evident.The 1978 airport had 53 based aircraft while the present airport has 84. The estimated general aviation operations have increased since 1978 from an annual 16,000 to an annual 190,000. In contrast to the relatively small airport facility of 1978,which had grown slowly enough to exist comfortably within the RESIDENTIAL 'A' DISTRICT, the present facility describes itself in recent publicity as: "...a commercial facility...has a complete line of aviation services including air taxi,flight instruction,aircraft storage and maintenance facilities... can accomodate all light and medium sized single and twin engine aircraft and prop -jet service,twenty four hours a day.Hangar storage,tie-down facilities and fuel are available to transcient airplanes ... an air charter company ... providing ... air service to more than 6,000 airports nation- wide. The airport is also home for Sky Shows where one can free fall from 7,000 feet ... with only twenty minutes training." (Northampton Chamber of Commerce publicity:1987) "Guisto said ... there are about 45 pilot trainees ... he said.... Skydivers,seaplanes,. and ultralights also use the airport." (Daily Hampshire Gazette 9/10/87) "The owners of the Northampton Airport yesterday re -opened their runways to larger airplanes, and they are negotiating to bring in a commuter airline .... The airport is once again taking larger commercial--- usually corporate --- airplanes 'military training flights, and corporate helicopters,said Richard Guisto ... he said,a commuter airline is being considered,too... Corporate turboprop planes are... beneficiaries of ...3500 runway (Daily Hampshire Gazette, 8/13/87) "Guisto said the New York State auctioneers who use his land sell tractors,trucks,back hoes and other equipment, doing some 1.2 million worth of business.That money does not go to him, but he said he receives a "good fee,"which he would not disclose,for the use of the land. Some 1,500 potential buyers attend ... Ward 3 City Councilor... said."you couldn't have gotten an emergency vehicle through Cross Path Rd, if necessary ...Budgar said if the court permits the airport to hold the auctions. "They set a precedent to open up the Meadows for anybody who wants to come in,(and) it's going to look like Moe's Used Car Lot." (Daily Hampshire Gazette:4/87) It would appear that the airport has become not just a single business but a cluster ol- separate businesses all operating within the same space which is not zoned for any business. Thus according to all 3 categories of the above-mentioned test established by Massachusetts case law, the present airport "... has been improperly changed,altered (and) extended..." O CO``e Office of the Treasurer ' Smith college Northampton, Massachusetts 01063 413 584-2700 (may' r 11 Y rev February 3, 1988 Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Members, I am sending this letter on behalf of Smith College in connection with recent hearings and observations made concerning the use of the Northampton Airport and the related increased air traffic in the Northampton and surrounding area. The College has noted over the past few years the increased air traffic in the vicinity of Northampton and more specifically in the vicinity of the College apparently resulting from the increased usage of Northampton Airport. This particular increased air traffic in the area does cause the College some concern as a result of the increasing noise which can be disruptive to various events both indoor (during the warmer seasons) and outdoors (such as Commencement and other events held regularly in the outdoor area). Naturally, increased traffic of this nature also causes the added potential for an accident and potential injuries. Due to the type of traffic (generally low flying small aircraft) the likelihood of an accident in the vicinity of the College grounds goes up as air traffic goes up. It is now my understanding that consideration is being given to increasing the hangar space at the Northampton Airport which could conceivably then result in increased usage of the airport and increased aircraft traffic in the area. The College would be very concerned about any additional increase in the traffic beyond that currently being experienced for the same reasons as noted above. I would naturally be happy to provide additional information to members of the Zoning Board about our concerns if they should so desire. Sincerely, Larry C Selgelid Treasu r LCS/mz CITY of NORTHAMPTON OFFICE of PLANNING and DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: R. J. Pascucci, Secretary, Planning Board SUBJECT: Northampton Airport, Inc. Application for a Finding DATE: February 3, 1988 fM1l44 At the January 28th Meeting of the Planning Board, after all testimony from Proponents and Opponents was heard, a motion was made that the Planning Board defer any decision on the Application until the ZBA rules on the issue of extending a pre- existing, nonconforming use. The Motion passed 4-1. IAASCV__­� CITY of NORTHAMPTON TO: Bob Buscher FROM: Bob Pascucci SUBJECT: Northampton Airport DATE: December 31, 1987 FILE: OFFICE of PLANNING and DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM There are two "Airport" cases in the backlog. Enclosed are the Applications on both of them, and a copy of some correspondence relative to the scheduling of the cases. When Kathleen Fallon came to me with Atty. Ritchie's request, I assumed he was talking Planning Board scheduling as well as Zoning Board of Appeals scheduling, which is why I went first to Larry Smith. When I got Larry's response to my question, I went to Kathleen who said she thought Ritchie was only concerned with the ZBA. So here we are. I guess I will schedule both cases before the Planning Board on January 28th, which is the first available opening for them, and I would put the "neighbors" Hearing on first, followed by the "hangar" hearing. As we,approach the ZBA hearings on these two cases, I will schedule them any way you wish. cc: K. Fallon I,,/ __1/ CITY of NORTHAMPTON OFFICE of PLANNING and DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Pascucci FROM: Larry SUBJECT: Northampton Airport DATE: December 30, 1987 FILE: I can understand the airport's point of view in not wanting to have both hearings held on the same evening for fear of one case prejudicing the other. However, I'm not sure that the two are necessarily unrelated. One of the main things that the ZBA is going to have to know before they can decide on the Finding of whether the addition of the hangars to a pre-existing nonconforming use is substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood or not is, what is the pre- existing nonconforming use? It makes great sense to me that the ZBA Members deciding on the "hangar" case be the same ones that decide on the "neighbors" case. It would greatly enhance the chances of decisions that are consistent, and might also conceivably reduce the amount of time necessary to obtain and compile all of the necessary testimony at the Public Hearings. It would seam to me that, seeing as the issue of exactly what is the extent of the pre-existing nonconforming use at the airport (the core of the "neighbors"case) will be a factor and point of discussion at the "hangar" Public Hearing, the "neighbors" case Public Hearing should be held first; That way, all of that relevant testimony won't have to be as extensively presented or repeated by either the opponents or the proponents at the following Public Hearing, which can concentrate on the actual impact of the expansion and addition of the hangars, if any. Though it doesn't matter to me whether the hearings are held on the same or on separate evenings. since the purpose of Public Hearings is to give the public adequate and effective opportunity to review and comment on an application, your comments that it would be more convenient for the abutters, the same in both cases, to have to come out on just one evening (especially in winter) instead of two, makes sense. I do understand Atty Ritchie's concerns but I have seen the Zoning Board in action and find them to be extremely professional and able to distinguish and separate the issues in related cases. But essentially these are all decisions that the Chairman of the Zoning Board is going to have to make. Atty Ritchie's request (a legitimate one) should be forwarded to Bob Buscher, who gets stuck with all of the responsibility. December 30, 1987 TO: Larry Smith i FROM: Bob Pascucci RE.: NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT I believe we spoke briefly about the fact that there are two cases involving the airport, which will be heard by the Planning Board. One case is the appeal of Emily Saur and Lionel Delevigne on their complaint to the Building Inspector about the extension, alteration or change to a pre-existing non -conforming use. The other is a request by Northampton Airport, Inc. for a Finding under Section 9.3B relative to the construction of a new hangar. Kathleen Fallon came to me today to relay a request from Atty. Robert Ritchie, representing the Airport, that these two hearings NOT be held on the same night, the feeling being that the "hangar" case could be prejudiced by an adverse decision on the "complaining neighbors" case. It seems to me that feelings are running so high on the "airport issue," that scheduling the hearings two weeks apart probably wouldn't accomplish a thing. Also, since the abutters are the same people in both cases, doesn't it make sense to have them all come in once instead of twice? Please let me know what you wish to do, and I will so inform Kathleen. cc: K. Fallon .. September 14, 1987 48 Massasoit Street Northampton, MA 01060 NIy1NG t�b eld, Pascuccl, Merriam, Strickland, & Giusto ,%0 Op`t o*. Box5221 t y Commission _. Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Commissioners; I am pleased to read that a responsible advisory group has been formed for the Northampton Airport. I would like to Inform you that I have in the past talked with Mr. Giusto and have not felt that my point of view was well received, to say the very least. So. I am writing this letter as a matter of record for the Airport Safety Commission. In 1978 I took flying lessons at La Fleur Airport. At that time NO ONE flew over the center of Northampton. If not the law (which I thought it was), not overflying the city was a rule strictly enforced by the owners and instructors as a saftey provision and as a courtesy to the community. In 1987 pilots fly their planes on any heading and altitude over all parts of this city. Where I live. 2 miles from the airport and NW of downtown Northampton, pilots have buzzed below 500 feet, flown pinpoint circles, and enjoyed turning figure -eights at absurdly low altitudes. Some student pilots, while practicing touch-and-go landings, do not bother to attain cruising altitude and cut over the City with open throttle in order to make as many landing attempts as possible during their instruction period. An engine failure under any of these circumstances would cause a disaster. New planes with higher horsepower engines, high drag profiles, and variable -pitch props (the tips of which break the sound barrier when set for maximum thrust) are becoming commonplace at Northampton Airport. The Valley is sometimes filled with the sound of these planes, and people wonder why the activities of so few should be allowed to affect so many. Who will encourage or force these pilots to observe safe and courteous operating rules? 2 � ,� My encounters with Mr Glusto have, unfortunately, amounted to nonsense. He has claimed, for example, that planes do not fly over our house. He has suggested that in order to make a complaint, I should read the identification numbers of a plane that has passed over the trees in less than 3 seconds. He says he has no control over students practicing touch-and-gos because they are originating from other airports. Earlier this summer I contacted the FAA and requested that observations be made. It is my hope that between the FAA, the new Airport Safety Commission, the pilots of Northampton Airport, and the residents of Hampshire County, procedures will be developed and enacted to satisfy the needs of both the airport and the surrounding residents. n Dav ijd W.,) Gengl er Copies to: l DOT -FAA, Barnes Municipal Airport Office of Planning and Development, Northampton, MA Hampshire County Planning Department Mr. David Musante, Mayor of Northampton CITY OF NORTHAMPTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NORTHAMPTON, MASSAGHUSETT'3 01060 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE The Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton will hold a Public Hearing on February 3, 1988 at 7:00 P. m. in the Council Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Chambers, Application of Street, Northampton, MA to consider the APP MA for a NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC. Old Ferry Road, Northampton, FINDING under the provisions of Section 9.3b, of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance RELATIVE TO THEIR INTENT TO CONSTRUCT AN ADDITIONAL AIRPLANE HANGAR AT THEIR PROPERTY AT 152 CROSSPATH ROAD, NORTHAMPTON, MA(more particularly identified as Parcels 15 and 71, Sheet 24B,D of the Northampton Zoning and Assessor's Maps (SC Zone). Copies of the complete Application are available for public inspection during regular business hours in the Northampton Office of Planning and Development, located in Room 11 in City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, MA. Robert C. Buscher, Chairman \,v CITY of NORTHAMPTON OFFICE of PLANNING and DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Northampton City Council FROM: Lawrence B. Smith, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Status of Northampton Airport Relative to Compliance With Zoning DATE: March 27, 1987 FILE: The Northampton Airport has been in existence since the late 1920's, well prior to the initial adoption of Zoning in the City of Northampton, Since that tiem, the use of the airport has increased slowly but steadily over the years (see attached chart). Since the airport has been in existence, there have been essen- tially four periods of Zoning Revisions which pertain to it. Pre -Zoning According to the Airport's Facilities Records, filed with and obtained from the Massachusetts Aeronautics Commission and the Federal Aviation Administration, at the inception of Zoning in Northampton (1949) the airport consisted of: a 50' x 74' woodframe hanger; a 38' x 25' woodframe T -hanger; a 30' x 24' administration building and classroom; a house and garage; and had 10-14 based aircraft. The airport was used for recreational and passenger (charter) flights, instruction, sales and service. 1949-1975 Northampton's first Zoning Ordinance, adopted in 1949, included the airport in the Residence "A" District, -which allowed aviation fields by Special Permit (issued by the Zoning Board of Appeals). Though the airport did not have a Special Permit, because it was legally in existence prior to the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance requiring a Special Permit, it was "grandfathered" or, in Zoning terminology, was a "pre-existing nonconforming use". Regarding pre-existing nonconforming uses, the original Zoning Ordinance (Section 8. - Nonconforming Uses) allowed: "a) any building or part of a building or premises, which at the time of adoption of this by-law is being put to a nonconforming use, may continue to be used for the same purpose. b) any business in operation at the time of this Ordinance is passed may expand with the permission of the Building Inspector. c) any nonconforming use may be changed to another nonconforming use or any nonconforming building may be rebuilt or repaired on permit from the Board of Appeals, such new use or reconstructed building not to be substantially different in character or more detrimental or objectionable to the neigh- borhood." This Ordinance permitted the use of the property as an aviation field to expand, with only the permission of the Building Inspector. However, a permit from the Board of Appeals was required for any change in the use to another nonconforming use. This is essentially how the Ordinance remained until the comprehensive Zoning revisions of 1975. A 1958 copy of the Zoning Ordinance clarified the matter slightly with a revi- sion that stated" "Any business in operation at the time of this Ordinance is passed may expand on the same lot with the permission of the Building Inspector." Between 1949 and 1975 the airport expanded to: 2 conventional hangars; T-type hangars for 26 planes; connected the old hangar to the administration building and constructed a large service building. The airport was continued to be used for charters, instructional, sales and service. The number of based aircraft increased from 14 to 45 and the estimated general aviation operations (take -offs, landings, etc.) were annual - 16,500; peak month - 2,150. 1975-1977 In 1975 the Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance underwent comprehensive resivions. The area in which the airport is located was rezoned to the Special Conservancy Dis- trict, in which an airport still required a Special permit issued by the Zoning Board of Appeals, thus the airport continued as a "pre-existing nonconfroming use". The Section governing nonconforming uses, structure and lost was amended, and the relevant portions read: 111. Any nonconforming use, except agricultural, horticultural, or floricultural, of any open space on a lot outside a structure, or of a lot occupied by a structure, shall not be extended, except that a nonconforming principal or accessory use may be extended within the limits of the lot existing as of the date of adoption of this Ordinance and shall be in accordance with the dimensional and density regulations of Article VI. 2. Any conforming principal use of a structure shall not be extended." Though somewhat confusing and contradictory, this Ordinance appears to say that: a) you cannot extend a principal nonconforming use within a structure, but b) you can extend a principal nonconforming use over the open area of the lot. Between 1975 and 1977 the airport expanded to: 3 conventional hangars; T-type hangars for 26 planes; and one administration building. The number of based aircraft increased to 53, and the estimated general aviation operations were reported as: annual - 16,500; peak monthly - 3,000. 1978 -Present In 1978 that section of the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to pre-existing noncon- forming uses was again amended to read: "Pre-existing nonconforming structures or uses may be extended or altered pro- vided that no such extension or alteration shall be permitted unless there is a finding by the permit granting authority or by the special permit granting auth- ity that such change, extension or alteration shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood..." This appears to be pretty stright forward. Since 1978, in order for a noncon- forming use to be changed, extended or altered, the Zoning Board of Appeals must first issue a Special Permit Finding that the proposed use is not substantially more detir- mental to the neighborhood. Since 1978 the airport remains with: 3 conventional hangars; T-type hangars for 20 planes; and one administration building. The number of based aircraft has increased to 74, and the estimated general aviation operations has increased to: annual - 190,000; peak monthly - 32,400. The use of the airport appears to have been expanded from general aviation operations to include, aerial photography, parachute instruction and jumping, construction equipment auctions, and queries have been made regarding automobile storage. Conclusion The activities at the airport up until 1978 appear to be in conformance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, mainly because little was required to expand pre- existing nonconforming uses, and the uses remained consistent. Those expanded activities beyond the pre-existing general aviation activities (recreation, charter, sales and service) since 1978 should have first received a Spe- cial Permit Finding from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The records of the Zoning Board of Appeals do not indicate that such findings were ever applied for or issued. Thus it appears that said expanded activities are not in compliance with the provisions of Zoning. DATE NUMBER OF BASED AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS Total Single Eng_. Multi -Eng. 1947 14 - 1950 10 - - - 1952 10 - - 1953 20 - - 1958 20 - 1960 25 - 1961 25 - 1962 25 1963 20-25 20-25 0 Est. # Landings - 500 1963 Est.in 5 yrs 25-35 25-35 1-2 is It It - 600+ 1964 31 30 1 1965 32 30 2 1966 32 30 2 1968 34 30 4 37 33 4 Avg. Monthly Landings - 300 8/69 Annual Local Annual Itinerant Total Peak Montt .2650 36 4 Air6T5�xi 1000 - 1/70 40 44 40 4 16500 1000 9240 2150 . 7/70 49 45 4 16500 1000 9240 2150 1973 44 41 3 16500 1000 9240 2150 1/74 45 42 3 16500 1000 9240 2150 11/74 51 46 5 16500 1000 9240 2150 2/76 11/76 52 46 (1 Heli) 5 16500 1000 9240 3000 1977 53 46 7 16500 1000 9240 3000 64 57 7 16500 1000 9240 3000 1978 64 57 7 16500 1000 9240 3000 1979 64 57 7 16500 1000 9240 3000 2/81 _ - -_Total /61 12/81 56 5 16500 1000 9240 26740 1982 61 56 5 16500 1000 9240 Military 26740 61 56 5 16500 1300 9240 100 26840 1983 61 56(2 -Ultra) 5 16500 1300 9240 100. 27040 1984 74 65(2 -Ultra) 9 19000 1300 12000 100 32400 1985 74 65(2 -Ultra) 19000 1300 12000 100 32400 1986 -9 RITCHIE F�3 ENNIS. P. C. ,., W ROBERT W RITCHIE JOHN R. ENNIS December 6, 1985 Marie Hershk:owitz 06 Parsons Street Northampton, Ma. 01060 Emily Saur 45- Marshall Street Northampton, Ma. 01060 Re: Northampton Airport Dear Ms Hershkowitz and Ms Saur: FIVE EAST PLEASANT STREET AMHERST, MASSACHUSETTS 01002 ( 413) 549-0041 253-3405 This office represents City Aviation and Northampton Airport. We have been informed by airport management that you have undertaken a variety of efforts to eliminate what you feel to be unacceptable noise levels associated with the approach and departure of aircraft at Northampton Airport. Mr. uiusto reports that you brought this matter to the attention of management back in the summer, and as a direct response to your concerns the following actions were taken: 1. Runway 14 was designated as "PREFERRED" for departing aircraft. Aircraft departing on Runway 14 will take off over the fields south- east of the airport. � . Runway 32 was designated as "PREFERRED" for arriving aircraft. Aircraft arriving on Runway 32 will approach the airport from the south-east over the fields. Use of the PREFERRED RUNWAYS are subject to pilot judgement as to the safety of their use, taking into consideration the weather and air traffic conditions. 3. The airport "traffic pattern" was changed whereby aircraft departing on Runway 32 (toward the north-west) would maintain the "runway heading" (northwesterly direction) until reaching an altitude of 1,100 feet, MSL; then left turn to remain in or leave the traffic Pattern. 4. Notices were posted prominently informing airport users of the above. 5. on initial call-up, traffic permitting) that arriving aircraft are informed (weather and Runway 32 is in use and preferred. Every step possible has been taken to deal with your concerns effectively and sensitively. Mr. Benjamin provided an aerial tour of praffic pattern so arting and arriving that you might better understand the po�o eddies ussuchyaserelocation of the aircraft. Some remedies are simply n airport, or initiation of arrival and departure procedures which are unsafe or violative of state and federal regulation. While you have every right to advocate for the best possible operating procedures of the airport (an objective shared by airport management), your so it not without limits• The liits busmnessarelationshipswhen betweenefforts right to do rise to the level of interfering with the airport and the airport users. Efforts which are interpreted a irate to legal ferenity ce with business relationships will be viewed as subjecting y to the airport for damages sustained by these efforts. ft owners I am informed that you have written loperating proceduresrs to many aconsistent awith pilots on this matter. While encouraging operating P the policies established by the airport and outlined above may be permissible under the law, I must warn you that communications which are viewed as interference with the private contractual business relationships between the airport and the owners and pilots will lead to litigation. I have persuaded management to allow for this letter to precede any d iscuss ore forceful response to your more aggressive actions. I would urge y ou to this letter with your attorney, and arrange to have your attorney contact this office without delay. of this matter, or the seriousness of Please do not disregard the urgency the consequences of your actions. y m y y rs: Robert W. Ritchie, Attorney for City Aviation and Northampton Airport u As residents of Northampton, we have witnessed a tremendous increase in the air traffic from the Northampton airport. Last year there were approximately 10-15 takeoffs and landings per day; there are now approxi- mately 150 with plans to increase that number. This, in turn, has meant a tremendous increase in noise from the planes. They are flying much too low over our homes, schools, playgrounds,etc. This concerns us not only - in terms of the noise, but also in terms of safety and in terms of property devaluation. Therefdre, we are asking that the 'City Council address this issue. We need a prompt resolution of this issue before the problem gets any worse. NAME ADDRESS CIO? y5 Marshal ( s f- . �. 4 124w r 3 5 Al � 1 TA CK/ a U � As residents of Northampton, we have witnessed a tremendous increase in the air traffic from the Northampton airport. Last year there were approximately 10-15 takeoffs and landings per day; there are now approxi- mately 150 with plans to increase that number. This, in turn, has meant a tremendous increase in noise from -the planes. They are flying much too low over our homes, schools, playgrounds,etc. This concerns us not only in terms of the noise, but also in terms of safety and in terms of property devaluation. Therefore, we are asking that the City Council address this issue. We need a prompt resolution of this issue before the problem gets any worse. NAME ADDRESS -- QVtn ArVI C7 �i� 0 %lOrr, CU Ow - 4 , �r—A� - Acell Ii - U As residents of Northampton, we have witnessed a tremendous increase in the air traffic from the Northampton airport. Last year there were approximately 10-15 takeoffs and landings per day; there are now approxi- mately 150 with plans to increase that number. This, in turn, has meant a tremendous increase in noise from the planes. They are flying much too low over our homes, schools, playgrounds,etc. This concerns us not only in terms of the noise, but also in terms of safety and in terms of., property devaluation. Therefore, we are asking that the City Council address this issue. We need a prompt resolution of this issue before the problem gets any worse. ,NAME ADDRESS A VMQ4(j .o C�_' iii :tt 11 1 V ST 40'e�4 rfti s f- /Oe- Ajo ZC Az- ah� CHAIRMAN COMM:SSIONERS Sd�l , a A, R Ms. Emily Saur 45 Marsha'' St. Northampton, MA -01060 Dear Ms. Saur: 70 L%arn 6E2G �a�t-arL, ���ciu�etta.027:6 3966 �'671 973 -7350 December 9, 1985 DIRECTOR OF AERONAUTICS I want to thank you for your joint letter to me, dated November 3, 7985, regarding air traffic at the Northampton Airport. I have purposely delayed responding to your letter until we had the opportunity to thoroughly IOQk into the matter. "dna^while, we have had several related conversations with the management of the Northampton Airpot. At the onset, we feel you should 'snow that the Commission considers the air- port to be of a high value to the City of Northampton and the surrounding communit,es of AArrrherst, Hadly, Hatr'eld, Easthampton and Grandby, to name a few. In -fact, several years ago the Northampton facility had been placed on t;^e state's airport system plan of essential azroorts. However, this should not be Construed that the Aeronautics Commission is unres- ponsive to citizen concerns wany community. In fact, this ,s why we spend he time investigating such matters. in this ^art'Cti'ar 'n5tance, I do happy to reOrt to both you and Mrs.HerS!1kOwitZ that. the airport management, cons `s 'nn of Xr. CL:"s,.o and 3er4am;n, has been C'Xtrer^_'V rQCbnrat`vn and respCIS4Ve. !n 'Jar 'alar? T?Cy have: designated the southeast fac,nc runway as the pr,mary r!,nway at -I- he air- port. Y c_Q cau on you, However, that z e use of -,;'i's rur-way i s vpred i ca+Ad cnle?y u?Ot? W'nd COnrit"Q^: ,t, any ^ ,,ven _,Te, As at any airport, safety s a: ;ways pa-P7.ount and t r �, e „ �,!r � :e. e there w� , ; be t :nes , Tart? C:: r r'_v d nn+"',e w` er/�R,ont-h,, 1t r' ?erny'' 'l he ^0 C'G`CC '�� to use a QL{'•s,.3 •N ~,.tine, -or nor .,",w lerly, runway;�h . erected a highly visib;e sicn at the ber,nnina o- the northwest runway t�?11 at Clea? cAscribes the nose a`•?tement broc rur:�s that have been imp.emented at the a rpor�• • distributed literature on same to all the o,'ots and aircraft owners based at Northar,bto» and are keenly aware of the ,rbortance of distributing the literature •._�i the transient o,lots (fron other a=rports) using_ the Northampton Ai rbort, s ~ �J Ms. E-nily Saur - 2 - With regard to minimum altitudes at which aircraft are allowed to operate, our laws parallel those of the Federal Government in that except for landing or take -off, aircraft must be f'c n no lower th n 1000 feet abo',e a congested area, such as Nor?,ampton. We conclude that the Northampton Airport is tieing managed in a safe and efficient manner, rh due consideration,for the co^runity that abuts some of the western edce of the a'rport and, in our 'Judgment, one o4 the management's highest priorities is to be a good nei.ghjor to the'com.munity served by this truly important regional,: airport. Finally, please rest assured that the Massachusetts Aeronautics Commission is constantly striving to make certain all the airports within The Commonwealth are operated in the safest possible ,canner. Sincerely, Arnold R. Stymest Executive Director ARS:sh cc: The Hon. David B. Musante, Jr., Major, City of Northampton Commissioner Christine M.R. Rodriguez, "QAC B. Dale Scott, Manager, FAA/FSDC-63 Richard Guist -o, President, City Aviation, Northampton Airport City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation . Historic Preservation • Planning Board • zoning Board of Appeals Richard Giusto City Aviation Northampton Airport, Inc. Old Ferry Road P.O. Box 221 Northampton, Massachusetts 01060 Re: April 1, 1986 Public Informational Meeting Dear Mr. Giusto: March 24, 1986 On February 6, 1986 the Northampton City Council received a number of petitions (copies of which I have enclosed) relative to the Northampton Airport and its impact on abutting properties. At this February 6th meeting, the City Council voted to refer the matter to me for further study with regard to the airport's compliance with the provisions of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance. On Tuesday evening, April 1, 1986 at 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Office Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, the City Solicitor, Building Inspector/Zoning Enforcement Office and I will be holding a Public Informational Meeting to hear testimony and collect information from the airport's owners, users, abutters and any other interested parties relative to the use of the airport, its impacts, and its conformance with zoning. We would like to be able to determine which issues and complaints are zoning oriented, and which are not. Your attendance is requested so that you might inform us as to the use of the airport, its history, and any future plans that you might have. It is hoped and expected that all parties will cooperate in this exercize so that these issues can be adequately addressed and a final resolution reached. Any questions or in- quiries should be directed to me at the above address and telephone number. Your anticipated cooperation with regard to this request is greatly appreciated. cc: Atty R. Ritchie Yours, - W6 Lawrence B. Smith Senior Planner -,"4 M�!;o U City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation . Historic Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING Northampton Airport Northampton Senior Planner Lawrence B. Smith will be holding a Public Informational Meeting on Tuesday evening, April 1, 1986 at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Office Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, MA to discuss and review the Northampton Airport and its compliance with the applicable provisions of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance. This meeting is being held in re— sponse to a request from the Northampton City Council. Also in attendance will be representatives of the City Solicitor's Office and the Building Inspector's/Zoning Enforcement Officer's Office. All owners, users and abutters of the Northampton Airport, and any other interested parties are invited to attend this meeting and submit testimony with regard to the use of the airport, its impacts, and its compliance with zoning. It is hope3 ancT`�-"-" expected that all parties will cooperate'in this exercize so that these issues can be adequately addressed and a final resolution reached. Any questions or inquiries should be addressed to Lawrence B. Smith, Senior Planner, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, MA, telephone: 586-6950 X263. To be published: March 25, 1986 Bill to: Northampton Planning Office City Hall 210 Main St. Northampton, MA 01060 FORM A - _ NORTHAMPTON$ MASS. Date APPLICATION FOR ENDORSEMENT OF PLAN BELIEVED 1JOT TO REQUIRE APPROVAL File one completed form with the Planning Board and one copy with the City Clerk in accordance with with requirements of. Section 3.02. To the Planning Board: The undersigned, believing that the accompanying plan of his property in the City of Northampton does not constitute division-rcithin the meaning of the Subdivision Control Law, herewith submits said plan for °a determination and endorsement that Planning Board approval under the Subdivision Control -aw is not required. 1. applicant .\_-2f7#Ar�Daj��� % Print cr tyre nave. Signature - Address _`��� �L�t 2. Owner Fr`,nt G;Z t •'r,? n giznat;re AZa.-ess L!/ 3. Surveyor ALMER Hi"\T►_EY, JR. b ASSOC., !NC. Print or type ^a:7e V Sig-:atz r e 125 PLEAS�tiT ST? NOVE,ABM 27 7985 9 Eves the"Bigt�e bus ticket for a trip that would nas and a year. At take a much smaller kite out of a any given �t to 10 Bale businessman's day. P>»s can usually be seen I the Ginato, who in the mid-1970s Y started an air commuter businessw Haven, Com- that t*eto Lang island, Baltimore, •• and Washington, asys he believes. the Valley is ready for a small commuter operation. Gmsto told the Ad7� he expect t vide service for passengers an operation he dealribed as the ' highest priority" on the agenda at the airport, where bush", has seen a steady growth since Benysmm and Giusto took over the manage- ment two years ago. At pres- ent no commuter sir service ex- ists between Keene, N.H., . Albany, N.Y. and Bradley Airport in Windsor Locks, Conn., accord- ing to the Massachusetts Aer- . The race s� bye on, however, ver, to 5U the gap locally. In ChicOPce, the Westover Metropolitan Develop• menk will Wild a p bfic hearing onwPre�►- OM analyses of fLhe t for commuter senvmcea to Washington e and Chicago from Westover Air Force Base. ard. Sales of new arrC=, which were undercut by high interest rates several years ago, are still stagmt,' ; but the used Pksoe business is wide open," added Giusto, who was in the airplane sales business m New Haven and Me Dbe- are;Q two Nort for lorthampton bora day, N6 days charters also runs e Commuter service is on the horizon, While the city considers a takeover. The growth is typtCal of an up- j awing in activity at many private {i imports in Massachusetts since lower interest rates have Put Tile back into the airplane les bW- vid Graham, eas, a"Or&ng a spokesman for the Mar sachuaetta Aeronautics Commis- m�pG gtydptbhoen- ally well-run. Northampton port is the Only carport between Westfield and Fab. and now wconnmodates an average of 150 to 165 takeoffs and landingS a day, according to Ghusto—triple the mMdW three years ago. Two Years ago, R, retia were +based at the Wrpo spate on the field or in bangnb. Now there are 80, mostly the local business opeode--real estate agents, restaurant owners, con- tractors. Though many of the ph* double as business and pleasure craft, only two or three an at&* recreational, one belonging t the UMass Fly- ing Club, Giust. told to, iasis tun8. for $1-2 a mile dePendmg on the type of plane. Five people, for example, could be taken t Mar- tha's Vineyard and back for $220—a little leas than it would coat t go by bus and ferry. With business gig so well at *Port, port, some homeowners m the eW borhood are afraid their property values will take a nose dive. Unaware that the flying qty—which has been in its lo- cation between the river and the Meadows section of the city since 1929—was no longer quie rural "little iAFleur M ved WE= and Emily mo from Pomeroy Terrace t a new home on Marshall Street last May. Saur says that noise and low-flying Planes have become a Valmity for residents living ear dung the airport. Giust says that ,•99.9 percent" of the Pilots na- ing the airport stay at the regia - occasional low-flying planeisthe don't issue of traffic control, en8k�re out say. Because of its size and be- Pis cause it is a private airport serv- from ting Private aircraft, Northampton th need ire are long aPpoth that to the sway both front of the e Rangem , and from the e Holyoke Ranh Airport or the skY aqs to it are notwa ed by the FAA large airports M��land would be needed, however. if the city take as With commercial traffic. its own- owl b has n under &scussion forhe rely on Pgotsto since tconcern early ers their own safe ty keep them in ; off and on n 198, and was studied in depth in 1981 pattern as thea aPP and cel by the Northampton Airport Cormmssion. As the city makes The functions functions tither or attract industry. hire a public parking lot in that anyone can land uta on its bid in - be a ce airport would be a definite in- for businesses interested �24hours a day- runway is no guarantee that m centive in relocating here. Sags. Gmsto, corporation would coming Pvots will have radios that willenable them to pick up ape- caliustrucWns from airport per. sonnel, though over 90 Pent No major move to an area that doesn t . have an airPOrL And many cor- poraton executives, he says, their guarantees of plots do have radios, accord- would rather get about airport service directly t deal lens t Giusti Except for one or two the than having wady►u aupott Owers. between a h.snd.a collisionnone . Atter its 1 i study of the air - wand a telephone P*; hich resulted m MY iglmuhes, Port protect, the Airport Commis - t Mayor of the airport has never even had a Giusto said- . ecomniended Dtttmt the city not Gr significant end that the ontq . Pfd tow actively �- y �yge ever reportal ^ ;' • � b cause FAA regulations at the airport was camel by would have required that the fa- < ► ci6 , be enlarged if it were s�+►g to function as a municipal airport. This would have meant acquiring yr < +farM1RDd in the Meadows sectio *,rt s of the measure that was `'t vehemently OPPosed 1>y' farmers there, including Commm�� me mber Johan Szawlows ! has a potato farm in the Meadows. When the Commission contacted the FAA about getting an exemption from the rules, the FAA refused. Another Commission member, Floyd -Andrus, who is also a pilot, suggested that the city look at airport sites that might avow for more expansion, hnclud- ing the area near Northampton State Hospital, where the city hopes to Place new business and industry. At the time, however, the project was Put on hold. But one member of the Commission WSho711. who asked recent' told the Advocate the •,sme onut witha snowplow" (a idea should be reference t an imruuciPHl airport incident of van- dalism in 1984)• The runway reexami ed soar in the light of could hcsmn&e 1.000 and teased bt>sness development takeoffs a day , if it had t,' 1° the one ciaddvantage t the city ani Giust said, but added that he al aviators of having the city did not expect volume the increase lex owning airport is that federal o beyond 200 or 250 flights a day wnlo8 would Pay 97 percent in the foreseeable future. Asked the cost of improvements t ant, at what point he would Pto, Iaccordt Giusto. "In an ho traffic control tower, he sail, esty. it would probably be Boo wouldn't use a f our and five �-U we for the avis n conmmwmty, k planes igetting pattern regularly, sail. „The city would make m thenhen the land. would ask for help.'• elf. The owners would lose th Asked if he would like to anthe 'oat said that no one�, ' quire more land and expand senting city 71 11the has aP he tthrtnk, s � � has poached him about buying th' land for tie business it is likely airport since he and Benjammp t do in the area, but that he took it over..However, Giusti might be willing to 0 wishes he had the c� wid- :e the airpOrt to he ai en the runway Aa fasystems- his Pyr mid retain the M more tar as takiexpensiveasking land, we to operate it, tion altitude of 1,100 feet before begMumg their downward glide for landing, but ackmnowbdBes that he has no control OV. those who do not. than the More worrisome mrissuces of noise and even an ZONING PERM, APPLICATION di rce S,,cticn 10.:' 7i -16 - /7-/g oi� — 33 — z T: Flan File ning cr na AF!'l:i.c;lnt me �e Address [dress O 1 Tel S �y=�� ?lEphone ���� t:1; t'�e "'1',,ble of Dir:�cnsion^1 and his section is to be filled out in a.ccord�.nce A;'TICLE VI) ensit Re latione:. Z. . — Setbac?;s :zx.B1d. Alin. OP - onir. Use Use Lot Front Derth Front Cover. Space - iistrict Ar. Z ".'idt}i Weoc i77' 9 0 04 're g 'Propos-cd _,-- -- ---- -— --- th ,a< r of tlir rsrcel: lark the appropriate box tO z.ndicr.te e __—__---- ----- Q pon-Conformin J I:(,t r,nd/or Stracture. S1)Pcify ...----- --- - ----- Q Single F---':I.il f unit, Ql:ulti-.F,1!-lily Q Residential Q Duplex C=Othei �aBusine ss Q Industrial Q institutio-1 QReg111•rr Q F.l?.D• Q Subdivision Q Clvnt-,.r 0 other - C= Subdivision with "Ahrrov-1-!,Qt-R(',..,.ircd'�-.5t Q planning hoard Approv^.l: Zoning Hoard. Approval (Sycciri.l Pernit IG -0i: Variance) City Council (Special Exccp ion S. 1c� .101 Q Yes s ( ATo ,'.Vatershed Protection District Overlsy: (Z.(`. Sect. 1:IV) —. Re uirecs Proposed Parking Space Requirements: (Z-()—; . est: :.l) q (Z.C. "est. 8.2) Required Proposed. loading Space Requirements: —_ Q Yeo To _ Plot Plan Q Yes To (S. 10.2) XT.I) � e' l i - Site Plan Yes Q Igo (S. 10.2 and 10.11 Q '7;;iver Grantcd: Dcate This section for OFFICIAL use only: =Approval as presented: =Modifications necessary for oprrov:,.l: Return: (More infor.mntirn needed) Q Denial: Reasons: T���licant Date S'igr_ature of A1� /X� J., ..Ij Fgo - 76 Sign^tlzre of Admin. Off— icer Date CITY OF NORTHANIPTON NoRTHANIPTON, MA. 01p6o 25BD-71 Z o DEPT. FILE COPY BUILDING - PERMIT VALIDATION DATE _zir-I1 5, 197_ PERMIT NO. 128 APPLICANT Twirent 1RTaM eur ADDRESS 61 Spruce Hill Avenue (NO.) ._ .... (STREET) .• . (CONTR's LICENSE) NUMBER OF PERMIT TOTip-MM Ition (_) STORY Aircra= H=er DWELLING UNITS !TYPE OF !usenveuENT) NO. (PROPOSED USE) ZONING SR AT (LOCATION) IDS d ft. -T V DISTRICT (NO.) (STREET) BETWEEN AND (CROS! STREET) (CROS! STREET) SUBDIVISION LOT BLOCK SIZE BUILDING IS TO BE FT. WIDE BY FT. LONG BY FT. IN HEIGHT AND SHALL CONFORM IN CONSTRUCTION Z TO TYPE USE GROUP BASEMENT WALLS OR FOUNDATION � (TYPE) C I- REMARKS: DIA -11101 i tti An Of Air raft hangfir VOLUME 1201 X '%I ESTIMATED COST .�hun on PERMIT .� 10.00 (CUBIC/SQUARE FEET) OWNER T Toren F & rinrotby TARI enr ' Ett Northampton, Ma. BU DING Pr. ADDRESS . 61 Spruce Hill Avenue. e (Affidavit on reverse side of application to be completed by orized agent of owner) Public (Federal; State, or local government) C. COST (Omit cents) 10. Cost of improvement .............. To be installed but not included in the above cost a. Electrical ...................... b. Plumbing ...................... e. Heating, air conditioning......... d. Other (elevator, etc.) ............. Nonresidential - Describe in detail proposed use of buildings, e.g., food processing plant, machine shop, laundry building at hospital, elementary school, secondary school, college, parochial school, parking garage for, department store, rental office building, office building of industrial plant. If use of existing building is being changed, enter proposed use. 11. TOTAL COST OF IMPROVEMENT S V III. SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF BurLDING — For new buildings and additions, complete Parts E — L; for wrecking, complete only Part J, for all others skip to IV. E. PRINCIPAL TYPE OF FRAME G. TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL J. DIMENSIONS 30 Masonry (wall bearing) 40 F_� Public or private company 48• Number of stories ............... 49. Total square feet of floor area, 31 Wood frame 41 � Private (septic tank, etc.) all floors, based on exterior tructuralsteel dimensions ..................... 33 Fj Reinforced concrete H. TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY % L X �� 34 F-1 Other - Speci/y 42 ❑ Public or private company 50. Total lad area, sq. ft............ 43 ❑ Private (well, cistern) K. NUMBER OF OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES 51. Enclosed ....................... F. PRINCIPAL TYPE OF HEATING FUEL 35 Fj Gas 36 F-1 Oil 37 F-1 Electricity 38 0 Coal 39 Fj Other - Speci/y 1. TYPE OF MECHANICAL Will there be Central air conditioning? 44 F-1 Yes 45 Q tde WIII there be an elevator? 46 F-1 Yes 47 No 52. Outdoors ........................ L. RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS ONLY Full....:::::: 54. Number of bathrooms Partial.. (Pym of 39arthal"Ptan JI:ssachnsetts Office of the'Inspertar of'Puilbings Page,A5:B&-PI0L APPLICATION FOR ZONING PERMIT AND BUILDING PERMIT z IMPORTANT — Applicant to complete all items in sections: 1, 11, 111, IV, and IX. ZONING O DISTRICT I. AT (LOCATION) (srR r) LOCATION (N0' OF BETWEEN AND (CROSS STREET) (CROSS STREET) BUILDING LOT SUBDIVISION LOT BLOCK SIZE fn II. TYPE AND COST OF BUILDING — All applicants complete Parts A — D M M A. TYPE OF IMPROVEMENT D. PROPOSED USE - For "Wrecking" most recent use M 1 F-1 New building 2 F-1 Addition (it residential, enter number of new housing units added, if any, in Part D, 13) 3 F-1 Alteration (See 2 above) 4 Repair, replacement 5 Wrecking (if multifamily residential, enter number of units in building in Part D, 13) 6 Moving (relocation) 7 ❑ Foundation only B. OWNERSHIP 8 ❑ Private (individual, corporation, nonprofit institution, etc.) 9 F -j Public (Federal, State, or local government) C. COST 10. Cost of improvement ............... To be installed but not included in the above cost o. Electrical ...................... b. Plumbing ...................... e. Heating, air conditioning......... d. Other (elevator, etc.)............ 11. TOTAL COST OF IMPROVEMENT I III. SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF E. PRINCIPAL TYPE OF FRAME 30 Masonry (wall bearing) 31 Wood frame tructural steel 33 F -j Reinforced concrete 34 F -j Other - Specify F. PRINCIPAL TYPE OF HEATING FUEL 35 ❑ Gas 36 F-1 Oil 37 F-1 Electricity 38 F -j Coal 39 F -j Other - Specify Residential Nonresidential 12 F-1 One family 18 F-1 Amusement, recreational 13 ❑ Two or more fomily - Enter 19 F-1 Church, other religious number of units- - - - -t1 20 F-1 Industrial 14 F-1 Transient hotel, motel, 21 F-1 Parking garage or dormitory - Enter number station, repair garage o/ units ------- - --22F-1Service 15 F-1 Garage 23 F-1 Hospital, institutional 16 F-1 Carport 24 F-1 Office, bank, professional Other - Specify utility 25 F-117 F-1SSchool, library, other educational oo — F-1 Stores, mercantile 28 F-1 Tanks,'towers 29 F-1 Other - Specify (Omit cents) Nonresidential - Describe in detail proposed use of buildings, e.g., food processing plant, machine shop, laundry building at hospital, elementary school, secondary school, college, parochial school, parking garage for, department store, rental office building, office building at industrial plant. 6. 1.4;na I% 6eina chanced, enter proposed use. ING — For new buildings and additions, complete Parts E — L; for wrecking, complete only Part J, for all others skip to IV G. TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL 40 F -j Public or private company 41 F -j Private (septic tank, etc.) H. TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY 42 Public or private company 43 Private (well, cistern) TYPE OF MECHANICAL Will there be central air conditioning? 44F-1 Yes 11"45CjNO Will there be an elevator? 46 F-1 Yes 47 Fj No J. DIMENSIONS 48. Number of stories ................ 49. Total square feet of floor area, all floors, based on exterior dimensions ..... • •� %� G'�X 3� 50. Total lard area, sq. ft............ K. NUMBER OF OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES 51. Enclosed ....................... 52. Outdoors ........................ L. RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS ONLY 53. Number i0'bedreoms...•.•....••.». .� Full....::;::: 54. Number of bathrooms Partial.. IV. IDENTIFICATION — To be completed by all applicants Name Mailing address — Number, street, c-it.N, and State- ZIP code Tel. No. Owner or Lessee t.1 — Date Plans Approved By 1 2 I e� BUILDING 2. � 1, C;>~c.c i M Bui lder's License No. GRADING Contractor OIL BURNER WRECKING PLUMBING 3. Architect or Engineer $ I hereby certify that the proposed work is authorized by the owner of record and thot I have been authorized by the owner to make this application as his authorized agent and we agree to conform to all applicable laws of this jurisdiction. Signature of applicant Address Application date DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE V. PLAN REVIEW RECORD — For office use Plans Review Required 9 Check Plan Review Fee Date Plans Started By Date Plans Approved By Notes BUILDING SIGN OR BILLBOARD $ STREET GRADES GRADING USE OF PUBLIC AREAS OIL BURNER WRECKING PLUMBING OTHER $ MECHANICAL $ ELECTRICAL $ OTHER $ VI. ADDITIONAL PERMITS REQUIRED OR OTHER JURISDICTION APPROVALS Permit or Approval I Check Dote PP Obtained Number B Permit or Approval I Check Date Number By y PP Obtained BOILER PLUMBING CURB OR SIDEWALK CUT ROOFING ELEVATOR SEWER ELECTRICAL SIGN OR BILLBOARD FURNACE STREET GRADES GRADING USE OF PUBLIC AREAS OIL BURNER WRECKING OTHER OTHER II. VALIDATION Building Permit number,^% /p Building . Permit issued �/ .L,/ 19_ Building Permit Fee $ C Certificote of Occupancy $ Approved by: Drain Tile $ Plan Review Feea TITLE JOY igR4- Cleo •' VdllL���!ddLd7L March 18, 1982 Mr. Edward D. Etheredge, Chairman Arlt Northampton Airport Commission 8 Crafts Avenue /yjAR Northampton, MA 01060 1 8 1982 Dear Mr. Etheredge: 41,4YoR'S OF I visited the Northampton -LaFleur Airport the other FACE neighborhood, I dropped in the Mayor's Office and obtained a COPY �n the Commission's report. PY of your If I may, I would like to comment on the report and provide you with some Of my views and comments: I. The correct distribution of public funds, which has been for years is as follows: FAA 90% State 7-22% Loca 1 2-12% 2. A more realistic planning estimate for a site study for this ty e and size airport would be at a maximum of $45,000.00. P 3. The federal requirements of a 200 foot clearance on both sides of a runway, 400 feet wide, is not correct. I have enclosed a co fictitious airport which is part of an FAA Advisory Circular No. 150/5300-4 Utility Airport, of which COPY of a plan for a safety area limits is 250 fee'have a copy. feet you cinsee, the minimum runway runway . Also enclosed, is a plan of the LaFleur Airport with ethe 250 of the footdsafet area marked in blue. You will notice that the safety area requires very little if any, additional land. A solution would be to displace Runway 32 thresholdy by 500 feet. This would allow for a 3000 foot runway with a 500 foot are f ' the clear zone. This area could also be used for aircraft rollout off. a or and for take - 4. As to land requirements, there is no serious problem with back or conditions relative t farm lands which will not be disrupted unless offered for sale by the land obe satisfied with area wners. I believe the FAA would leases, lease long term leases for those portions of land required to meet federal land r specifications. ea 5. Fencing - There is no written requirement for fencing, inpart, or an portion thereof. Fencing is an eligible reimbursable item and is installed for safety and security reasons when necessary. 2 In conclusion, I trust the above comments will be helpful to your Commission. We are still in a position to request funding, if your Commission feels it is necessary, for a site study, if and when federal funding becomes available. Very truly yours, 0 Dominic R. DiVirgilio Chief Airport Engineer DRD/bw Enc. Note: Page 5, lst sentence, "Lucas explained they have two parallel runways 3000 feet long", this should be corrected to read, "they have one paved runway 3000 feet long", see attached sketch. cc: Mr. Vincent Scarano, FAA .Hon. David B. Musant, Jr., Mayor of Northampton President of Northampton City Council XLil OF AIRPORT I.A Al1i_1"0RT 1. CLASS (Commercial, kIunicipal, et8) Corr,ereial. Owner (with address) L. La Fleur, Tin? Streets Idorthnmpton Lessee (with address) Ln -Fleur Airport R: Flying Service, Inc. Operated by it Donald Hood. Ltanager (with address L.T. Lu."linir 2. LOCAT IOit Distance and direction fro4enter of city (Mention prominent landmarks) 3,"5�ri le-c:'!I., of -"Xen ',,ridges to L."'T :ir ,,round and Race Tru(;k Airline distance from center of city './� mile Distance by road from Post Office Cne -Wile. Altitude abov(Aea level 120 feet Latitude 42019130" Longitude 72`73 t36" Identification and location of roads near airport leading to nearest city or town route C,,', 17est of airport, to Amherst to Northampton. 3. DESCRIPTION Dimensions of boundaries Acres 158 Total. Gni Available. Shape Very irregular. Is entire area of field available for landing and taking -off Yes Type of soil Sand loam Gradient Level Nature of surface Sod If sod surface, give type of grass used Hay Is this an all -way field :'es. Is landing area fenced Ido Usual taking off and landing directions, as determined by wind rose for this airport, deteinninod by Amherst data: IM - SE 2L400 ft., ZJ-S 850 ft., NE - SW 1100 ft . , and B. -W. 2000 ft. Is property surrounding the field owned or controlled by the owner or operator of the airport No Is the property zoned 7o If so, attach a copy of the zoning ordinance - Is area available for expansion Yes If so, in what direction and to what extent On all sides unlimited. 4. DRA I IUGE What type is the present drainage system Natured. Is this system adequate for ordinary weather conditions Yes Does water stand on field No Is field subject to periodic flooding No When Only on rare Why 1936 Flood. occasions. X111 4. (Cont'd.) What is height of ground water level Approximately 32 feet. Is field useable during thaws 41oa- G' 5. SERVICE: Personnel for servicing -day Yes night Yes Repair -Day Yes Repair -.Dight Yes I-Techanics Charge N1.50 Repair facilities sufficient for engine P:;ajor No Aircraft Major No Llinor yes Gasoline at field fes Minor Yeti Spare parts 'Minor In town yes Oil Yes Octane rating of gasoline available 74-82 Socony Capacity gasoline storage in gallons 1500 Hangar storage charges �"?'1.50 - $2.00 Administration Building Yes Rest rooms Yes Transportation to city (show r ate and time) Taxi 501e, five minutes. Is R.R. siding at airport No Bus on flaf, 10�. Name of R.R. Restaurant No First Aid Yes (simple) ` Fire appatatus-describe Hand extinguishers. 6. CUt'.X'EICAT ION: Telephone Northampton 3496-1-v Telegraph By phone and W.U. Radio C.AO mer Cal Frequencies flours of Operation Remarks ' Rose VjICRO Guard Work No revular Amateur Amateur station I�d.E. of field, 10 meter to 160 meter bands. Nearest Broadcasting Radio Stations: T,SPR - Springfield - 1140 K.C. WBZA - Springfield - 990 K.C. Are weather reports available Yes by radio. feather Bureau Station Albany and Boston Airway teletype None Visual traffic control No 7. METEOROLOGICAL DATA: Annual Winter Summer Prevailing wind direction NW NW SE Prevailing wind velocity -"- Prevailing wind per cent � 22.2 Rainfall -average 1.68 in 12 in in Maximum- 1 hour Minimum of record ---- ----- Temperature-Itiiax. 100 0 �^ - ----- Temperature -Min. 2x'0_ 199.10 0 Data obtained from U. S. 1,'eather Bureau Station at Amherst College and Climatological Reports of U. S. leather Bureau. Remarks: Comparative data over 13 year period. Wind data taken over 13 year period. a 8- LANDING STRIPS (if under construction, show size when completed and state complete to date and approximate date of completion) lio. Direction Plidth Length Remarks -state type of sod or soil All. rmy. 9- RUNWAYS= (f if under construction, shmv size when completed and state % complete to data and date of completion) No. Direction 7Tidth Thifktsr Type and ;;,aterials None 10. AFRONS - TAXIWAYS - ETC. (if under construction show size when completed and state ;� complete to date and date of completion) Area Sq. Yds. Location Type Const. Condition Remarks None lie HANGARS (if under construction, include size when complete, show o complete to date, and date of completion) No. Size Door Wd. Door Ht. Type Const. Type floor Type Roof Condition One 64x64 62 10 Wood frame C F emsnt Modified Good Gable Remarks- are hangars heated 110 how -4- 12• ADi,4Ii:ISTRATIOK Ai:D OTHER BUILDINGS (if under construction, show size when completed, date of completion) 7 complete to date and Building Length Width Height Type Constr. Condition - Remarks One 28 14 8 Wood frvzo Good. Attached to hangar. 13. OBSTRUCTIONS: List all obstructions on or near field within 2 0 to 1 gliding angle, giving nature, height and location of each, especially those in line with rurmays or landing strips. '."io antenna poles at A.N. edge of field 50 feet high, willing to move if necessary. Is landing area kept clear and ready for use at all times Yes Is any part of landing area crossed by a road (if so show on sketch) No 14. hIARYING AND IDENTIFICATION: Standard 100 ft. white circle with 4 ft. band (or other marking) No Name painted on hangar or imbedded in field (legend employed) On hangar roof, "Northampton" and also "Lar^leur Airport." On side of hangar La,Fleur Airport." Other marking on (shed, roof, etc -legend employed) None Wind direction indicator hind sock Illuminated No Howare obstructions marked -day Not marked How are obstructions marked -night Not marked. Character and location of lights None Are landing strips marked None Haw Are runways marked No How 15. LIGHT ING Approach lights, number - where located - Color 1':hite * Rotating beacon -double end No Single -end Yes Size 16 " ;r`attage 500 Where mounted l:o Auto lamp changer ho Code beacon -where mounted No Flashes No Boundary -lights -prismatic No No. Plainno No. Series no Multiple No Size lamps No Cones fixed No. No Turnover No. Aro Contact lights - what runways marked No Spacing No Series Yro ylultiple No Ceiling Projector No Floodlights -landing No system None Obstruction lighting -adequate Needed in radio station. Comments *Fixed beacon at this airport. Traffic Control lights -describe Pone Wind tee prone Lighted pro no wind return No Wind cone Yea Lighted I:o Length 11�. feet external or internal External Are rurvmys or landing strips range lights codified No If so, give runways directions and number of lights for each direction - Are buildings floodlighted Yes, 500 watt light on either side. Remarks: 0 r. U 'ti 16. DESCRIPTION 0F' SEAPLANE OR _Ai,THIBIAN BASE OR AidCHORAGE Dame of seaplane or amphibian base Name, distance and direction of nearest city Body of water in which located Landing and take -off area Shelter Depth of water, high tide Low tide Obstructions, if and hmv marked Winds Ice (period) Period base available for use FACILITIES: Current (Fog (period) Ramp Hauling out equipment Beach Mooring buoys, if and haw marked Lights: Servicing afforded: Fuel at wharf, ramp of by boat Communication System: Radio Telephone Remarks: Possible seaplane facilities in Connecticut Fiver adjacent to land owned by operator. N -E -S -g' FORM - 0p STATE (CITY OR TOWN yT€ �NED BY� (NAM ANO ADORcee� DATE I LESSEE OR AIRPORT OPERATOR DATE I ��� T MANerR Al� c.P.'T. Zq GENERAL INFORMATION !PPM4T1 N OF CITY OR CITIES IF PINT AIRPORT, >IMINE DISTANrc DIRECTION FROM r ry - A. P. T. OTHER APT. SITE N0. AIRPORT FACILITY RECORD 1� S.A.C. AIRPORT (NAME OF AIRPORT) CI ITIF3 A _ cep ___ _ HRS. OF f LIGHTING FACILITIES *N N-- Ll ®o— moo■ LANDING AREA - RUNWAYS HANGARS IF :- INDICATE IN DIRECTION COLUMN WHETHER Buy�Y OR -- ATE IZ TH Ht;T C01',TRUCTION IF AlL- WAY FI IN ICATE LEN TH OF AVAILABLE 4BLE DIRECTIONS DATE -- om 1 EUGTuI Sdkvdft I I I I 1 2,76 MAU mile= n a RUNWAYS EQUIPPED WITH CONTACT I IrHTc OR LIGHT -LAN SHOULD BE SO I I- t 1 1 AIRCARRIER INSPECTION SECTION ACTION APPROVED _7­F­....—I-.- AIRPORT CLASSIFICATION TE PRESENT PROPOSED POTENTiAI SW _r_ 4 Lanear Airport ior6bvtpboa9 ilassaebusotts Bo wshire Looius lanwAr Old ee rYy ftad BoPI-1-1-0-at. ftessebnsotts Aaori"n soboo2 orAoronaagos Now -IN, tan. fiR.•. we l atasiow"s UP 29. 45• ?V 97' 00• 12l► ak we ss.- Omn* River 1'* 1111 aw a Adj- N. Foo TrW* ad,j. W, TollowOaaos Na Les'. 4D'Sift'--land Jim 2ss 400 200 3mad Bond Sod Bei Y 4L - AI UW A.�•Cbe►lapris 7 Cersoroiol l %" t No BE b go . xr 12:2k U4.ft. No 1: vA Phone at Airport Northampton SM S �o C"^1 x+o Ne X wood X* 1(T) JSsoon it T" Nr to No No No io 14 Class Bohn No From ?os YM 20W Fr lull Tim bar AjXt#;o!f No so Tank 1.000 e0 Too 1OF A.E 'Ta Us P�ussqnor 1110ts �� �� �3.s uat��l+r 4 s1rz n/O. 9/-;/ SKETCH SHOWING LbCATION OF AIRPORT TRUE .N L OPEN �, ;� ; _�" j __ ORTHAMPTO ° ND R THA SCALE IN MILES 0 CLOSE UP DIMENSIONAL SKETCH OF AIRPORT o lolp O shock .Sr-odoosed P/o n .Bosen-. .Bose rb / * O ZOO ` l C3 p - - �Ga S'� ` u oo TPo% !i4 2S C"rl,ce Ca Roc a /✓.ae I cu/ii,r 07' ed Cu/tiro ted 0 500 ! SCALE IN FEET - / SEC. NAME OF FIELD I -A FLEUR AIRPORT ELEV. X20 ' CITY OR TOWN NORTH/9MPTON LAT. y'2 ° 1-9' 4S" COUNTY HRAf SH/RE LONG. 72° .37' 00" STATE MASSACHUSETTS _ i REVISIONS IBYIDATEIDRAWNBY </.f' W. IDATA BY q. F C !DATE 1 2 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 FORM ACA -29 DEPARTM,... i' OF COMMERCE 110-11-46f F CIVIL AERONAUTICS ADMINISTRATION AIRPORT FACILITIES RECORD Albany POAMJ APPROVED CHART SITE N0. il� BUDGET BUREAU INSPECTED BY NO. 11-R881 A. F. M&v-r.^t DAIV, 0 A11�._.., NAME I.uFi�ur Airport 1171 cess (161 TYPE Commercial CITY 3 STATE COUNTY >�assaaauastis 1181 SERVED Br (AtrJin.(.)) PROPERTY OWNER Lucius Lsnsur 5T CITY POPULATION a4 �s� p ADDRESS 72d FOrr, I�O� LANDING AREA EXPANDABLE N �f NOrthi�tptone Kassachusetts 58 DIRECTION L EXTENT $♦ ..vW0 OPERATOR MAINTENANCE PERFORMED: MOWING ss Aarsricaln Sc'sa0o1 C)JP $6TOIIiiitiOi 59 SNOW 11b ADDRESS FIELD MARKINGS:BOUNDARY OTHER TOTAL ACRES DRAINAGE (Type) TYPE OF SOIL (RECTION $ ENGTH 1zQ0 (DTH 4 AS`E Sand JRFACE (OFFICE OR ADMIN -BLDG. (Spoe/!p) SIZE 12 a 24 TYPE. CONSTR. I FIRE EQU!PMENT(Klnd) i CONTROL TOWER(Oper•ted by) RADIO(Grnund to •!r) ASSOC. RANGE STATION INSTRUMENT APPROACH SYS. CAA COMMUNICATION STA. WEATHER SERVICE(Type) No lb AT AIRPORT OR BY TELEPHONE Pas at Airport TELEPHONE (Number)----� 68 TELETYPE Tollow (;Cxws TELEGRAPH LANDING LIGHTS rtbaa�ton, Nass. •CONTACT(No. ofRoye) MANAGER 60 SIZE 1►. Natwis+�iss RANGE LATITUDE 420 � A 61 LONGITUDE T2Q� 000c6j OBSTRUCTION DIST. &00 - DIR. FROM CITY e> 64 LANDMARKS (Diet. ♦ Dir.) •O1y10�14 6 6 6 r* m. s> 0 -Conn. river � >�. sn & COURSE LIGHTS I Add. L. Raft Track sadj. $� � 67 FIELD MARKINGS:BOUNDARY OTHER TOTAL ACRES DRAINAGE (Type) TYPE OF SOIL (RECTION $ ENGTH 1zQ0 (DTH 4 AS`E Sand JRFACE (OFFICE OR ADMIN -BLDG. (Spoe/!p) SIZE 12 a 24 TYPE. CONSTR. I FIRE EQU!PMENT(Klnd) i CONTROL TOWER(Oper•ted by) RADIO(Grnund to •!r) ASSOC. RANGE STATION INSTRUMENT APPROACH SYS. CAA COMMUNICATION STA. WEATHER SERVICE(Type) No lb AT AIRPORT OR BY TELEPHONE Pas at Airport TELEPHONE (Number)----� 68 TELETYPE Tollow (;Cxws TELEGRAPH LANDING LIGHTS IDENTIFICATION LIGHTS •CONTACT(No. ofRoye) OTATING BEACON BOUNDARY SIZE WIND INOICATORS RANGE COLOR CONE FLOOD CODE BEACON LIGHTED OBSTRUCTION LOC. APPROACH CODE TEE OTHER COURSE LIGHTS I LIGHTED OPERATING SCHEDULE LOC. TETRAHEDRON lb CODE 11D LIGHTED OPERATING SCHEDULE FIXED LASE OPERATORS AIRPORT ATTENDED (Stat.* W=) A.t NAME OF OPERATOR 69 70 DIST.TO RAIL TRANSFER POINT HANE OF RAILROAD MEALS AT AIRPORT w APRONS(S4. yde.) TAXIWAYS(LJn. rt.) lb LANDING AREA CONDITION so" RS tH lJF D I MENS I ONSrRUCT( NUMBER OF D 1 MENS 1ONS 1ood1� ood NUMBER OF BASED "R- OTHER MAJOR BUILDINGS DRAFT F TR N I NTS Class ftm HANGAR TIE -DOWN Tss 7 FUEL - - REPAIRS TYPE HANGAR CHARTER FLIGHT STORAGE CAPACITY OCTANE STORAGE MAJOR MINOR OTHER A - E A - E SERVICE INSTR. (Spo/ly) I ti � FORM CD -14 ' OEPMTMENT OF COMMERCE DATE' c io-is-46 M 5/3/ 51 TRANSMITTAL SLIP REF•E(ZfY) TO: Mr. John P. White REF.Y) FROM: ASDO. West i.eld. Mass NOTE AND FILE 'ME PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE C:3 NOTE AND RETURN TO ❑TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION RETURN WITN MORE OETAIl3 0 PER YOUR REQUEST (] NOTE AND SEE ME p SIGNATURE ABOUT TNIS PLEASE ANSWER I� (] FOR YOUR INFORMATION (] FOR YOUR APPROVAL INVESTIGATE AND REPORT I Zr) ta 3 .n Ir o � ' J 1 ✓% f J Us r o p FORM CD -14 ' OEPMTMENT OF COMMERCE DATE' c io-is-46 M 5/3/ 51 TRANSMITTAL SLIP REF•E(ZfY) TO: Mr. John P. White REF.Y) FROM: ASDO. West i.eld. Mass NOTE AND FILE 'ME PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE C:3 NOTE AND RETURN TO ❑TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION RETURN WITN MORE OETAIl3 0 PER YOUR REQUEST (] NOTE AND SEE ME p SIGNATURE ABOUT TNIS PLEASE ANSWER I� (] FOR YOUR INFORMATION (] FOR YOUR APPROVAL INVESTIGATE AND REPORT Pencil notations on form indicate Chan found on inspection. Wr„„DARD,,aRM NO. 64 Office Memorandum -UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT To : Harold G. Crawfoid2 ASDO, Westfield.. Hass. DATE: April 171 1951 FRom . John P. White, ADO, Boston, I -lass . SUBJECT: IaFleur Airport Northampton, tiassachusetts Fora: ACA -29A Attached is a Facility Record Form for the LaFleur Airport that we . discussed by telephone on April 16. You wilia� e ar�tof have tached card fromde various sthesin red AirpoY't crayon based upon the receipt, year, Manager. If you can obtain the information tabulated or pictured that I have sthatd in pencil without too much effort, I shall appreciate ito If it appear f nt this job might become too involved, that is, if the strips are very diftefrom or if the obstructionsin ae ronannotpbroach o tainedswiathouttt�oo much effort., let that which has been pact me know as soon as possible and I will come out and resurvey the airport i„ ^^. N SCALE IN MILE9,1 r I,aFleur Ai ort „,E 9151 C,TYANDSTATE' NOrthem n yaeseohusetts AMroRT Seco eNART Alban 1 sERV10E TrPE OD1R/rY Han ehiro 1(asseohusetts.O1R..ROM en . HRS. AIRPORT ATTTDIDEO 7 LAT. 42 0'Lona72 7' 'E''"• a*r v a On MARA•ER wren . aur �„ o us eur MERATOR uity Hoa 221 ADDRESS Spruee 8111 Ave. ADDRESS Old Ferry Road ADDRESS Northampton, Hess. glorenoe, Hass* Northa ton, Masse 0 0 SEGMENTEDcIRCLE o YEs ZI No . '�� Otter /LIGHT ACTIVITIEs, NUMIER OPERATORS �p Minor & *3 or .40!. A. C.OIE1MgR TATID. 0 DAr RNIB . tA1ACEIY (OAW 1WV REFAIRS m INSTRUCTIONAL O AORILTR.TURAL AIRCRAFTAPM- RAVNDs: O TowEll Cl � Cl �� _ m CHARTER Q MTRDI- SURVEY. AOVER7141N0 None O RANGE O MMR O'REATMER ® OTHER (sPEC1Fr) Sales MURES !0 oTlml (x•cIn') QII�n� WIMD INDICATORS: LIGHTED Q YES CIRO O u p• o Y 9 ZI TEE ® DONE O TURAMEDRON REsjiIiCTKIM FIME•CRMN EQUIP. extinguish. available) uGHn: o TAxrvur o APPROACH o °�”" REMARKS nd r2() TYPE •Y RWY•, Fe -1I H-2 •. BASED AMICRAFT TOTAL , , NUM•ER SIMGLE.EROINE AIRCRAFT O ROTATBEACON COLOR, RHi INSPECTED ev: K. T. RONbY Ate[ 11NAil 0 AND C, as 19 OPERATING SCREWLE RPR" phone RATE - ADEQUATE q PEs O No �v ' RUMWR MIR.T1•ENOINE AIRCRAFT -�, \ RLIKWAY RMRT. c ear lel �� �. LIQ, "MyEnrEGLIDE E, s DON,RDL G ossTaucr N Har Tr a , g ' u � i DIST. FROM RWY. ENO AIRPORT LOCATION SCALE IN MILE9,1 "►SiFtr�^}— QD d © `� Est EFF Rey Gro is t N rRA'LJ 0 d \ ESE - WNW STR/P• 0. JV �e .: oc • �e� w 0 0 . C 1 errrAses �0� 00'� X X . p.rr,; relyd rr. Y �v x, -�, \ !tom tQ•✓� S C OVI �� �. LIQ, c�iflre/rd u � i YIS currire>'ed Nei#jj, e` A. Y ."ev Jep�'r - NORTNAMPTON Qwr rvo-S— � 7 AOM/M• NCR. 1O/ T T T 1 ■ Nee, r Jo' � 4 O �+� Curliroled X � r!d D J00 o SCALE IN FEET RACR TAACK U. A DEPARTMENT OF COMRff11CF-CIVIL AEAOIMUTICE AENAINISTRATION r �; ��1 � A RECORD OF AIRPORT FACILITIES e. r• rerpMNNT NIrN1,A rA1tA p ^— 1 SF.FTP bn 15 i _- .r< 9 1 pTrA"oNnATE n Wassaohusetts AMN'DRT LaFleur Air ort c"ART Albs / III usssaohusett$ fE'T'"C", E SecoN KW" Hs01 shire "T..Dw rwm Nm I Al. WS NM. AIRPORT ATTENDED y IAT. 42 0 LOM•72 f EI Avlosvivuss Inc. MANAGER urea . our oeNaR o us Fieur B= 221 ADDMSf Spruos Hill Ave. ADo"uE Old Ferry Road "0°"�E Hass. Florsnoe/ Mass. r ---- . lla s s. Northampton. Northe ton. NRwDMlorauTORs DEGMENnDCNICtO ❑ rEf "' _� _ rEN"T ACM,_!. A. C.oPERATINI7V0. DA❑ WY O MN"T t IRIa.I NaERerrr WAS) 1000 RM' " xi ner )rU, Or A3P AIRCRAFT ARWD• Nora J , MVAMS: ❑ TowR ORO 0 IRSAC tENone t PATROL SURVEY.r, ADyuflEMY 1 O "Alva a "AMR O =ATOM m E"� sales AIRLINES ��� ��O T "e) ® oTINOlsonrECIr'n / r anlaR Wo Ifr1 unto R ,ME INDIN1TORf: --{ — — d T fD1Ia ❑ TETMNfORON RESTRICTgNf O EIRE<RAO"EINRr o y re a P. M EE ® ��p-_- ad extin6uish. available) owns: o TAV+Ar a�f"" o O"T"" gEMARKf �� ( 2 •It TOTAL TVR w RAT., Fe W H-'2 OOTIf! i , 0 i6 f a OAfaO AW40WWT A O ROTAIMWACO" NCONIDII: oTIO INSPECTED Dr' wil1,im D. CraMlord 0 NW &PLACE ORMTINS Rc"EDULE "pRs phone DATE ADDDUAT[ O TEs ❑ NO NUMRR MULT14mom AIRCM.T RUMAY RENT. " Nwoa ANau a � 2 e +�-�^ 3 GORT"DL'GOW UCTTI E T c (tin DIST. RDAI RIW.afo E . -7—" — •-: �... /.•f NORr'HRMPTON � � r O NRN/T/CRL '* SCALE IN MILE$,, N rcFf_R^y.0ts�ii�ti ESE -WNW , STR/Pa O•e/ �r C i CerraI cY/fird •I jj NI It ' �' T r/1 et �b '1 f 0 CV/frrl fly r \ A d, a.Nsa''.. •?a t,��Ay� N f+l1 E. .60 �iA + '•fir y 0' / ly,ft�o C'� ♦H ,�1%� We 1iR. 114 ;1!ttll� CAL • -� tee. 1 ,N •.' , M.1fe. + U. a onAaTwrHT of COMAIRJICL — wvIL ApIONAUTICS AoNIMIsrsATloM Now NI." We" i reRll a RECORD OF AIRPORT FACIUTIES ✓ t ✓ Form Approved: Budget Bureau No. 04-RO94 Runway at ❑ ESTABLISHMENT 6 CTIVATION lI AT DEPARTMENT Of TRANSPORTATION ❑ ALTERATION OF ❑ HELIPORT FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION C& DEACTIVATION OR ABANDONMENT [] SEAPLANE BASE NOTICE OF LANDING AREA PROPOSAL ❑ CHANGE OF STATUS R 18 36 NAME OF PROPONENT, INDIVIDUAL OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS (No., Street, City, State, Zip Code) L 1 ur S ruce Hill Avenue Florence Mass. A. LOCATION OF LANDING AREA-- 3. STATE 4. DIST. b DRCT To I. NEAREST CITY OR TOWN 2: COUNTY NEAREST CITY OR TOWN Han shire Mass • FROM LANDING AREA. Northam tori MILES DIRECTION 5. NAME OF LANDING AREA b. LATITUDE' 'r 7. LONGITUDE " e. ELEVATION 2 00 120' 01 NB Northam ton-LaFleur 42019 45 7 37 BITYPURPOSE (List, below, localities to be served if new facilities, if change in status or alteration, briefly describe ch CONSTRUCTION DATES PE USE Deactivation of runway due to taxiway construct EGIN/BEGAN PUBLIC PRIVATE EST. COMPLETION ❑ PERSONAL completed DRCT. D. 11.11,11111, LANDING AREA DATA PROPOSED FROM DISI. I, BEARING OF RUNWAYIS) EXISTING (If any) C. OTHER LANDING AREAS ABOVE (Miles) OR SEALANE(S) 14 7,2 W z LENGTH OF RUNWAY(S) OR SEALANE(S) 35 01 WIDTH OF RUNWAY(S) 15 1 01 and sur • OC OR SEALANE(S) O PRIMARY LANDING DIRECTION 32 2. 12d tA TYPE OF <m SURFACE RUNWAY Bi • t eat e tur 2• DIMENSIONS OF LANDING AND TAKEOFF AREA E. OBSTRUCTIONS DRCT. HEIGHT FROM DIST. DIMENSIONS OF ABOVE "A" (Miles) TOUCHDOWN AREA TYPE LANDING ABOVE AREA ^ �+ INGRESS /EGRESS J DIRECTION s=L TYPE OF SURFACE (Turf, rooffop, efeJ DIRECTION OF 3 DESCRIPTION OF LIGHTING (If any) PREVAILING WIND Au PRESENT ANTICIPATED F. OPERATIONAL DATA (1f est. indicate 5 YRS. HENCE by feHer "E") -- 1. I. EST. OR ACTUAL NO. BASED ACFT. 4 MULTIENGINE AIRPORTS - SINGLE-ENGINE _. UNDER 3500 LBS. MGW___--- G. NOISE CONSIDERATIONS ROM DIST. HELIPORTS - — OVER 3500 LBS. MGW IDENTIFICATION "A" (Miles) ABovE 2. AVERAGE NO. MONTHLY LANDINGS AIR CARRIER GENERAL AVIATION OTHER (Milifory. glider, Mc.) 3. ARE IFR OPERATIONS ANTICIPATED ❑ NO M YES WITHIN _ 5 YEARS H. APPLICATION FOR AIRPORT LICENSING ❑ HAS BEEN MADE ❑ NOT REQUIRED ❑ COUNTY ❑ WILL BE MADE ❑ STATE ❑ MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY 6FA ERTIFICATION: 1 hereby certify that all of the above statements made by me are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. TU TITLE TELEPHONE NO. JDA�Air ort Mana er 13-584-1860 18/69 A ORM 480-1 (5-67) SUPERSEDES FAA FQRM 2681 1 r N AIRPORT LOCATION. t ++ REMARKS,J TE , ACRE!AA .i r Its/1rM' � � • � -. ~rWA*w - a F' r .-. SCALE IN MILES I AIRPORT LAYOUT RUNWAY CATEGORIES RUNWAY !/,---Y, n'77 EXISTING_ PLANNEDLENGTHTED ,1 t�� cuirirrno Q ��� _ �O b'O- C UL7,l iA{TFO . � o �100 ., stoat �v ry!r b C z i � W K O W � � � S1sc7�! `Z six► N N � W "uiY=3N K W �1►��� ea"S$��� � � y�� O � .� i ~Oz a p4�O(x,~� 1.0 ♦ yx1 C W O r- J t =)--ZZ ry l^ V b xIA o 3 s gQ 8 L ^ O ' i z �s� > <,� 1 O ° W > ZoNP n C Q U m ,�� z� W J < O g�z K< Z = y 33• 4p, u I< .•. •~ CA CA ZO ± LL w w m N 1r1 1+1 O N 7< \ U < N C W O W .•. V .. ILL ILL ILL 4 4 ILL .i /� r•. 2 z Z z C O < y S O W W W 0 R' < W u N W W W . z O O Z F W > Vpp/ = Z IW. 144 U �> �;, U' N N+ N> > Z r z _ O< < W W W W O< LL i Z O< OIC > a'W O N1 Z= w•I O Z O W z J Y W Z in Z Z W< C r w K �" W ; V/ < W Z K = Z W 3 S 1-. Y G Q> Z. n y� W W K M1' Wy C 7 N u0i N Z O O v, W V/ W Z Z < < m V V~ 2 2 in in u 7 y� a x a y<� V/ 6 K < F' O I 1.0.1 N N •� 1-. O K U f U' O yy 4 G= N KO< Z < N W H W P R .�•. • V1 m O I Jt . ,o = ~ i F— 2: f-; W u a k I Z H Z u� g w b w Z 3 3= �> O W O i Z u< 6 0 K O z m aypp• Z < Z z Z O 0 ft - M Q > n d a o 0 l •( f 81 t W M <INI W Z 1 N N <' N 19 O Q < O(� - 0 UC U' Y= m LL W U O J Z a VI a s N 0 W rc O C "' W a W 6< O W .W. Y rc < Z u�i i O W w O W Z cii x V a 2 z j g ~_ O 2 x m p .p O O o �Z d sIs Q A �. a O A > = rr W O �•' N d > Y Y Z< U' x 4 1`-. . 1-. W C e ee = • >•N W� t z' iN r N 3 Z K W K G < O = H S w UIU N W 7 ILL U' i Z W N uVi y` i W Y W O W W p x; o< O Z p Z < kp1 p ym N ~ O <I N'S nIn n n n S m �p m m$ p; P P •moi P• ^ • P p2 R WO rc< g O Cm O yO1 u OI• �� INS= V,N �I Its to W Zt 'r >I`Z_ J o W�M� „Oi' IsuuW�In £ try: >a�� a S 1V iIM21 'W2<'• W LAti u • rc�tA IWiO �Ii J \ ~u '^ V i 10 f� W IN IJP �� n,g I2 m" Z Z = C Wi4 ILI Z a d z rc.LL Io O's •, `•rc'W W o ZOa ul W I W G `l CI.0 Cs rcC u o; 11"W • .r <y +J NDN N m j, a 164 x� (� 1 to IN 33 V zu it. l N OI 4 Z I 1 W W N N N O s Z Mold AA S? •\ OI O< N p I <I <N Z Z N NI au0 < S Q W> y W --- W .N +�o �•z'z r�(W W W W_ j.♦-------- � I z x -- -- - rE O Uh -C OG a60 =z1<I << m • vI O < U� 1� J tw UiW PI P a rc 3-- c i=2 =I� N n —♦U -- - 3 � - - K 2 IL sI oto °C — ♦ z z ------ -- O W +Z ►•N r i' (rY z ial W u Ax z <W ul W 2 2 of Q JI < - -------- $ N s1s V ZZ O. �J -�� -- = �{�� iG C a OWL JI W UP gi w 2 2 ~ o. tts W �W =Z•2 Oa v F o9 22 Z .2.�MJ • �Wao < x cot ao T J =,JIJ ~*.O x 9 : M" •G■iii i � a a '�W 3 0. "� O Qi sr z in r� W~ 1L OL `n A l W Z 2 1L •. M - • o a�U �n O = oin o o UOO<U'<W rcIu <IN �� .. .y .., w.. d•i lu WO W N'ai z W1 7IZ �Z M > ' �t •2/ z ul i �t ZZ W .07 t N ZZ Z= W ♦ N t K C K P1 ^� �1 W C z i w F LU ►- w yM o3. �ys5 { I. coo �_ zz OC SA ;�; G cCC ty \ rid SorW 4 k' 61S i< 8 'aY�0 r. a 4HN•TS 25 S< y3 ytA < W 0 F 4 6 Z y 1 t >jl►"S r m g gi i N � W z � s� �a e in 1 ¢ Vi ° � y■ b o at 3 a 5 GGGG g 400004 000o N Q S 3 J t O O O O O J "� O 1 n J d0 y M 'I 1�y g C J >w� n� Q z Ym aZ > > J <J �o 1,24O yo m N Y J W u li li 1L 1r li 1yy1 Q (� N r Q s at (7 W r 7 W o W W s W H= J + & „+H> >z 2z z _>r zzzr a� 8 P" d� 1W�xii SWZ,pmi�'�,3 aW W G C ti W C dip I oN z U w- cc j _ Q� < (J ¢ � z W W dui a _ R_ 9 N N N p0 10 W C z M 2 m S W V d< uyi N 6 S G S C7 2 S C i� y M1 -C ccg O C` o° O W S `� s S' a H s a s= I g a$~ W L7 H z 1 m yyg -z .-o z$_ i a3 S '� aW e�. og s c�`�<===o� g= W a cc < cc Z 2 b y^ O 72 a C J �O r a o w z O °� ri c�i c�i � v W v7s C W ixd it w� ap `p 3 g = a W U 3 S O O n n n n n n S 0 0 0 0 O� P ONi Obi P N Sa S- Om = CJ W rc a�HA ttR'z o U. J yg�-41 z=3.Ng 31 .,F F Ian z LZO g W tix J J g + V F- U C �.W IL VI O to a z z m , z z ' S N j g JzLL IL � s �z� 22 0.m o ao J g< 2 K -9-9 C� W p << O K N1 N N iii q SW •.• Uf 1 1 o 1 6� N 1<S4 O O V ry U. N M V1 c�y < a rr2 ~ pW u= wi p iX > O a[ a[ amp g' O1 of > z z x IA AF.- W3 U, N O f9 LL r4 x 1"O x w w w _ w x W P 1 bp y iqq 6 y'.�jyy yy2 W O Z �� N� Z n W 2 W Q F, LU ui OL J = W W ~ y H g zz g `L`-0C % W ; C z z xx7 N N N ct ofx ~i 0 7 ` � S Wuj z W W W IL Jam+ (p = z N `< ZZ O •S z w =jW w gz 22~r (36 fat =uj _= y o N x fI7 3 of aC X '� :8 t 0 x z R aS «< j �_ s � � < 3 < o > > m i� R x O S>> i o O x J W �a i zz brat o a gy O > W ui O I Z J S z w < < 0In uj V) 1 C J W J N W J N n OI w i 0 �u _ _ HI MAY FORM APPROVED. OMB No. 00:(00` __ CEPARTMLNTO .1N5T'ORT ATION SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR HICTRUCTIONS ^_R FEDERAL AVIA ')MINISTRATION 171 AIf1SPAt,E �+FI4L YSlti DF 7ERM171 N, DATE OF PRINK I 1 SITE N0. IK AIRPORT M RECORD NO OBJECTION ,Spec. ANE 09131.A - - RAssoc.. urr NOkTHAMPTON 9 srn1E cnr IN MA �afRD CH ART NSW YORK -- - 1001f Ic IAL AIRPORT N;C71 LA T. -UR---- -_ - -- ----- ---_ - ARPT LCIN ID 7P2 -�--- 111 N_E_ARE STI TY VO R T FA M F TON SIATt NEAREST CITY IN MA ]30 ARPT ACREAGE 5 _C -,1: 13COUNIYAINPORT IN HAMPSHIRE-- - -- - "--- --"td STAII nRPi IN Pt ANPT OPEN 7-0-R- IC Y 15OWNER -LAURENT E LAFLEUR .'R AL11: VARN 13!;",w 'NASPiEDAG_RLFIENrS _ n[x>tass u,A„, SPRUCE HIEL AVE �HRz,f. FLO ENCE� MA 81B6x 17 r� 1`I1RL I(. (7WNf1) PHI VrII! OWNED AIRPORT --- _- - ----------- ---- IRS L�• 1 SE API ANF RAST. ❑ HELIPORT ❑ SiOLPOFIT _ ISMANAGLR LAURENT E LAFLLUR {zuPHDNENo,I»�r�. � wl•, 413-5H4-1866 _ _ Ar7aaSS;r1A ; ”"' SFRUCE_HILL AVE, jv,co'-r,— FLORENCE, MA 01666 be--, FAA �nHals, VI✓Ase ..IV,Sl y-trx FI,11IR LAURENT _ LAFLEUR Sel-1, Stat,00 It SSI of flHnles to items 1--ded LA FLLUR AIRPORT by.,datN1.3. Interp,onalxtwee„F556 arpt, NO SPRUCE HILL tVE- 2.Yo,,FSS ,,. WINDSOR LOCK` FLCRE`=CF- v'A 1`10f.0 4.FSS,,--v- "0 3. Fo, a toil 1- call to yonr FSS. Pau SR6-2!344 Oa toll bno o,m_bo„s_„ot_I t_ed_,c_all 283-623-2416 DISIAN(A .IND DINI CIION IO AIRPORT 1110_M ASSOCIATED CITY. NO. STATUTE MILES PI DIRECTION n'E _ - 23 AIRPORT L IHHnn, 42-1”-45N 24 LONG1_TU_DI 072-37-P.0. ARP r2r EL>:vn_nON BB 120 E 1 _ _F_25 _ - FAACA(7S.SWI SIt4 NGTH(ipM1 L13S1 3'.B 40 J.{ 3A 1`IIYti 35 JR SL7HT ACE %EFF 42 MARKING "-- 43 45fm 37 38 39A DOUBLE IC/LaLGTS RUNWAY LI NGIH WIDTH CONN )SII ION gNGL WH- Dl1ALW11L LIALIANq DLIALTANI• `RADIEN TYPE 6 CONDITION LGTS INTENS 14/32 3`1.0 '0 ,Sf", - .26 Pe$TC-C t- L I. 1 11;11 1 INT.+ _ - r - - - APPROACH SURFACE DATA 57 END AI RIME N 4111, 7`I 51 APCH (a - CLOSE 50 rn 111(,1 4-„ 11( APPI71,.11 H ID 517 SLOPE RVR Rvv 64 CILG OBSTRUCTION r� DSTC 56 APCH RGi BLAST /ONE REIT. _ISR - m -a/ FM THRESH RATIO CBSTN TFC FEN(:E 14 - PJ N A VAS 1 N TFEESL - -11,00 18- •—Y IN N 32 N N N NONE N N CLFAP 20-1 -Y "r NF9I IN.. ,.1 RUNWAY ANLANDING LE N(il 11 IAKEUFI LLNGIII 1111,E SH(TLO _ _ END �tl OT.I'II;L r)Sft--lcfl 5. I),'Y 6 NIGHT u DAV NI1�111 LATITUDE LONGITUDE ELEV .ISPI.aI;IE �._ _- -�. SiiL SP1{.-_�irl.___- 14 32 1 I 71 STANDARD TIME ZONE .P�r77 BIC N UPEHSCHEDULE 73 RWY LGT OPER SKED 74 AIRPORT ATTENDANCE SCHEDULE 72 DAYLIG hII SAVING TIME _ _ _ •-DUSR-(`A�.�F' MONTHS DAYS HOURS 75 AIRPORT BEACON LI(iHl LANDING FEF FOR N(7N-I:OMAENCIAI USERS N AZA ALT—AVLIZ�NTNONE CLEAR R GREEN 0 CII5FOM5 ARPORT OF ENTRY �- CLEAR ❑ CLEAll6YELLOW ❑1 CUSTOMS LANDING RIGHTS AIRPORT ENGINE 106 PISTON Y B1 IAXIWAV LIGHTS_ _ _ CARGO HANDLING 98 N_O. T -HANGARS 99 ND. OTHER HNGRS - — OIL IFI IUERIN E, II 8'?WINO IN ATDR_ MIL JOINT USE AGNEEMEN7 MIL LANDING RIGHTS - - _SE - _- - B TYPE 6 NO. AIRCRAFT REPAIRS MAIOR MINOR 81 SEGk1LNIED CIRCLE 1178A DMIL14 TYPE OPERS 11 AIRFRAME 1(12 Y 93 IF IPAD ON AIRPORT --- --- � �OWFH - p 1 104 r Il'r Y 94 WEnI HERSTA ON ARPT IO6IIIP-R 1sual SI 95 ADMI N_I RMLBLDG OXYGEN 1(/7rO lwt ssunl h 119 ESLD TOTAL ANNUAL MIL OPERS R _ _ _ _ BASED GEN AVIATION A_CFT D%Y REPL TOB HI✓HESSufu N 1.20 ESTU ANNUAL AIR TAXI DRIERS 7 1'BB SINGLE ENGINE BOTTLES 109-FRSS„ar N ESTIMATED GENFRAL AVIATION OPERATIONS 124 4 PLACE 6 OVER 39 AUX P()WIKf ONO ( FAT: 121 ANNUAL LOCAL I 122 ANNUAL ITINERANT123 TOTAL PEAK MONTH 125 UNDER PLACE 7 114 F-TYPL FLAL"PUBLIC SAL C 16F B B I R "�2q B - �- �- 3A-PFff 126 MULT I -ENG I 18 22 3u • 134 FAN 13`1 CFR INDEX • - - __-- - -- 127 HELICOPTER 34 35fl40e4511 Iq 6(7NICUMIREU�Z-2-R-"� - -- TIC PAI TERN ALT 128 SEAPLANE SEAPLANL BASE DATA; 129 SHELTTHTO 130 MOORING BUOYS 131 DOCK 132 RAMP 133 BEACHING GEAR 131 REMARKS -- - E63` RwY 14/32 ADJ 5B- 611'E TURF LNO(: STRIPS EA SIDE OF PAVED SFC. E051 NOP! STD VASI RWY 14 . E957 RWY 14 RD IN PR 1M SFC 17`- FM THF. EF57 RWY 32 RO IN PRIM SFC 759 FM, THR. EB73 <KFY 122.7 FOR RWY LGTS... OFF IN 7 MINUTES. E681 N/S TKWY LGTO ALONG WFST FOGE E114 FUEL CODES: HB- IBBLL. E137-61 <OCCASIONAL HANG GLIDER OPERATIONS ON RIDGE EAST OF AIRPORT. 135 LATEST INSP DR IWO REO 136 INSPN NOTE: Except m 822 6 23. Y Yes; N - No. "• = Sea Renxrks. Re 052. 1 - Approxh; 2 : Approach and Roll Out; 3 _ Approach, Md -Point, all/ Roll Out. Re 1145, L - La W, M - Medium, H _ H,at, Abbreviations are listed ,n FAA Contract— Handbook, Order 7340 ID FAA Form 5010.1 18-751 1IL1PERSEDES PREVIOUS EDITION DEPARTMEN' IANSPO, TION FEDERAL AV1I�ADMIN 'ION AIRPORT MJCSTER ORD B ASSOC. CITY NORTHAMPTON 10 OFFICIAL AIRPORT NAME LA FLEUR 11 NEAREST CITY NORTHAMPTON 13 COUNTY AIRPORT IN HAMPSHIRE ISOMY A' 4ELTON MAYNARD emacsc•tae� Pnv ��i ni n croov E SIDE INSTRUCTIONS DATE OF 11 - 1 SITE NO. ✓78 6 REG. DIST. Service Stenion(FSS) Of charges toitenwpreceded 1 A A910 CHART FOX 221 OLD FERRY RD. 2.Yo-FSSis WINDSOR LOCKS LCTN ID MA 30 ARPT ACREAGE I TATE ARPT IN MPT OPEN TO RELIC 1355W ULNASP/FED AGM ENTS 17 ❑ PUBLIC OWNED ® PRIVATE OWNED Q AIRPORT SEAPLANE BASE HELIPORT ❑ STOLPORT itl MANAGER WELTON MAYNARD 420 PHONE NO. Lith .re. cod,) ADDRESS: ISAFlov PDX 221 OLD FERRY RD. i9B PNORTHAMPTON* MA. HIM62 BetMeen FAA contacts, please advise your Flight WELTON MAYNARD Service Stenion(FSS) Of charges toitenwpreceded LA FLEUR AIRPORT by adot Rel. 3.1nterphonebet"w FSSBarpt. NO FOX 221 OLD FERRY RD. 2.Yo-FSSis WINDSOR LOCKS NORTHAMPTON• MA. 81868 4. FSS on ei rport NO 3. For a toll Tree call to Your FSS,call 800-243-0310 IR a toll Tree number Is not printed,call 203-623-2416 21 DISTANCE AND DIRECTION TO AIRPORT FROM ASSOCIATED CITY: NO. STATUTE MILES 01 DIRECTION N 23 AIRPORT LATITUDE 42-19-45N 24LONGITUOE 872 -37 -BOW E 126 ARP 12BELEVATIONE 33 34 PHYS 35 =FACE FAA`Ci106$Wf STRENGTH IIODDLBSI 39B 38 %EFF 12 MARKING {3 16 RNY RUNWAY LENGTH WIDTH .COMPOSITION WHL 39A DOUBLE NMl DUALT� RAD IEN TYPE 8 CONDITION GL LOTS INTENS 14 G P 0 5 8 4 $ PH .26 BASIC -G N L LIGHTING APPROACH SURFACE DATA 57 END Y ALI NT TRUE RVR Rvv a 58 RGT 59 BL4Sf MR 19 APPROACH 49 TO 50 51 APCH SLOPE 5E CTLG OBSTRUCTION 56 06TC 56 APCH m REIL INDCAtytiy.,�,.yL=L,�M•rU FM TINESH RATIO 7N TFC FENCE 32 N N -VAS N N TREES IBB 18-1 +Y N N N N N NONE N N CLEAR 28-1 +Y N N "I.A AY 0 DEVICE LANDING LENGTH TAKEOFF LENGTH THRESHOLD END (PI -End) 1 DAYNIGHT DAY NIGHT TITUDE S&LONGITLIOE_AZLLLEV 32 71 STANDARD TIME 20NE + 76 BCN OPERSCHEOULE 473 RWY LGT OPER SKIED 74 AIRPORT ATTENDANCE SCHEDULE 72 DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME + MONTHS DAYS HOURS 75 AIRPORT BEACON LIGHT 77 LANDING FEE FOR NON-COMMERCIAL USERS N ALL LL DAYL I GH T NONE ❑ CLEAR 8 GREEN 79 CUSTOMS AIRPORT OF ENTRY CLEAR ❑ CLEAR 8 YELLOW ❑ 80 CUSTOMS LANDING RIGHTS AIRPORT ENGINE 100 PISTON 91 TAXIWAY LIGHTS • CARGO HANDLING 98 NO. T -HANGARS B 99NO.OTHEA HNGRS 3 OIL 101 TU161NE 82 WIND INDICATOR MILJOINTUSEAGREEMENT MIL LANDING RIGHTS N REPAIRS MAJOR MINOR 83 SEGMENTED CRUCLE 117 BASED MILE TYPE OPERS 118 TYPE NO. MILITARY AIRCRAFT AIRFRAME 102 103 93 HELIPAD ON AIRPORT 104 105 94 WEATHERSTA ON ARPT OXYGEN 105 H I. RESSURE 96 ADMIN/TRMLBLDG 107 LO PRESSURE 119 ESTO TOTAL ANNUAL MIL OPERS BASED GEN AVIATION ACFT OXY REPL 108"tPRESSURE 120 ESTD ANNUAL AIR TAXI OPERS SINGLE ENGINE BOTTLES 109LOPRESSURE ESTIMATED GENERAL AVIATION OPERATIONS 12{ !PLACE 8 OVER 5 0 AURIOWERFp10PIWLFAC 121 ANNUAL LOCAL 122 ANNUAL ITINERANT 123 TOTAL PEAK MONTH 126 UNDER 1 PLACE 7 11! F -TYPE FUELFOiRtBLIC SALE 126 MULTI -ENG MULTI 12 18 22 30 • 134 FAR 139 CFR INDEX 127 35 10 !6 145 UNICDM FREO • TFC PATTERN ALT 128 SEAPLANE SS SEAPLANE BASE DATA: 29 SHELTERED 130 MOORING BUOYS 131 DOCK 132 RAMP 33 BEACHING GEAR 137 REMARKS L035 RWY 14/32 ADJ 5P• 61DE TURF LNOG STRIPS EA SIDE OF PAVED SFC. E051 NON STD VASI RWY 14 . ER'7 RWY 14 RD IN PRIM SFC 1759 FM THR. E?57 RWY 32 RD IN PRIM SFC 759 FM THR. E073 <FOR RWY LOTS B ROTG BCN DUSK -DAWN KEY 122.7 - LOTS OFF IN 7 MINUTES. E081 N/S TXWY LGTD ALONG WEST EDGE E114 FUEL CODES: 80. 1POLL. E137-01 HANG GLIDER OPERATIONS ON RIDGE EAST OF ARPT. 135 LATEST INSP OR IWO REO 136 INSPN NOTE : Eeceot m '$122A. 23. r , Y..� u _ u.. • _ e__ e___ .._ RRolI Out. He R46. L = Low. M = Medium. H = High. - - -•� �..ua' .tppraacR. Iam.m.rit, aro Abbravietiors are listed in FAA Contrectims Headbook, Order 7340 ID r t kNFAR%ES EPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - _ DERAL A VIA t1pN ADMINISTRATION SEE RE �ERSE—SJD6—tE/NSTRUTIONSDP ORTMASTER RECORD yACE ANAlr6Ty D —oMe N°' °Ea CITYTIORTq�p--NO OBJECTT 18/79L glpP(Ntl NARE DIST, j SITE NO. _ r���W--STATE CITY IN 11113I.A T CITY _I'IiIRp����j���--- -. - AFRO CHART NEM YORAIRPORTIN ^wnr$ __ I2 STATE NEAREST CITY IN t LCTN ID—YELTOR -_-- _ — - MA -- 782 30 AgPT ACgEAGE 11 STATE SS ADORES4 164 _- �- 8 MAG YARN AIpT IN_ M A ApPt OPEN T01l,BLIC i t7 ❑PUBLIC OWNED PRIVAT ° NASP,FED IB MANAGER :IE•LT�TV RPR—..�-.�E.r 0 _7_® A.W RT N HAM_P TON AGREEMENTS 1116/ ^-AY "IB RD -- SE_A_PLANE BASE ❑ HELI INgT I�OLD-FEIf ❑ STOOLpORT 19B P PFIOIVE N0. Iwnn u.. <on.l 13 5-�- WELTON MAYNARD NORTHAMPTON♦ M 8A-3861 LA FLEUR aet°ea" FAA - tta, urease .nv;.s BO% 221 AIRPORT s«vlce StAtmn IFSSI mcu, Y `• Fnent NORT OLD FERRY RD. Daa to lteag 9--ded HAMPTON, MA. 13161 by lar. 3. Intarpro,rehetween FS S& amt. NO 2. Yo« FSS I, WINDSOR LOCKS 1• FSS on a,rl"t 'NO 3. F«atoll Ira. r.all to 21 DISTgF/CE AND OIR_ECTION TO Al PONT FROM ASSOCIATED CITY: Your FSS. cell 811-243-1311 23 AIRP(MT LATITUDE ---- . CITY "" --- 11 a toll Irue mardw Ia rl« P med•call 213-623-2 16 �3=T9=i3N--__ z_I LONCHUDE �__ 2 3,7-INO IY, rAr�Te MILES _B3 ------ 31 PHrs E 26ARp-- DIIIMTION NE _ RUNWAY LENGTH 35 36 SURFACE Fqq C;K')SSW7STIaE1.7fTHllppp — 26 ELEVATION 11121 WIDTH COMPOSITION 37 38 J �1 39B 1 A'se" NryL T DOI AJ %EFF TYPE 'r"" ON -TT 0.5RI - DLKLTANO RAD LEN CNDITION GTS .26 BASFC-G L+E7" INTE46 M L RY ALIM _-- LIGHTING ------- i END MENI / HI - - ----- -- _ _ _ TRUE IB APFNOACH TD 50 5t APCH 52 APPROACH CE 0 T -- - -- " REIL SLOPE RVR RI, 6T CTLG (�y7R(�Tl URF A 6 DSTC 56 A 32 - ° rMy..tw-L,7IO FM TFFESH RAT O'T IN RGT 10 I815AST I N N NONE N N CLEAR 1 1 -�8-1 D.6YN N FENCE 21-1 .Y N N FEND' _-,(�LArrtuDE _— LFV r.Iac [DNF. +I'S - - I f 72 DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME 76 �NOPER SC HEDl4E 73 L RWY LGT OPER SKED 76 AIRPORT BEACON LIGHT _ _ 71 AlgrOgt ATTENDANCE NONE _ 77 LANDING FEE FOR N K1pryT- SCHEDULE ❑ HT 6 GREE 79 C ORIS AIR OF•F-CCAI�RCIAI 115ER5 A __._ DAYS CLEAR 17ST WORT DiNTRY �---_ HOURS Q CLEAR 6 VELI OW ❑ 80 CUSTOMS lq—H AIgPOpT ENGINE 100 PIS TDN OIL _ IDI T 81 TAXIWAY LIGHTS _ _ UIBINE 82 WIND INDICA_ TDR CARGO HANDLING REPAIRS _ - - MIL,IpI T 98 ND. T-HANCARS AIRFgAME IU T MINOR 83 SEGMENTED CIRCLE --N- N USES AGREEMENT 9y !o. OTHER HNGRS R- 103_ 9J MEL IPAD _ _ _ II7 BgSE0 MIL& TY_ PEO-- MIL LANDING RIGHTS P r, IDI -7- 105 -Y- DN AIRPOgT A IIB TYPE_ 6 ND. MILITARY_AlliCggFi 106 HI PR _ 91 WEATHERS iA DN ARPT N _ - OXYGEN E351 KrF 96 ADMIN 'T = - ---- - -- _ 107 tontEssuRE RML BLDG _ 119 ESTD TOTAL ANNUAL 8HI Pgf sura A- 1--- N_UAL OXY REPL 10 8DTTLES 10910 PRE ssIIRI A-- -20- ESTD A_NNuAL AIR TAXI OPER$ 1' __ -- --- -_-_- _ -- ITT -- - BASED GEN AV IA TI DN__ACF_T AuX 0 tRFORpwNl111 -- ESTIMATED GENERAL AVIA_tION OPERATIONS -- - -- _ - - 111 FT 22 3U SALE _ _121 AiNUAI LOCM 122 ANNUAL ITINERANT 127 TOT _ 1211 PLACE 6 OVER E SI 1 tPEFI/ELFOI1PILll:SS$T 2 IB _ _ _ AL PEAK 36 10 131 FAR 1J9 CFR INDEX -w 8-'____}_ MONTH 125 UNDER 1 PLACE 7 ��f� _ SEAPLANE BASE_ DATA: 115 UNICOM FRE- ZZili- ----'------ !26 MULTI -EN- _ 129 SHEL"!!ED 13-� ��-___ TFC PATTERN qL� 77 HE LICpp7FF B 137 REMNRKS MOORING - 128 SEA E135 -- ------ —Bugs _ -- -- _ 13t DUCK _ __ 132 RAMu PLA ANE _-- E151 RyY lA/32 ADJ 569 WIDE TUR }T3�eE ACHING GEAR _ E157 NON STD VASI Ryy lA F LNOG STRIPS EA SIDE CF PAVED E157 RyY 14 ROAD IN PRIMARY SURFACE. SFC. E173 RWy 32 ROAD IN PRIMARY SURFACE. E183 <FOR RWY LGTS t ROTO BCN DUSK -DAWN KEY 322.7 E114 N/S T%WY LGTO ALONG WEST EDGE FUEL CODES: 81 - LGTS OFF IN 7 MINUTES. E137 -I1 HANG G � 111LL. IGLIDER OPERATIONS ON RIDGE EAST OF ARPT. NOTE. E.ieut .n K22 A .' 1, i Yea: N Nn. _ -_ _ Roll (III. '. 176 LA TESi_PASP UR IHFO REO _ W rr1S. I I ow, M Kb,nran, EI Sav ReraarK,, Ra R52, 1 - ___�; A daav,atuvrt .0 . MItjI. AlXvow:n:.' APPrINCn e,Rl R,II _ - - --I36 INSPN ._ I"r"d ,n 1 AA I:oIRr,K:nr>u HarRlhr Our: 3 . 'TIRRoth, MM -Pont, ab FAA F« W'• t>raer 7310 ID SUlll-1 16-)S, SUPER:.EDES PREVIOUS EO,TIUN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPoRTATION FEDERAL AVIATION AOMINISTRATION AIRPORT MASTER RECORD LAURENT E LAFLEUR LA FLEUR AIRPORT SPRUCE HILL AVE. FLORENCE9 MA 03060 7 RU34"-YS I 35 36 SUiFA CE NINA 7 LENGTH +WIDTH COMPOSITION I/32 3500 • 501 ASPH C 'RSE S/OE FOR INSTRUCTIONS D— ONO N°' a� DATE OF PAINT 02/03/76 .I. SITE NO. S REG. ANE DIST, RY LIGHTING AL1 NT 7 Hi 51 APCH 53 APPRI TRUE IB APPROACH St - 1 CTLG pBSR ro REIL SLGPE RVR Rvv 1 N ra>w..a..ac: N N 32 N N N NONE N N CLEAR 32 6 ENGINE OIL F1.QRENCE. MA 0]DRn 8elvaxn FAA canasta, please advise Ypa Flight Service Station (FSS) of charges to tanst preceded by a dot is 1. 3. InlarPhenebeI—enFSS6 arpt. NO 2. Your FSS is WINDSOR LOCKS 4. FSS on airport NO 3. F« a toll has call to Your FSS, cell 586-3344f.11 lun er is n I/ a Iree mted,caIi 203-62A-2416 1TUTE MILES 03 OIRCTION NE _ E 25 AIP 26 ELEVATION 0 39B 1 %EFf /2 MARKING Coil LGTS gjll. RAp IEN TYPE 6 CONDITION .26INT BASIC -G . - u "DATA L.AFEMNN A IRFRAME 102 103.-_.. 83 HFL IPApr:U 1MCLE N 1179ASED MIL6 TYPE OPERS 119 TYPE MIL LALDITARYRAIRCRAFT r ON AIRPORT 104 105 Y 94I EATHERSTA Ory ARPT --- OXYGEN 106 HI PaFssullE N 95 ADMIN?RNLBLOG Y - -- ---_._-..---___ - 107lo FRfssum 119 ESTO TOTAL ANNUAL MIL OPERS_-----�---- O%Y REPL 10811I'mill aE — _ - 120 ESTO ANNUAL AIR TAXI OPERS BOTTLES 109L0 F.ESSURE N BASED GEN AVIATION ACf AU%yg - LFA _ UAL __.__ESTIMATED GENERAL AVIATION pPEggTIONS 121 ANNLOCAL SINGLE ENGINE 1/ F•TYPEFtIEiFORPI�K; SALE _ 122 ANNUAL ITINERANT 123 TOTAL P EAK 12 x 18 3 6 —_ MONTH 124 4 PLACE 6 OVER 39 125 22 30 134 FAR 139 CFR INDEX IN `�—'-- 21 N 38 10 15 UNDER 4 PLACE 7 128 MULTI -ENG 145 UNICOM FRED 12 sip SEAPLANE BASE DATA: 129 SHELTERED TFC PATTEIN ALT 127 HELICOPTER 130 137 REAIA137 � MOORING BUOYS 131 DOCK 132 RAMP33 E035 12B SEAPLANE0. BEACHING GEAR RYY 1/32 ADJ 509 WIDE TURF LNOG STRIPS EA SIDE E057 RYY lA RD IN PRIM SF OF PAVED E057 RWY 32 RD IN PRIM SFC SFC. 759 FMMTHR.• E073 <FOR RYY LGTS KEY 122.7 R SAY LIGHTS ON. E001 N/S TKWY LGTD ALONG WEST EDGE -v— ERcaPt in 422 6 23, Y - Y 135 LATEST IN$P OR INFO REO 09 Roll Out. Ra 415. L =Low, MN No. Sae Remarks. Re x52, 1 C 19 5 135 INSPN Mad, H _ Hr APMoaCM. 2 ` Agvoach a�q Roll Out; 3 Abbreviations era listed in FAA Contract -1.` APpoach, Mrd -Pohl, H."'000E, Order 7340 ID FAA Foran 6010.1 16.751 SUPERSEOES PREVIOUS EDITION iD U DEPARTMEW 1ANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVADMINISTRATION AIRPORT 4 4, TER RECORD LSSOC. CITY NORTHAMOT- 12 STATE OWNED ® PRIVATE OWNED AIRPORT _�® LAURENT E LAFLEUR SPRUCE HILL A LAURENT E LAFLEUR LA FLEUR AIRPORT SPRUCE HILL AVE, FLORENCE• MA 01060 F fORM� ROyED. 0" No. 0440 VERSE SIDE F VSTRUCTIONS #a N. DATE OF PR 13/24/76 L SITE NO. 5 REG. ANE' DIST. IN MA ' AERO CHART J 0913 .A NEW YORK RPT LCTN 10 782 CITY IN MA 30 ARPT ACREAGE 11STATE ARPT__ IN MA ARPr OPEN TO poll RN 13 55 W NASP/FEO AC>I�IENTS Y IFe - F ORENC�• MA OlDbD 'LANE BASE HELIPORT Q STOLPORT Tls nr REONE No. (.•gym ...,. .e I 4 13-584-7 60 YP F ORENCE MA 01060 Bet++.mt FAq contacts. Please advise Vow Fl,ght Service STalron IFSS) of charges to items Ixecadad by a dot le 1.3. Interphone het -FSS& sRx. NO 2. Yala Fes Is WINDSOR LOCKS .. FSS on airlxxt NO 3. Far a toll free cell to Yo-FSS.caR 586-3344 If s tall bee 71 DIS_IANC_E ANO DIRECTION TO AIRPORT FROM_ASSOCIAIED (:IIY: --- nl.Iber Is .wt pi.ted...Il _203-623-2416 23 AIHP(N1T LA TITU_DE 42_19-45N 21 IDNGITLIDE NO. STATUTE MILES OS _ DIRECTION NE 3:i 3. PAYS -- -072--j7-OOV - E 25 Pip - �28 EtEVAT10N 0 120 E 35 3GSIARACE 1/VA iT*TSSWTSIItl Nf;T1111LO()LTLS) 39B RUNWAY - IENGIII WIDTH (:OMPUSITION 3/ r 39A DOUBLE AD l2MARKGN3 .SRWY4/32 3500 50 Q$pH _- - SNGLW q ,IgtT DUAL RAD TYPE 6 CONDITION CILLGTS TS INTENS AS •26 81C -G N L \Y �8. _ ___ 111; I111NG---- tN0 ALIGNMENT /III - 49 - - _ APPROACH SURFACE DATA yl 51 l,PT. '2 'J 57 56 56 O FRUk �I a .e APNIOA(:II IU I1VN I Id (-Illi OBSRl1CT10N CLOSE (Iyt REIT E (CT LVv 56 OSTCTHRESH 56 T, RGT BLgy7 14 - INLDN N-u,..r. �r. •r.l --- FM THiESH RATIO IN TFC FENCE N N N NDNE N N TREES 32 N N N NONE N N 1008 lR- .Y N CLEAR 20-1 -Y N A' ILM1WAy 'WHITE ST IN -I.i I ANOI NI; 11 N(; 111 tNU fIl DEVICE Ustl .tihK%I - -- IAIiL OTI 1 I-NGT11 - - ---_ -- _ '' •'I,SI+.VY "DAY "NIGOT O;•1 UAY 111111 511011) 14 100 .r. NI(,Ill jZjLl Alll1101 "I oN(.I I1 M)E_-- IIFV 32 - �ITTIARDTEMEZUNE 405 /I. EICNOPIIISCHEDULL +73 ___ 72 UAYE K;HT SAVING TIME i NWY LGT OPER SKED /4 AM 111111 ATTLNOA_NCI SCHEDl1Lk Y 'DUSK-DAW"1 - - -- _ l5 AIRPONI 'AC. LI(;fit _ 111 ANOING ILE TOR NON-f.(M�.1I IICIALr)US -bA N NTIri DAYS IfOIALS NONE Q CLEANSGgEFN (] /9C.,,oR4%AIRPORTOf ENTRY - - - --- ALL LL DAYLIGHT CLEAR (] l_LEAElA Yl ll OW (] Ht) COSIOM% 1 ANDING RIGHTS AIRPORT ----�- n -_ ENGINE lIRI PISTON Y 81 EA%IWAY 11(;1175-----kN __-_------ - r - OIL 1(11 TURBINE N --- - --- _ ! CARGO IIANDI ING !IB NO T-H_AN(iARS T _-- 82 WIND INDII ATOR Y -- --'- -�' _- -?6 E9 NO_OTHER IN(, 3 NEP_AINS MA,Lpq II MINOR_ BJ SF(iME NTLU (-IRCLt p. MIL.IUIN TIISE AGM kMFNT N MIL IANDING NIGHTS N AIRFRAME 102 Y IIIL1 Y 93 NFLIPAO (/N AIRPORT N 117 BASED MILA TYPI OPENS _ 11N TYPE h NO. MIIIFARY AINCNAFI --- XYGEx -- - _-.-_--_- p qyL llw Y 1(� Y 94 WEA 111l_IiS IA ON ARPT N - - OXYGEN 108 LO"ESSLINI N `.)S HUMIN_ - --BI DG_ 10/LD pIE5tiIn1E 719 ESLD EUTAI ANNUAL Mll q'E RS _. _ 108RIpIEss- N 170 ESTO ANNUAL AIR TAXI OPFRS 1000 _ )O%Y REPL _ - _ GEN AVIATION ACTT BOTTLES 10!1 LO VRh $CI1N1 N ' - - -- --_ --____ SINGLE ENGINE ESTIMATED GENERAI AVIATION OPERATIONS 11 AD%P_ RFORORNL1Al _ __ 124 .PLACE A OVER 39 111 ANNI/AI LOCAL - I 122 ANNOA1. ITINERANT 123 TOT_A_I PEAK 11. F -TYPE FUEL FORPIBLIC SALE 16500 1 - MUN TH 1251/NUkR4 PLACE 7 920 - 12 18 27 30 • -1-34--- FAH 179 ChR INDEX N - 3U 12C+ Mulll-kNG 3. 35 .0/A 1.511NICOM INFO 122.8 --- ---- -- ------ _ 127 Hkl ICl7VTkH_ SEAPLANE BASE DATA: 1205HELTEREU --'- - -- __ ILC PATTELN_AlT -- - 12BStAlYANI O 137 REMgItKS - - - - 7130 M()OgING BUOYS - IJl DO(:K 1;52 "P 133 Bt ACHING [:EAR E035 RWY - } - - - 14/32 ADJ 509 WIDE TURF LNOG STRIPS EA SIDE OF PAVED SFC. E057 RWY 14 RD IN PRIM SFC 175- FM THR. E057 R6Y 32 RD 1N PRIM SFC 75- FM THR. E073 <KEY 122.7 FDR RWY LSTs -..OFF IN 7 MINUTES. E081 N/S Tx WY LGTD ALONG WEST EDGE E114 <LOW LEAD 100 OCTANE ONLY. E137-01 <OCCASIONAL HANG GLIDER OPERATIONS ON RIDGE EAST OF AIRPORT. _ 135 LATEST IMP OR INFO REG - EKlpy1 in N22 6 23. Y - Yu: N - No. -� :• :See Renwka. R. N513 1 - ----- �-�v 17JI Roll Old. M 045. L LoW, M MNo. H = Setf RE •529 4 Approach; 2 r h TIM R011 Ota; 3 . APpoach, Abbrwiatiorls ere hated in FAA CanNactlnn• HSIKlhatk. Order 7340 ID ROLL -O UTA $ : NID-P0 NT AND FAA Farm 5010.1 1&751 SUPERSEDES PREVIOUS EDITION and /9 ?,.C- fDER.L A•.ATIDN ADMIN ISTRAT'.^• AIRPORT MASTER _ .- >t ASSDC CITY: \ NCRTHt RECORD O G T r T C >2 AIRPORT NAM%CRTnRMPT0N O ., • .:c, ve uE: TATE: MA =Aa SIi�'ah-.`` CBD 7J AIR?ORT(hM): 11 .VE 6 REG/AD 01'1.= c COUNTY: IAMPSHIRF MA • O• INE/`)CNE 7 SECT -E^' CMT: NES YORK :.^. GENERAL 18 OYNERSHID; PRIVATE SERVICES BASEL AIRCFAF- >I1 OWNER: !tORTHaMPTUN AIRPORT ->12 ADDRESS: BOX >7a FLEL: 18[LL `71 AIRFRAME RPP;S 90 'I4GLE EAG: 35 221 OLD FERRY RN.� NORTr-AMPTON•'MA �'AJOR >7` ?PSS: MAJOR 91 MULTI Et.G: 01861 '>13 SHORE NR• 413-584-1868 >73 ECTiLE ECT LF 0y uYvrE.: AOhE 92 SET: >14 TANAGER: DALE W. BRADFORD >74 `ULK OXYCEt.: NONE TOTAL T4 >15 ADDRESS: BOX 221 OLD FERRY RD. NOFT 7s TSNT STORAGE: TIE MGR 76 OTHER 93 HELICOPTERS: AMPT ~ ON. MA 81868 '>16 PHONE NR: 413-584-1861 SERVICES : CNTR INSTR RNTL SALES 94 GLICESS: �>17 ATTENOANCE SCHEDULE: 95 MILITAPy: MONTHS DAYS 96 ULTRA -LIGHT: 2 HOURS ALL ALL 1788-2100 FACILITIES - DPERATICNS 19 AIRPORT USE: PUBLIC - - - - 588 ARPT SCN: CG lag - - - - - - - - - - ;IR 1 19 ARPT LAT: 42-19-41N I ESTIMATED 21 >81 AFT LC•T SKED:--zc_ >0� SP 181 CARRIER: COMMUTER: ARPT LONG: 872-36-42W : 21 ARPT-ELEV: ?123 SURVEYED U4IC]M: 122.7@8 182 583 WIND INDICATOR: AIR TAXI: 13Pe 22 ACREAGE: Sg L yEc_ 84 193 SEGMENT ED CIRCLE: NONE G A LOCAL: lora. �>23 RIGHT TRAFFIC: NO 164 85 CONTROL TVP: !.p G A IARY: 128a@ >24 NON { pMh 81 FSS: PRIDGEPOPT las MILITARY: IFF HASP/FEDERALCAGREEMENT: N 87 FSS Pti ARPT: No TOTAL: '2402 I25 26 FAR 139 INDEX: N 88 FSS PHONE tip: 203_s77-7359 89 TOLL FREE NR: 1-4340-242-2377 OPERATIONS FOR +2 MOS ENDING 2`NCVP' RUNWAY DATA >39 RUNWAY IDENT - - - 14/32 >31 LENGTH: ' >32 VIDTH: 3518 I>13 SURF TYPE-CONC 51 ASPM -G >34 SURF TREATMENT 15 GROSS VT: SV 9 136 (IN TMSDS) DW 37 AFR l 198 38 DDTW DTV -LIGHTING/APCH AIDS - I 14/32 1>48 EDGE INTENSITY i *LOU ELEMENT -1 41 NOW !>42 I RVY MARK TYDE- E -GOND BSC -G SC -G >43 VA'S I V41. /N 44 THR CROSSING MGT 43 45 VISUAL GLIDE ANGLE 3.61 >46 CNTRLN-TOZ I>47 RVR-RVV N -N /N -N >48 REIL N -N /N -N ;>49 APCH LIGHTS N /N - -OBSTRUCTION DATA j 59 FAR 77 CAiE6DRY 14/32 1>51 ACV) /A(Y) DISPLACED THR 351 f1>52 CTLG OBSTN TREES / >53 OBSTN MARKED/LGTD >54 MGT ABOVE RWY END 61 >55 DIST FROM RWY END1111 .>56 CNTRLN OFFSET SSR 57 OBSTN CLNC SLOPE . 13:1 /59:1 58 CLOSE -IN OBSTN .Y /y i 21:1 LANDING LEN6iH ! 69 LANDING RWY-LENGTH 14/32 61 CTLG OBSTACLE 62 MGT -ABOVE THR 63 DIST FROM THR 64 CNTRLN OFFSET :(>) ARPT MGR PLEASE ADVISE FSS IN ITEM 86 / 'A84B • WHEN CHANGES OCCUR TO ITEMS PRECEDEG iA157 'APSE �AP58 i A 681 'Alit -B1 fAlin -14 A111 -05 ,Ai1B -18 Alit -1P RWY 14 /32LSTO CTO •. BY > FROM RWY EDGENORTMRBUiLVARY3FRDM 3156. OF RWY 14/32 USABLE NIGHTS. LGTS ARE 2-9 RWY 14 APCH RATIO 22:1 FR M 11-4�• FOOM EDGE ON SOUTH END. RWY 14 15• ROAD IN 0 DSPLCD THR; TREES 1358. OUT. PRIMARY PRY 32 ROAD IN PRIMARY SURFACE F5IE• ACTIVATE VASI RVY 14 FROM THR, HANG GLIDER OPERATIONS ON SEAPLANC DPNS 2uNLGTD RIDGE 561• SF OF pyy BEING CONDUCTED ON RIVER PARALLEL -TMJ RWY 14/32 - GHTMTRA ULTRALIGHT TFC RIGHT HANG PAT/ALT 5R1• it/}2 FIGHT TRAFFIC. CTN: ULTRALIGHTS ON t INVOF IN PAT. F ARPT CLSC TO ALL ACFT AND MEL 7599 L75 1B LBS AND OVER. 111 INSPECTOR: (^.) SAA ipT S0741 r•er s........... .-� ^ 112 LAST INSP: 25NOV85 113 LAST INFO REG: UA DEPARTMENT OF PEDERAL AVIATION AIRPORT MASTER RECORD PRINT DATE 08/18/82 .ORM APPROV.O. OM. N., 04."0041 >116 REMARKS: 811 L ROBERT CROATTI. A957 RWY 14 APCH RATIO 28:1 BASED ON OSPLCO TMRI TREES 1355. OUT. AR58 RLY 14 ROAD IN PRIMARY SURFACE. A158 RWY 32 ROAD IN PRIMARY SURFACE. A/81 ACTVT MIRL 14/328 ROTS 8CN 122.7• A112-91 MANB GLIDER OPERATIONS ON RIDGE EAST OF ARPT. A112 -22 ARPT CLSO TO TURBO PROP OPNS EXCEPT WITH 24 MR PPR CALL 413-584-1862. -Pa >2 3 AOOUL LITT: NORTHAMPTON 4 STATE: MA FAA SITE NR: 19131.A AIRPORT NAME: LA FLEUR S COUNTY: HAMPSHIRE MA CBD TC AIRPORT(NM): 91 NE 6 REG/ADO: ANE/NONE 7'SECT AERO CHT: NEN YORK GEKERAL SERVICES BASED AIRCRAFT f' >31 LENGTH: 3588 12 OWNERSHIP: PRIVATE >71 FUEL: 1BELL 96 SINGLE ENG: 56 11 OWNER:.CHARLES KAL8FELO >71 AIRFRAME RPRS: MAJOR 91 MULTI ENG: S >33 :URF TYFE-CGNO >12 ADDRESS: BOX 221 OLD FERRY RD. >72 PWR PLANT RPRS: MAJOR 92 JET: NORTHAMPTON9 MA 11161 >73 BOTTLE OXYGEN: NONE TOTAL 61 >13 PHONE NR: >74 BULK OXYGEN: NONE 9 >14 MANAGER: DALE W. BRADFORD 75 TSNT STORAGE: TIE MGR 93 HELICOPTERS: 36 (IN THSOS) DV 15 ADDRESS: BOX 221 OLD FERRY RD. 76 OTHER SERVICES: CHTR 94 GLIDERS: NORTMAMPTON9 MA 11161 INSTR RNTL 95 MILITARY: >16 FMONE NR: 413-584-1861 38 DDTW >17 ATTEKDANCE SCHEDULE: LIGHTING/APCH AIDS MONTHS DAYS HOURS ( ALL ALL OALGT 14/32 FACILITIES OPERATIONS _� 18 AIRPORT USE: PUBLIC >82 >81 ARPT BCW: C6 118 APT LGT SKED:•RDD-CTL 181 ALR CARRIER: - COMMUTER: 19 ARPT LAT: 42-19-41N ESTIMATED >82 UNICOM: 122.7/8 122 AIR TAXI: 1188 41 NOW EL ERE4 T 81 28 ARPT LONG: 872-36-42N >83 WIND INDICATOR: YES 113 6 A LOCAL: 16588 21 ARPT-ELEV: 1123 SURVEYED 84 SEGMENTED CIRCLE: NONE 184 O A ITNRNT: 924/ 22 ACREAGE: SS 85 CONTROL TUR: NO 185 MILITARY: >23 RIGHT TRAFFIC: 86 FSS: WINDSOR LOCKS TOTAL: 26748 44 TNR CROSSING MGT >24 NON—COMM LANDING FEE: NO 87 FSS ON ARPT: NO 25 NASP/FEDERAL AGREEMENT: N BB FSS PHONE NRS 283-625-2416 OPERATIONS FOR 12 26 FAR 139 INDEX: N 89 TOLL FREE NR: 888-243-8318 MOS ENDING 21JUL82 c >116 REMARKS: 811 L ROBERT CROATTI. A957 RWY 14 APCH RATIO 28:1 BASED ON OSPLCO TMRI TREES 1355. OUT. AR58 RLY 14 ROAD IN PRIMARY SURFACE. A158 RWY 32 ROAD IN PRIMARY SURFACE. A/81 ACTVT MIRL 14/328 ROTS 8CN 122.7• A112-91 MANB GLIDER OPERATIONS ON RIDGE EAST OF ARPT. A112 -22 ARPT CLSO TO TURBO PROP OPNS EXCEPT WITH 24 MR PPR CALL 413-584-1862. RL'NVAY DATA 38 RUNWAY IDENT 14/32 >31 LENGTH: 3588 >32 WIDTH: 58 >33 :URF TYFE-CGNO ASPM >34 SURF TREATMENT 35 GROSS WT: SV 9 36 (IN THSOS) DV 37 OTW 38 DDTW LIGHTING/APCH AIDS ( — — - — — — - — — — 14/32 >49 C06E INTENSITY RED -- 41 NOW EL ERE4 T 81 C >42 RWY MARK TYPE-COND BSC -6 /BSC -6 >43 VASI 44 TNR CROSSING MGT 45 VISUAL GLIDE ANGLE >46 CNTRLN—TOZ N -N /N -N >47 AYR-RVV N -N /N -N C >48 REIL N /N >49 APCH LIGHTS OBSTRUCTION DATA — — — — — — - - - - — 14/32 SB FAR 77 CATEGORY A(V) /A(V) >51 DISPLACED THR 355 / >52 CTL6 OBSTN TREES /CLEAR >53 OBSTN MARKED/LGTO / >54 NGT ABOVE RVY END 68 / >55 LIST FRCM RVY END 1888 / >56 CNTRLN CFFSET BB / 57 OBSTN CLNC SLOPE •13:1 /28:1 58 CLOSE -IN 36STR •Y IT r 28:1 LANDING LENGTH —- - -— -- —-— 14/32 68 LANDING RVY—LENGTH / _ 61 CTL6 OBSTACLE / 62 MGT—ABOVE THR / 63 GIST FRCM THR / 64 CNTRLN OFFSET >116 REMARKS: 811 L ROBERT CROATTI. A957 RWY 14 APCH RATIO 28:1 BASED ON OSPLCO TMRI TREES 1355. OUT. AR58 RLY 14 ROAD IN PRIMARY SURFACE. A158 RWY 32 ROAD IN PRIMARY SURFACE. A/81 ACTVT MIRL 14/328 ROTS 8CN 122.7• A112-91 MANB GLIDER OPERATIONS ON RIDGE EAST OF ARPT. A112 -22 ARPT CLSO TO TURBO PROP OPNS EXCEPT WITH 24 MR PPR CALL 413-584-1862. | - : Ix ] ( | Lu 2% 2 4, 02 }U | IX n | , CL 2 2 k` z i�• ) v §r. . �{ ° C-4 k © t k�i� �r4l r4 ■ H x \ ■ B k � |r 2 � % v| < . B V k 6 .6 k o § 2 / / / / z • � q J I 2 § o Q & .qT � � § o k E m < 0 3! $ | ��� 0 � .14 !C,4 L B k�® z > < 6 ® C4 � 0 R10 o o |< 44� OD q r- V0 = o ,*0000IL zgn i L q ■w & § ° K I.-■ © ® - � o ° z » m : R §§ k z I° § A , L , L m I , 1--e « I.-® ; ° • - . • . E �� § L=� o wi o 2 ! o o 2 § . 0 u a ■ . . | . I.- � | - : | FEDERAL AVIATION AGENCY AIRPORT FACILITIES RECORD AIR►ORT NAM[ FORM AP►VD. BUDGET SUREAU N0. Y hi S MCI NEA -" V Vo Lad''leur Ai SITE No. SECTIONAL l l AIRPORT SERVICE TYPE - - CHART 04. CHART 40. NPN .1 EIEVAT201 (E) OR►SA478 NIL TEMPERATURE (MEAN VAX) COYYUN 2 US TYPE 1 M GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION 83.8 E TOTAL ACRE! )' ry 1. r1 LATITUDE 1�7-=2111 1 LOCATION �?/2O_ LOIISITUD( -j6 -51 NUMB R Y,Y�DESCRIPTIVE STATUTE MILES NE of Northamn futon AIRPORT ATTENDUCEl 111111 12 -ARP (E) MUMMER DIRECTION CITY OR TOWN STATUTE MIL(! S OF Hatfield PilIIri® -TION 7 DAYS ---T- Nona Ng! � PROPERTY OWNER Li1C �ub" T.R T/T_ � DIR T NEAREST AIRPORT MONTHS 12 ADDRESS Old Fe Road Nort�- ton Massachusetts OPERATOR City Aviation, Inc. ACONE!! Box 22,. NOrthamn ATT Mn a >^ SettR MANASER OR ATTENDANTL aurent E. LaFleur TELEPHONE No TITR+i , nf'1n ADDRESS S/ race Hill Avenue Florence Ma.ssachuS . TELEPHONE no. RUNWAY DIRECT to W s DESCRIPTION OF LANDING AREA PHYSICAL LEHI 1 -S - REMARKS %EFFECTIVE ORADIEMT CORRECTED 1 RnW 4- 2 ba i LENGTH 21 1 1 1 9 2 WIDTH 1 7 SURFACE TYPE 50 STRENGTH (ESWL) bituminou treate TYPE RUNWAY LIGHTS _ RUNWAY IDEMTIFICAT L. L - EXI/TINS SLIDE ANSLE CONTROLLIMS 14 O' 1 Rnw SOOT. C1E8 DIST FROM RWY- EMD 1 7 1 O^ 00 PRINCIPAL RUNWAY E -W %WIMO GOV[RAOE CLEAR ZONES ne ---- INSTRUMENT RUNWAY X WIND COVE RASE CLEARWAYS a STOPWAYS ---- BUILDINGS TERM, None AlR NAVIGATION AIDS El FLIGHT ACTIVITIES 1 1 ADMIN. TOWER FSS E3WEATHER ElUMICOM ® OF -I v li t MUMMER FIXED SAS[ OPERATORS l IL! ElHAMOERO�NO VOR ❑ RVR❑ OIADISCM.❑ CHARTER ® PATROL ❑ N0. OF CONVENTIONAL � RADAR C3 TYPE � INSTRUCTION AGRICULTURAL ❑ AOV[RTMINO ❑ DTHER: SURVEY ❑ FUEL OTN[RUPECIIY) $ale8 & ----=-tri n� R LIGHTS TYPE CAPACITY STORADE APPROACH YES Lj 40&&J RUNWAYI!) so TAXIWAY AIRCRAFT OPERAilON8 son? O�--u.-1t !In! ROTATING OR FLASHING B ACON ESTIMATED NUMBER 01 O GENERAL AVIATION, SIZE None ANNUAL LOCAL AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS Avail. KbNO COLOR - - DP(RATINS SCHEDULE ANNUAL ITINEMANT AIRCRAFT MERAT NINS KIND. -��� TRU[ LIONT CERT. VISE] mo[3 TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATIONS TOTAL J/A - ��_ OPERATINS SCHEDULE FOR RWY LISHTSPA-Caane OPERATIONS, PEAK MONTH rte' FIRE BI CRASH EQUIPMENT WIND BI TRAFFIC INDICATORS BASED AIRCRAFT Hand Exti nguishers TETRAHEDRON ❑ LIONTEO ❑ MUYOER OF LAVIATION CONTROLLED ❑ TEE ® SIngSENIE lIMOLE [MOON[ 0 LIONTED ❑ CONTROLLED ❑ 4- PLACE a more COM( 2 ® LISHTEO OESMEMTED CIRCLE YES ❑ No ® MULTI'-EMOIME 4 SNOW TMP[ 'ri� ARRESTING BARRIERS YES ❑ ® TOTAL NUYO(R BASED NEL100►TE RO EQUIPMENT [OUIENT � 7 Fltt[_ NO TYPE BLAST FENCES YES ❑ R PAIRS POWER PLANT MAJOR ® MINOR ❑ MOMS [3AIRFRAME NO ® AIR CAOPERATIONS MAO 011 ® MINORRRIER ❑ NOME [3 DATA MAY( OF AIRLIME(0) None OCHEDUL(0 INTRASTATE AIRLIMEI!) None N011'fCN[WL[0 AVERASE NUYSER OF DAILY SCHEDULEOIDEP)- - -- MAY[ OF AIRLIMEIO) �i �At�nn TTl TYPEIS) OF AIRCRAFT ---- TYPEI!) OF AIRCRAFT ---- TYPE OF SERVICE,—_ ---- Y[O NO IV ORGAN, AND UNIT �Tw_- TYP[O AND MUYOEII OF MILITARY AIRCRAFT None TOTAL ANNUAL MIL. OPERATION[ None FIELDANNUAL LOCAL -- CONDITIONS ANNUAL ITIN.��� Runway! GOI`][i 08STRUCTIONDATA TOO•MIO VIOLATION[ -.T& �'pOd I DaOTRYOTNMI PARKINS a CHITINS _ MISCELLANEDUS REMARKS OPEN TO THE SEMINAL PUSLIC YEO N AIRPORT PRIVATELY OWNED Y(! -- - -.a • TITLE, ' NO `ANDINS FE( YES MO ❑ TWO WAY A—.. __ J NO LTJ.., TYPE IRED YES ❑ MO 12 DATE OF INSPECTION 4-18-68 FORM FAA' 2SA(IWill k CITY of NORTHAMPTON OFFICE of PLANNING and DEVELOPMENT - MEMORANDUM TO: Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Lawrence B. Smith, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Airport Appeal DATE: February 19, 1988 FILE: As result of the testimony that was offered at the Public Hearing for the above referenced Appeal, I would like to offer the following: Building Inspector's Response to Zoning Complaint A careful reading of the Building Inspector's response to Emily Saur, dated December 9, 1987 (a copy of which is attached) shows that he responded simply by sending her a copy of the Legal Department's opinion. At no point does he specifically state that this is his opinion, or even that he concurs with it. An opinion by the City Solicitor, or by the Senior Planner for that matter, is not automatically a decision by the Building Inspector. The Building Inspector, Zoning Board of Appeals, Planning Board, etc., is not bound by an opinion of the City Solicitor, but may use this opinion in reaching their judgement. So there seems to be a legitimate question of not just that the Building Inspector rendered his decision late, but that he didn't render a decision with regards to certain aspects of the complaint at all. Data Base One of the main problems that arose at the Public Hearing, and a problem that I found when I was doing my opinion for the City Council last year, was the differing and conflicting figures, statements and data that was being offered by all parties. relative to the number of aircraft and the nature of the activities at the airport. In trying to resolve this I contacted the FAA and Mr. Graham at the Mass. Aeronautics Commission to see if there were any formal reports or studies of the airport that could shed some light on this. The FAA and Mass. Aeronautical Commission sent me copies of the official Airport Facilities Records from 1937-1987 for this airport (copies of which are January 1988 - Richard and change alter and extend two-family dwelling) at 30 units to the third flo unanimously because the ap the Public Hearing, the re that everyone agreed, inc Assistant City Solicitor, and was not permitted as wasn't increasing the numb Sabra Aquadro applied for a Finding to their pre-existing nonconforming use (a Forbes Avenue by extending one of the or. Thought the application failed plicants failed to show up on time for levant point (as with the Jeffway's) is luding the Building Inspector and the that the expansion required a Finding a matter of right, even thought it er of dwelling units. Now, it appears somewhat inconsistent to me that the city would require the above two pre-existing nonconforming uses to receive a Finding in order to expand their existing units into attic space, where neither the actual number of units nor the square footage of the floor area is being increased, yet the airport can expand as much as it wants as long as the expansion is somehow remotely related to some airport activity, which does not even have to be an activity that is essential to the normal operations of an airport. Increase in Operations (Take -Offs and Landings) One of the complaints in the Appeal concerns in increase in the number of airport operations (take -offs and landings) at the airport over the past few years. Both Kathleen Fallon and I agree that prior to 1978 the Northampton Zoning Ordinance essentially required no Findings for expansions of pre-existing nonconforming uses. However, according to the FAA and Mass. Aeronautical Commission's Airport Master Records, from 1978 to 1986 the number of aircraft based at the airport increased from 64 to 74 (a 15.6% increase) and the number of annual operations (take -offs and landings) increased from 26,740 to 32,400 (a 21.2% increase). In April of 1987 the ZBA rendered a decision on an Appeal filed by Edward Stryszko regarding the Building Inspector's Cease & Desist Order relative to a number of junk vehicles being stored on Mr. Stryszko's property. In its decision the ZBA determined that Mr. Stryszco's storage of junk vehicles on his property was a pre-existing nonconforming use, but that he was essentially "grandfathered" for 12 vehicles (the number that apparently existed at the time that he became a pre-existing nonconforming use in 1975) but that any increase in the number of vehicles over the permitted 12 would be a zoning violation. Thus the ZBA has determined that a pre-existing nonconforming use is "grandfathered to that degree and extent that existed at the time that it became pre-existing nonconforming, and that any change, alteration or extension beyond that point would be a zoning violation unless a Finding were received. In being consistent and applying this same standard to the �. airport complaint, it would appear that the airport is "grandfathered" to the degree and extent that it existed prior to 1978, and that any changes, alterations or extensions after that date should have required a ZBA Finding. I think that it would be difficult to apply a limiting figure as to the number of operations (take -offs and landings) occurring at the airport, as I feel that much of it is out of the control of the airport operators (can they reasonably prohibit someone from landing or taking -off just because they are the 26,741st operation of that year, and perhaps that flight didn't even originate from the airport). However, it does appear logical that, as the Zoning Board has restricted Mr. Stryszko to the number of junk automobiles that existing as of 1975 (the date that it became a pre-existing nonconforming use) unless a Finding is received, that the airport should also be required to receive a ZBA Finding for any increase in the number of Based Aircraft or expanded activities beyond that which existed as of 1978 (the date that it became a pre- existing nonconforming use which required a Finding). Other Complaints Appearing to be overlooked by the other matters is the complaint relative to the apparent illegal alteration made to the pre- existing nonconforming sign on the roof of one of the hangars at the airport. In conclusion I would like to point out.that in no way am I implying that any of the increases in activities at the airport are detrimental or bad, but simply that, according to the Northampton Zoning Ordinance, a Finding from the ZBA should have been obtained prior to their commencement. It is solely up to the ZBA to make the determination as to whether such changes, alterations and extensions of a pre-existing nonconforming use are substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood. CITY of NORTHAMPTON TO: Northampton City Council OFFICE of PLANNING and DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM FROM: Lawrence B. Smith, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Status of Northampton Airport Relative to Comnplaince With Zoning DATE: March 27, 1987 FILE: The Northampton Airport has been in existence= since the late 19201s, well prior to the initial adoption of Zoning in the City of Northampton. Since that time, the use of the airport has increased slowly but steadily over the years (see attached chart). Since the airport has been in existence, there have been essential- ly four periods of Zoning Revisions which pertain to it. Pre -Zoning According to the Airport's Facilities Records, filed with and obtained from the Massachusetts Aeronautics Commission and the Federal Aviation Administration, at the inception of Zoning in Northampton (1949) the airport consisted of: a 50' x 74' woodframe hangar; a 38' x 25' woodframe T -hangar; a 30' x 24 administration building and classroom; a house and garage; and had 10-14 based aircraft. The airport was used for recreational and passenger (charter) flights, instruction, sales and service. 1949-1975 Northampton's first Zoning Ordinance, adopted in 1949, included the airport in the Residence "A" District, which allowed aviation fields by Special Permit (issued by the Zoning Board of Appeals). Tjhough the airport did not have a Special Permit, because it was legally in existence prior to the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance re- quiring a Special Permit, it was "grandfathered" or. in Zoning terminology, was a "pre- existing nonconforming use". Regarding pre-existing noncoforming uses, the original Zoning Ordinance (Section 8. -Nonconforming Uses) allowed: "a) any building or part of a building or premises, which at the time of doption of this by-law is being put to a nonconforming use, may continue to be used for the same purpose. b) any business inoperation at the time of this Ordinane is passed may expand with the permission of the Building Inspector. c) any nonconforming use may be changed to another nonconforming use or any nonconforming building may be rebuilt or repaired on permit from the Board of Appeals, such new use or reconstructed building not to be substantially different in character or more detrimental or objec- tionable to the neighborhood." This Ordinance permitted the use of the property as an aviation field to expand, with only the permission of the Building Inspector. However, a permit from the Board of Appeals was required for any change in the use to another nonconforming use. This is essentially how the Ordinance remained until the comprehensive Zoning revisions of 1975. A 1958 copy of the Zoning Ordinance clarified the matter slightly with a re- vision that stated" "Any business in operation at the time of this Ordinance is passed may expand on the same lot with the permission of the Building Inspector." Between 1949 and 1975 the airport expanded to: 2 conventional hangars; T-type hangars for 26 planes; connected the old hanagar to the administration building and constructed a large service building. The airport was continued to be used for charters, instructional,sales and service. The number of based aircraft increased from 14 to 45 and the estimated general aviation operations (take-offs,landings, etc.) were: annual - 16,500; peak month -2150. 1975-1977 In 1975 the Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance underwent comprehensive revisions. The area in which the airport is located was rezoned to the Special conservancy District, in which an airport still required a Special permit issued by the Zoning Board of Appeals, thus the airport continued as a "pre-existing nonconforming use". The Section governing nonconforming uses, strucure and lots was amended, and the relavent portions read: "1. Any nonconforming use, except agricultural, horticultural, or flori- cultural, of any open space on alot outside a structure, or of a lot occupied by a structure, shall not be extended, except that a noncon- forming prinicpal or accessory use may be extended within the limits of the lot existing as of the date of adoption of this Ordinance and shall be in accordance with the dimensional and density regulations of Article VI. 2. Any conconforming principal use of a structure shall not be extended." Though somewhat confusing and contradictory, this Ordinance appears to say that: a) you cannot extend a principal nonconforming use within a structure, but b) you can extend a principal nonconforming use over the open area of the lot. Between 1975 and 1977 the airport expanded to: 3 conventional hangars; T-type hangars for 26 planes; and one administration building. The number of based aircraft \-I- _1_/ increased to 53, and the estimated general aviation operations were reported as: annual - 16,500; peak monthly -3,000. 2978—sent In 1978 that section of the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to pre-existing noncon- forming uses was again amended to read: Pre-existing nonconforming structures or uses may be extended or altered provided that no such extension or alteration shall be permitted unless there is a finding by the permit granting suthority or by the special permit granting authority that such change, extension or alteration shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood..." This appear to be pretty straight forward. Since 1978, in order for a nonconforming use to be changed, extended or altered, the Zoning board of Appeals must first issue a Special Permit Fining that the proposed use is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood. Since 1978 the airport remains with: 3 conventional hangars; T-type hangars for 20 planes; and one administration building. The number of based aircraft has increased to 74, and the estimated general aviation operations has increased to: annual -190,000; peak monthly -32,400. The use of the airport appears to have ben expanded from general aviation operations to include, aerial photography, parachute instruction and jumping, construction equipment auctions, and queries have been made regarding automobile storage. Conclusion The activities at the airport up until 1978 appear to be conformance with the pro- visions of the Zoning Ordinance, mainly because little was required to expand pre-exist- ing nonconforming usesf and the uses remained consistent. Those expanded activities beyond the pre-existing general aviation activities (recreation, charter, sales and service) since 1978 should have first received a Special Permit Finding from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The records of the Zoning Board of Appeals do not indicate that such findings were ever issued. Thus it appears that said expanded activities are not in compliance with the provisions of Zoning. 00+72£ OOT OOOZT 00£1 0006T 6 (Ea3Tfl-Z)59 +7L 0017Z£ OOT OOOZT 00£1 0006T 6 (Ea3Tfl-Z)59 +7L 9861 0 OLZ OOT 0+7Z6 00£1 0059T S (Ea3Tfl-Z)99 i9 S86i 0+7892 OOT 0+7Z6 00£1 0059T S 99 +7861 .C.z E tT t i9 £86T 0+7L9Z 017Z6 NOT 0059T S 99 T9 0+7L9Z 0+7Z6 NOT 0059T S Z86i 99 i9 i8/Zi iE:)oz 000£ 0+7Z6 NOT 00591 L LS +19 000£ O+IZ6 OOOi 00591 L T8/Z 000£ O+IZ6 OOOi 0099i L LS +79 6L6T LS +79 8L6T 000£ O�iZ6 NOT00591 0099T L 9+7 £S 000£ O+IZ6 NOT S (?TaH i) 9+7 ZS LL6T 09TZ 017Z6 0001 00591 S 9L/TT 09TZ O+IZ6 OOOi 00591 £ 9+7 iS 9L/Z 09TZ 0+7Z6 NOT 0059T £ Z+7 9+7 +7L/TT 09TZ 0+7Z6 T+7 +7+7 +IL/i NOT 0059T 17 9+7 6+7 £L6i 09TZ 0+7Z6 NOT 0059T +7 0+7 '717 OL/L - NOT fx-ppzt- 059Z +7 9£ p+7 OL/i tj�uoyl xsad TE301 3uszau?3I TEnuuV TEoo7 TEnuuy - 00£ - s8u?pus7 slg3uoyT •8ny +7 ££ L£ 69/8 +7 0£ +7£ 896T Z 0£ Z£ 996T Z 0£ Z£ 996T T 0£ T£ +796T +009 - „ „ „ Z -T S£ -SZ S£ -SZ SaA S ui•�sH £961 OOS - s$u?puE7 # •3sH 0 SZ -OZ SZ -OZ £96T - - SZ Z96T - - SZ T96T - SZ 096T - - 0Z 856T - - OZ £96T - - OT Z96i - OT 056T 17T L476T TnK uH aT uiS TE301 SuOIsV2IHd0 Z 4VEDIlIV QHSVq 30 IlHgl-MN alva DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS At a meeting held on April 30, 1987, the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton voted unanimously to grant lan Appeal from a Cease and Desist Order for alleged violation of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Northampton, Article V, Section 5.1 issued on January 15, 1987 for the purpose of storing unregistered automobiles as a source of spare parts at {property located at 133 Ventures Field Road, Northampton, MA (URA Zone). Present and voting were: Chairman Robert C, Buscher, Peter Laband and M. Sanford Weil, Jr. The Appeal was filed ;Edward Stryszko, 133 Ventures Field Road, Northampton, MA. The Findings were as follows: Referring to Section 9.2 of the Northampton Zoning ordinance, P. Laband found that the uncontested evidence `presented at the hearing regarding hvehic eszkoontheir uninterrupted custom of storing property for personal use which predates the Zoning Ordinance has remained unchanged with no substantial extension of the use. He therefore found that the applicant has the right to continue the use =otherviolations arenotbefore this f her cars rral use. eBoard. noted that any health R. Buscher agreed that all evidence presented has cbear !and incontrovertible that the Stryszko family icontinually storing junk vehicles since the inception of the property in the 1930's, although he questioned the allegation i.that all of the vehicles being stored are for personal use and :questioned ��what is ' considered reasonable under the " ,questioned clause, stressing that there is a point at which 1.'. pre-existing nonconforming use outgrows its nonconforming status. He stated that although it is uncertain how many vehicles were on the property in 1975, it is documented that X12 vehicles were present in 1979, which is the same number of cars that he counted during his site view. He stressed that i.i.f the number of vehicles increases in excess of the number ;that is now present, Mr. Stryszko will;be in violation of the jzonina ordinance. Finding that this pre-existing use has been !uninterrupted and substantially unchanged, Mr. Buscher voted alto grant the Appeal from the Cease & Desist Order. S. Weil stated that after review of the Show -Cause HPar1nQ and review of the limitations regarding the "grandfather" clause, he found that the Building Inspector's Cease & Desist Order was improper and voted in favor of Mr. Strvszko's appeal. It was noted that on this date 12 vehicles were observed on the property. Peter Laband Robert C. Buscher, Chairman M. Sanford eil, Jr. • CHAIRMAN AAkm, ♦ii♦ i'/i C?/16'-996'6' �� • I i i COMMISSIONERS -- X","7 l/CX/ll2 ✓UG. aa&l. ./ A x��_I.Ae✓� April 2, 1986 Mr. Lawrence Smith Senior Planner City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Larry: DIRECTOR OF AERONAUTICS a4xo`d R. _/O As promised, I am enclosing for your records copies of the 1981, 1984 and 1985 FAA airport master records. I've highlighted, for your convenience, the number of annual flight operations and the number of based aircraft on each report. Again, from the annual operations figures, it is easy to determine that the daily figures break down to 74, 75 and 88, respectively and do not begin to approach the 15 to 150 figures that were erroneously used by someone to describe an increase of 1984 to 1985 traffic at the airport. Both Jerry Russo and I were pleased at being able to attend your well-run meeting last evening. If there are any further questions we can answer, please do not hesitate to contact us at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, David W Graham Chief Aeronautical Inspector DWG:ek Enc: PRINT DATE 12/21/81 U.S. DEtARTMENT OF TpANS►OpTATION AIRPORT MASTER RECORD FORM AFFROVED OMS N. 04 MOOS' FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 4 STATE. MA FAA SITE NR 89131 A >>l ASSOC CITY: NORTHAMPTON 5 COUNTY' HAMPSHIRE MA >2 AIRPQRT YA14E: LA FLEUR 3 CBD TO AIRPOP.T(NM): E1 NE 6 REG/ADO: ANE/NONE 7 SECT AERO CHT: NEW YORK GENERAL SERVICES BASED AIRCRAFT 19 OWNERSHIP: PRIVATE >71 FUEL: 89 199LL 99 SINGLE ENG: 56 >11 0►NER:*CHARLES KAL2FELD >71 AIRFRAME RPRS: MAJOR 91 MULTI ENG: 5 >12 ADDRESS: BOX 221 OLD FERRY R0. >72 PYR PLANT RPRS: MAJOR 92 JET: NORTHAMPTON• MA. 01969 >73 BOTTLE OXYGEN: NONE TOTAL 61 >13 PHONE NR: >74 BULK OXYGEN: NONE >14 MANAGER: DALE Y BRADFORD 75 TSNT STORAGE: HGR 93 HELICOPTERS: >15 ADDPESS: BOX 221 OLD FERRY RD. 76 OTHER SERVICES: 94 GLIDERS: NORTHAMPTON, MA. 91961 95 MILITARY: >16 PHONE NR: 413-584-186/ >17 ATTENDANCE SCHEDLLE: MONTHS DAYS HOURS ALL ALL DALGT _ —FACILITIES — - —OPERATIONS — — — - — >89 ARPT RCN: CG ILII AIR. CARRIER: 18 AIRPORT USE: PUBLIC >81 APT LGT SKED:• 101 COMMUTER: 19 ARPT LAT: 42-19-45K ESTIKATED >82 UNICOM: 122.70E 112 AIR TAXI: loop 2P ARPT LONG: 072-37-99Y >83 WIND INDICATOR: YES 113 G A LOCAL: 165EF 21 ARPT-°LEY: •90129 ESTIMATED 84 SEGMENTED CIRCLE: NONE 104 G A ITNRNT: 924E 22 ACREAGE: 55 ESTIMATED 85 CONTROL TUR: NO 195 MILITARY: 26 ?49 >23 RIGHT TRAFFIC: 86 FSS: WINDSOR LOCKS >24 NON -COMM LANDING FEE: NO 87 FSS ON ARFT: NO 25 NASP/FEDERAL AGREEMENT: IN 88 FSS PHONE NR: 293-623-2416 OPERATIONS FOR 12 26 FAR 139 INDEX: N 89 TOLL FREE NR: 819-243-1319 MOS ENDING 270CT81 RUNWAY DATA F >39 RUNWAY IDENT 14/32 >31 LENGT*+: 3591 >32 WIDTH: 59 >33 SURF TYPE—COND ASPH >34 SURF TREATMENT 35 GROSS WT: SW 9 36 (IN THS)S) DY 37 DTW 38 DDTW LIGHTING/APCH AILS 14132 >49 EDGE INTENSITY LOW ---- 41 NOW ELEMENT 81 >42 R6Y MARK TYPE—GOND BSC—G /BSC—G >4? NASI VAS /t, / 44 THR CROSSING HGT 45 VISUAL GLIDE ANGLE >46 CNTRLN—TDZ N—N /N -N >47 RVR—RVV N—k /N—N >46 REIL N /N r >49 APCH LIGHTS OBSTRUCTION DATA ( — — — — — — _ 14/32 50 FAR 77 CATEGDRY >51 DISPLACED THR 355 / I >52 CTLG OBSTN TREES /CLEAR >53 DBSTN MARKED/LGTD >54 MGT ABOVE RYY END >55 DIST FROM RYYEND loop >56 CNTRLN OFFSET 57 OBSTY CLNC SLOPE 18:1 /29:1 58 CLOSE—IN OBSTN •Y /Y 20:1 LANr,)INF- LENGTH 14/32 60 LANDING RYY—LFNGT 61 CTLG ?BSTACLE -- E2 HGT—ABOVE THR 63 DIST F ROM THR 64 CNTRLN OFFSET (>) ARPT MGR PLEASE ADVISE FSS IN ITEM 86 WHEN CHANGES OCCUR TO ITEMS PRECEDED BY > 1>110 REMARKS: AR11 & ROBERT CROATTI. AE58 R.Y 14 ROAD IN PRIMARY SURFACE. A058 RWY 32 ROAD IN PRIMARY SURFACE. AE81 <FCR RYY LETS & ROTG BCN DUSK—DAWN KEY 122.7 — LGTS OFF IN 7 MINUTES. A130 —91 HANG GLIDER OPERATIOkS ON RIDGE EAST OF ARPT. I illi IhSPErTtR: (S) 112 L: ST INSP: 27OCT81 113 LIST IF FC FEC: M Patrick T. Gleason, Esq. City Soiicitor Kathleen G. Fallon, Esq. Assistant City Solicitor William A. Nimohay, Municipal Building Northampton, MA. CITY OF NORTHAMPTON i MASSACHUSETTS CITY HALL 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060,` ; LEGAL DEPARTMENT 2 -1987 586.6950 GrFICE 0F'P;;4NNjrpG AND DEVELOPMENT, Building Inspector 01060 December 1, 1987 Re: Zoning Complaint --Northampton Airport Dear Mr. Nimohay: You have referred the complaint filed with you against the Northampton Airport to me for an opinion as to its merits. In response, may I submit the following. The Northampton Airport is presently a pre-existing, non- conforming use. The airport was established prior to the 1949 enactment of the first comprehensive zoning ordinance. From 1949 to 1978, the type of buildings on the site has changed and their number increased. The zoning ordinances during that period were quite liberal as to the expansion of a non -conforming use on its existing site. Therefore, the site alterations appear to have been proper since they were done in connection with the pre- existing, non -conforming use, i.e., the operation of an airport. However, a chane in a non -conforming use has, since 1949, required action by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Since 1978, the zoning ordinance has required a finding by the Zoning Board of Appeals for any change, alteration, or expansion of a non -conforming use. The question is,. then, whether the activities which are the subject of the complaint constitute a change, alteration, or expansion of the non -conforming use. •-,..-,�.-. -�..:._..�.......-,-.�,�..r,•.,.,�c..3.airs-�a.««V�-!:s...�e.•s,^-r�ac�;-Pu!;±��.Js�!a:��°crr" .- _ .. ..�„ - 1✓ � The complaint cites the following activities as alleged expansions of the non -conforming use: 1) general aviation operations 2) aerial photography 3) parachute instruction and jumping 4) construction equipment auctions 5) automobile storage The complaint also lists "noise" and "offehy" as subjectsviation of the complaint. I do not think the safety ion of the airport is a matter over which the Building Inspector has any control. Nor would noise from the airport be under his jurisdiction unless it were related to a zoning violation. As to the other five activities, it is my opinion that he equipment auctions and automobile storage are clearly not permitted without action by the Zoning Board of Appeals. From 1949 to 1957, the zoning ordinance provided that "any business in operation at the time this Ordinance is passed may expand with the permission of the Building Inspector" (C. 44, s. 8). From 1958 to 1975, the qualification that the expansion must be on the same lot was included as part of that ordinance. In 1975, the ordinance was revised to read as follows: ++1, Any nonconforming use, except agricultural, horticultural, or floricultural, or any open space on a lot outside a structure, or of a lot occupied by a structure, shall not be extended, exce use maypt be nonconforming principal or accessory as of extended within the limits of the lot existing the date of adoption of this Ordinance and shall be in accordance with the dimensional and density regulations of Article VI. 2. Any nonconforming principal use of a structure shall not be extended." Finally in 1978 the ordinance was amended to read as follows: "Pre-existing nonconforming structures or uses may be extended or altered provided that no such extension or alteration shall be permitted unless there byis a special or by the permit granting authority permit granting authority that such change, extension or alteration shall not be substantially mOuse re dettoenthe than the existing nonconforming neighborhood..." appear hat from Reading these ordinnces nformitogether, t would I businesscouldexpand onto its 1949 to 1957, a non-colafter acquired property with the permission original lot or any 2 Airport .is 4 of the Building Inspector. From 1958 to 1975, such ess wasnlexpansion was confined to the property ppr ichval of the Building Inspector. 1958, still subject to the approval pears anon -conforming principal or Between 1975 and 1977 it by right on the property on which it accessory use could expand by In 1978 suauthoritylon was made subject to was located in 1975. a finding by the permit granting 'n these or to the equipment auctiofswconfires the ta. e Applyl g The f irst auction motor notice occurred in 1975. illegality of that useUnder the then -current zoning, vehicle sales were not allowed ieastaasZofargback trast1959)•facAt such sales were not allowed at 1 use or a use accessory that time a principal non -conforming thereto were permitted to expand on erationeofoan airport rfor lthe use on the subject lot was the op use of small private aircraft. I cannot see that a construction auction is, equipment in any way, an accessory use to that auctons could not held byprincipal use. Therefore, theheldheld prior toe 1975, the right. Even if the first a applicable ordinances back permission of1949 lthe eBuilding Inspector• "business" to expand with P thereto The "business" on the subjectesit fromons and4usesraccessory was an airport. Only airport oP the ordinances in effect in these could have expanded under years. A similar line of reasoning can be applied to the automobito le storage use. However, the first occurrenceMif Guhis istoS be very receneseems oneofthe t. Within the past year, the airport, asked if he could store automobiles on owners of the at a finding by the Zoning Board of Appeals site. He was told th uldd has would be required before he cols�learly Nin violationlof the ever been requested. This use Zoning Ordinance. or general In addition, Massachusetts case law has whetherla nonshed - conforming use a three part test for determin g or extended. As set use has been improperly changed, altered, that test and forth in Brid ewater V. erhutheanuse51Mass 20reflects (they)"naturetook is as follows: (1) we p purpose" of the use prevailing when the zoning by-law or effect; (2) whether there is a difference of (3) wthe hether the character, as well as the degree, current use is "different in kind in its effect on the neighborhood". this test to the construction equipment auctions and the Applying improper. They do automobile storage, both uses are obviously not reflect the "nature and purpose" of the non -conforming use certainly a difference (the operation of an airport). There is not just in the degree of the in the character of the use, 3 -. - - Airport M non -conforming use. And, finally, the uses are existing it •n their effect on the neighborhood. "different in kind i subject of the status of the other activities whichanrairpore the has been an on The s Clearly enation complaint is more complicateae is no doubt that op that site since 1949• andac a valid pre-existing for the use of small aircrafand activities which are an e airport enation constitute intrinsic part of that op use. The issue is whtheeincreasenon-conforming numberuof non -conforming extended by (1) ort, and (2) has been illegally based at the airport, flights and the number of airplanes of the airport facilities for aerial photography an the use umping. parachute instruction/j flights or of planes based three part test set forth in the Bridgewater case cite Under the the number of f g expansion of the above, the increase inlegal at the airport does not current use doeslreflecthe atnonurofaan non -conforming use. The use, i.e• the opera of small private aircraft. The first purpose" of the non -conforming airport for the use criterion of the test is met. it non -conforming use is different in ly d fferent in Although the it is not significantly regularly was in 1949 or even in if75the airport had become a reg now quality or character. a commercial airline or scheduled destination for ro eller-driven airplanes et airplanes or large propeller -driven a change in the quality accommodated 7 rivate planes, clearly rather than small P use would have occurred- rather ermissible expansion of the use also woitdisamy ve and/or charanter of the non -conforming However, Therefore, the number of flights of small occurred under the Bridgewater test criteria' the number of small opinion that an aincrease rom theairportor in ansion of private planes airport does not constitute an exp planes based at the established that an the use. Massachusetts case law has clearly that use. (See he de nee of a use is not thensignificant factor in increase in t expanse determining if there has been an nand Powers v. Buildin Ins ector Brid ewater v. Chuckran, supra, of Barnstable 353 Mass 548 (1973))• whether the use 'n its effect on the neighborhood." This The third part of the Bridgewater test examines n are the other is "different in kind 1 seffe standard tha is obviously a far more subjective it should not be confused with haVeeffect neighborhood increase The two.in the degree of a use will naturally involve an increase in Of flights will obviously no evidence greater number ort. However, noise in the area adjacent to the airport - and can be traced resented that demonstrates a disc effect on the has been P — neighborhood which is different operations. directly to increased airport oP Airport 4 `� Finally, it is my opinion that the aerial photography and parachute instruction/jumping are activities which are intrinsically part of the operation of an airport and do not constitute an expansion of the non -conforming use. In summary, it is my opinion that the first three activities mentioned in the complaint do not violate the zoning ordinance at this time. (Please bear in mind, however, that changes in the aviation activities at the airport, depending on the nature of those particular activities, could constitute a violation in the future.) The fourth and fifth activities are in violation of the ordinance. And, while the increase in the number of flights or of aircraft based at,.' the airport is not an impermissible expansion of the non -conforming use, any major physical alterations to the site will be such an expansion. This would include the lengthening or widening of the runway, the construction of additional runways, or the erection of new buildings. Any of these activities would require a finding by the Zoning Board of Appeals. very ruly yours, � � l Kath een G. allon cc: Mayor David Musante councilor Leonard }3udgar Lawrence B. Smit Airport 5 z#�r of 'Wart4ampton �ssssc�nsetts Office of tlfe Inz:ptrtvr of Thilbings 212 Main Street • Municipal Building Northampton, Mass. 01060 COMPLAINT SHEET How received: Telephone ( ) ��._ ``rr Complaint No. 3? Personal(0 ` Date: / Letter ( ) NOV '3 1�7 / Time: A.M. P.M. DEr, r, H ^ • Telephone No. IOAs Complainant's Name: Complainant's Address: Complaint received by: DEPT; OF SUfLDtNG 1Nspp%^t t%Lj.% jtP� VIOLATIONS OF: Northampton, Mass, 01080 )(Chapter 44 Zoning Ordinances, City of Northampton O Chapter 802 As Ammended Mass. State Building Code O Sanitary Code, Art.2 Complaint reported against: Name: « r- 1 �� 1'� -� •fes, 1 l� . I� u i Tel..°'S� Address: c� Location of complaint: PLIg Map # Lot # ILS - Signature of Compianants: gP& Riiv� +-Vbyl Nature pf complaint: —C� �`'` rY� t i t r i ti r t) I r ry ►'�'1 j 1 ��- 6 C . �Sic`)ti-� o ktit' cz�t(LL ;, Ly se r c�-t1�.i nC ��0) 1 �t1SCOP 1. �� f h1L�(�cTCtil>�-ko 1 7 w_a� J 7AAE= —T— Investigation: Yes ( ) No ( ) Investigated by: 26 October 196 Dear Sir or Madam, Enclosed is a petition from the residents of Northampton. We are very distraught over the growing air traffic at the Northampton Airport, and as the letter attests, our past actions and complaints appear to have fallen on deaf ears. We are determined now to remedy this situation by whatever legal means necessary, and we need your help. Well over 100 signatures were collected in just a day or two this past weekend, which illustrates the scope of the problem, and the numbers of people affected. We, undersigned residents and taxpayers, urge you to agknowledge our concern and act accordingly. We know that you will and Thank you, indeed. Copies to: Michael Ahearn, Jr. Paul Bixby Lynne Bertrand Robert Buscher Daily Hampshire Gazette, Ed. Michael Detmold Mary Ford Edward Keefe Stephanie Kraft Atty. Thomas Lesser Mayor David Musante Gerald Nash, FAA Jonathan Roche Bruce Sylvia William Ames James Brooks Leonard Budgar Rep. Silvio Conte John Fitzgerald, Jr. Shel Horowitz Joan Kochin Raymond LaBarge John Morrison Bill Nagle, Jr. Kevin Nolan M October 1987 TO: James Brooks Len Budgar Rep. Silvio Conte David Detmold Shel Horowitz Stephanie Kraft Mayor David Musante Gerald Nash, FAA Dear Sir or Madam: Lynne Bertrand ` Robert Buscher Daily Hampshire Gazette, Ed. FSDO, Hanscom Field Joan Kochin Atty. Thomas Lesser• Bill Nagle, Jr. e We, residents of Northampton, urgently bring to your attention a serious and potentially dangerous situation regarding air traffic over residential neighborhoods of Northampton. We have in recent months been the victims of an substantial increase in aviation traffic over our community. We are subjected to the constant, permeating whine of planes inside and outside of our homes. More dangerously, we must bear the ever-increasing circling of low-flying aircraft. It was never our choice to live next to such an airport, yet the aggressive business conducted by Mr. Giusto, the owner, is affecting all residents throughout the city. So far, our courteous complaints have been met with contempt, insults, and even intimidation. We recognize that the airport has a right to exist, but we taxpayers also have a right to live in some kind of peace, as when we elected residence here. Therefore, we are calling on you to act immediately by calling in new regulations which will help us save Northampton's quality of life. We are yours, determinedly, C? &V C& erns g. �►�,� fv�yr�- V'01 Zn p tle_� f _ n7 ua—cam 5, /,/ ellq-t�-w A, �� C9 Q4,, , y 401idb L C) C, 0� 77 �- AA - 14 ' C�— --g- sw Ndeon,M,g01060 2 c he ray 3 tL,u j October 1987 Dear Sir or Madam: We, residents of Northampton, urgently bring to your attention a serious and potentially dangerous situation regarding air traffic over residential neighborhoods of Northampton. We have in recent months been the victims of an substantial increase in aviation traffic over our community. We are subjected to the constant, permeating whine of planes inside and outside of our homes. More dangerously, we must bear the ever-increasing circling of low-flying aircraft. It was never our choice to live next to such an airport, yet the aggressive business conducted by Mr. Giusto, the owner, is affecting all residents throughout the city. So far, our courteous complaints have been met with contempt, insults, and even intimidation. We recognize that the airport has a right to exist, but we taxpayers also have a right to live in some kind of peace, as when we elected residence here. Therefore, we are calling on you to act immediately by calling in new regulations which will help us save Northampton's quality of life. We are yours, determinedly, CC�CG�� ('1s�11 'A y J�.z..« 5s 'rss N V{rV,PV I �Iiv tl Z� bCY 620 a ryu,Ifu?lary 6-e u (�57 J '�� se I'llW-IA C4 W L!. q q •p O a� Co q -r p 1 ar 0 '� s r ce ... •� q 4d 04O C "'t' •p'� off i �Au.� W•G C c•a. 0y_Cpt+ _toy-000.__:.4Cdo� O wa`"i �+�w.>, F Q>, 3 2 —0 co C ao '=`ani :aa�ar 4)IS O 41 •^• O „_; .a p 3 do . W > •� ed W .>>, 0 u'Co.— > p .+ y O .� '� ,,,,, > tf > be bo .0 �..�:'�qAw....'".0 a% tt . to >� q W vttpyo Z.. Coa AG0 0 a W a IA W �N O 3.�+� y u q Oto G ty N rOj •� rn NM .-1�a Z CaO. co N p p 4 Z> Q „y = V4. u y _ a.. y� 07. t, H y O M w� bow do 4 C W ... > a$,r'�Q 41 0 • W•O 3 a ~toil N 0y ...•�., 00 N uC.j q.�V►q Ny N O w $ a o w �' gi y bo.— o 4) •v .� o c o. a,-� o y y a� y ci o e tv �... r .+ ,S •� C .u.. N is N 3 a~.. .A...•N A -C O. •�V doh 41 W 4! 4l • �1 C 'CI O ' W c, ,, Gj 0 •'" q +q O C N 4 O w ++ N Oar .'[.+ 41 .d N C �j C ;,y� q 'CI c: � A 2 W 0 W R -0 a O tv � •in � .." •Cf 0 fJ •~ ~ 4n0 y ..., A S E �- fr. IV o � � o tv .fes q a, a � a� � a^" m =.4 u' a �-' >. a dCS �.� C y a:i yt « V .w '� N tv y O y.a v� >> y �+q N OZ==.O 0 q•�r' f`3� 0 < oZa�a R o a°1o= 0 �,gq' `3 g n &. 4),S: O-b y c, °« � '• o cu, x y��c ev a`v4 0�'�i bo a�u r3•:. ��i .0 7 u 4. ,O ... F a u rn y C 7'47 �0y G..r+ .� � i.;� W ''' vl ri aye�yvo`a'$xq;�a��►7�•vNNN'-',pa��i»;nc a 8W, V cg �' ev 0 3 3 � .� :Y a� Z-) $ W .0 • � y � c� 5 a`i Z,ww .8 w ce Dim 0 cc CIO BOO w' vt S a 0 -1�.� ��A � = � 2 --1 3 aao «oav,*wq•o.�=0uj 3q O� MrA •once �a.�' wr1:4S• '� � : t�. o x •o p.� rA a � .46 N N �t`� cc pp ON iwQ•a.�•V O/ Nouguu00w 94 Va « v� _ _« .ori 3uo:w-r-7-6sl goo* 80••:p2 N•� .s Oy va+w VNO w •N V.0 a i ME! 7 3► �Aw�„ �.y w�r b iG�J�'•^ .L' N pp >. ase 'ttppi 70CA > •+A~ So ve�o� o O r V p$ E Q �.or� �Z It. y 9 2 be._ f•+ N .a .� .0 . W _ 0yra W �jU c>e o a� o`°u`° ccm o g'''am;15ZA ~ w 0 0 3 Zoo 'co o. �va IL ani . W CITY of NORTHAMPTON TO: Bob, Peter, Sandy FROM: Bob Pascucci ..J OFFICE of PLANNING and DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Northampton Airport Equipment Auctions DATE: April 10, 1989 FILE: Attached are the minutes of the April 5th Public Hearing for your review. During that Hearing, Atty. Seewald made the point that he didn't really need a finding because the equipment auctions were grandfathered, and later stated, "I have not conceded the auctions are illegal." Also attached is some selected material from the Emily Saur file. The Decision in that case reads in part, "All parties agreed that Equipment Auctions and Automobile Storage are disallowed extensions of use, and a Cease and Desist Order has been issued." The minutes of the Decision meeting are also enclosed, as is a letter from Kathleen Fallon to William Nimohay, dated Dec. 1, 1987 --see especially pages two and three relative to equipment auctions. Also enclosed is a letter from Mr. Tewhill to Emily Saur, and a copy of the Cease and Desist Order relative to heavy equipment auctions. City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586.6950 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation • Historic Preservation • Planning Board* Zoning Board of Appeals March 31, 1989 Robert Buscher Chairperson Zoning Board of Appeals City Hall, 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. Buscher: The Northampton Conservation Commission voted unanimously at their last meeting to express their concerns about the Northampton Airport's request for a Finding to allow occasional auctions of equipment. As you know, the airport is located in the floodplain of the Connecticut River, which is a sensitive area. Large amounts of equipment stored, even temporarily, in the floodplain has the potential to create water quality and flood storage problems. The Conservation Commission can not fully evaluate potential environmental problems because of a lack of information on the timing of the proposed equipment sales and on the duration and nature of equipment storage. Thank you for your consideration of our concerns. Sincere jy —David engl r, Chair ConservatWn Commission air. tem City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586.6950 • Community end Economic Development • Conservation* Historic Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals NORTHAMPTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes: March 27, 1989 The Northampton Conservation Commission met on Monday, March 27, 1989 at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton. Members present were Chairperson David Gengler, Richard Carnes, Ralph Emrick"YraRk 44 Peters, Mason Maronn, and Susan Roy. Planning staff Wayne Feiden and Larry Smith and associate members Robert Dostal and Mark NeJame were also present. Executive Session: At 7:00 PM Gengler requested that the Conservation Commission go into executive session to discuss negotiations for,,i quiring property. On a roll call vote Gengler, Carnes, Emrick,,,Peters, and Maronn agreed to go into an executive session (Roy came in at 7:05, after the roll call vote). The executive session ended at 7:15 PM. Minutes: Upon motion by Maronn and second by Peters the minutes of March 13, 1989 were unanimously approved as submitted. Correspondence: Site visits for March 30 were set for Malinoski at 3:30 and Fitzgerald Lake and Burke Conservation Areas at 4:00. Dates and times for photo for identification cards for Commission members were also arranged. Feiden presented plans to apply for a grant from the Wharton Trust for seed money to establish a revolving loan fund for protecting open space in Northampton as part of the•Conservation Commission's Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Valley Land Fund. Upon motion by Peters and second by Emrick the Commission voted unanimously to authorize the grant application and to accept the grant if it is awarded. In reference to the Northampton Airport's request for a finding to allow equipment sales, the Commission voiced concerns about the requested activity in the floodplain. Upon motion by Roy and second by Carnes, the Commission voted unanimously to write the Zoning Board of Appeals indicating that the request could not be adequately evaluated by the Commission because of a lack of information on the duration and timing of the proposed equipment sales and on water quality concerns relating to how the equipment is stored. 1 DECISION OF NORTHAMPTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS At a meeting held on November 16, 1988, the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton voted unanimously to DENY the request of Northampton Airport, Inc., Old Ferry Road, Northampton, for a Finding under the Provisions of Section 9.3(a) and/or (b) that allowing occasional auctions of equipment on the property of Northampton Airport, a pre- existing, nonconforming use, would not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing use. Present and voting were Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Dr. Peter Laband, and M. Sanford Weil, Jr. The Findings were as follows: The published Legal Notice called for a Public Hearing at 7:00 p. m. on November 16, 1988 in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building. At 8:40 p. m. when the Public Hearing was opened, several inquiries were made asking if anyone was present to represent the Airport. No one responded. The Board assumed, as it always does under these circumstances, that the Applicant had lost interest in pursuing the Application; the Board voted unanimously to deny the request for a finding. Robert C. Buscher, Chairman Dr. Peter Laband ,0 [J M. Sanford Weil, Jr. 3 Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals November 16, 1988 Meeting The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals met at 8:40 p. m. on Wednesday, November 16, 1988 in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, to conduct a Public Hearing on the Application of Northampton Airport, Inc. for a Finding under the Provisions of Section 9.3(a) and/or (b) that the conduct of occasional auctions of equipment on the Airport's property will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing Airport uses. Present and voting were Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Dr. Peter Laband, and M. Sanford Weil, Jr. Ch. Buscher opened the Public Hearing by reading the Application. Dr. Laband asked, "Who is representing the Airport? Is anyone here?" There was no response. He asked again, and again got no response, and moved that the Public Hearing be closed. Mr. Weil seconded and the motion passed unanimously. Dr. Laband then moved that the Application be denied, citing that as standard procedure, when an Applicant fails to attend his scheduled Hearing, the assumption is that he has lost interest in pursuing the matter. Mr. Weil seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Also present, in addition to those mentioned, was R. J. Pascucci, Board Secretary. 001 Robert C. Buscher, Chairman COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS TRIAL COURT HAMPSHIRE, as. NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC., > Plaintiff > V. > ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE > CITY OF NORTHAMPTON, Defendants > ----------------------- > TO: Zoning Board of A---------> City of Northampton eals City Hall Northampton, MA SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT CIVIL ACTION No. NOTICE OF APPEAL Notice is hereby given that the above-named Northampton Airport, Inc., has filed an appeal in the Superior Court Department of the Trial Court, Hampshire County, from the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals denying the request of Northampton Airport, Inc., for a finding under the zoning ordinance. Attached hereto is a copy of the Complaint filed with the Superior Court. Dated: December 14, 1988 AND ©�1E�OPMPPVW Plaintiff, Northampton, Airport, Inc., by its Attorneys, RITCHIE, ENNIS & SEEWALD, P.C. S East Pleasant Street Amherst, Massachusetts 01002 (413) 549-0041 By - Alan Seewald COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS TRIAL COURT HAMPSHIRE, as. -------------------------------- > NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC., > Plaintiff > V. > ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE > CITY OF NORTHAMPTON, > Defendants > --------------------------------> INTRODUCTION SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT CIVIL ACTION No. COMPLAINT UNDER M.G.L. C. 40A, § 17 1. This is an appeal, pursuant to M.G.L. c. 40A, § 17, from the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton denying the Plaintiff's request for a finding under the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Northampton to permit the Plaintiff to hold occasional auctions on the Plaintiff's property located on Cross Path Road, Northampton, Massachusetts. A copy of the decision appealed from is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A. PARTIES 2. The Plaintiff, Northampton Airport, Inc., of Old Ferry Road, Northampton, Massachusetts, is a Massachusetts corporation duly existing under the laws of the Commonwealth, and the record owner of a certain parcel of land on Old Ferry Road and Cross Path Road, Northampton, Massachusetts (hereinafter referred to as the property). 3. The Defendant, Zoning Board of Appeals, (hereinafter referred to as "the Board") is a duly constituted agency of the -2 - City of Northampton and is responsible, inter alis, for hearing and deciding requests for findings under the zoning ordinance. 4. On or about September 29, 1988, the Plaintiff, through its attorney, filed an application for a finding under the Northampton zoning ordinance to allow occasional auctions of equipment to take place on the property. 5. By law, the Board is required to hold a public hearing before deciding the whether the finding should be granted for the Plaintiff. 6. Pursuant to M.G.L. c. 40A, 9 15, the Board must send notice of the public hearings to all parties in interest, which, pursuant to M.G.L. c. 40A, 9 11, includes the petitioner (the Plaintiff herein). 7. No notice of public hearing was received by the petitioner or by the undersigned counsel for the Plaintiff. 8. On November 16, 1988, the Board purported to hold a Public hearing and, based upon the fact that no representative for the Plaintiff was present, voted to deny the requested finding. 9. The Plaintiff failed to appear at the hearing due to the lack of notice as required by statute. 10. The Board's decision, rendered upon defective notice, exceeds the authority of the Board. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff requests that the decision of the Board be annulled and the Board be ordered to hold a public hearing on the Plaintiff's petition after proper notice is given. -3 - Dated: December 14, 1988 Plaintiff, Northampton Airport, Inc., by its Attorneys, RITCHIE, ENNIS & SEEWALD, P.C. 5 East Pleasant Street Amherst, Massachusetts 01002 (413) 549-0041 By A an Seewald DATE:, _j\1 l 3 0 JMQ 000 CITY OF NORTHAMPTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NORTHAMPTON. MASSACHUSETTS 01060 01 RE: THE APPLICATION OF NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC. FOR A FINDING THAT ALLOWING OCCASIONAL AUCTIONS OF EQUIPMENT ON THE PROPERTY OF NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY MORE DETRIMENTAL THAN THE EXISTING FACILITY, ALL AT PROPERTY ON OLD FERRY ROAD, NORTHAMPTON. Pursuant to the Provisions of the General Laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Chapter 40A, Section 15, notice is hereby given that a decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton was filed in the Office of the City Clerk On: NOV 8 p 1988 Denying the Finding requested by: Northampton Airport, Inc. For Property Located at: Old Ferry Road, Northampton If you wish to appeal this action, your appeal must be filed in Superior Court within 20 days of the date this decision was filed in the Office of the Northampton City Clerk. Robert C. uscher, Chairman DECISION OF NORTHAMPTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS At a meeting held on November 16, 1988, the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton voted unanimously to DENY the request of Northampton Airport, Inc., Old Ferry Road, Northampton, for a Finding under the Provisions of Section 9.3(a) and/or (b) that allowing occasional auctions of equipment on the property of Northampton Airport, a pre- existing, nonconforming use, would not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing use. Present and voting were Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Dr. Peter Laband, and M. Sanford Weil, Jr. The Findings were as follows: The published Legal Notice called for a Public Hearing at 7:00 p. m. on November 16, 1988 in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building. At 8:40 p. m. when the Public Hearing was opened, several inquiries were made asking if anyone was present to represent the Airport. No one responded. The Board assumed, as it always does under these circumstances, that the Applicant had lost interest in pursuing the Application; the Board voted unanimously to deny the request for a finding. -;0 OX0 Robert C. Buscher, Chairman I d- Dr. Peter Laband 41o� M. Sanford Weil, Jr. J Y � _ Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals November 16, 1988 Meeting The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals met at 8:40 p. m. on Wednesday, November 16, 1988 in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, to conduct a Public Hearing on the Application of Northampton Airport, Inc. for a Finding under the Provisions of Section 9.3(a) and/or (b) that the conduct of occasional auctions of equipment on the Airport's property will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing Airport uses. Present and voting were Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Dr. Peter Laband, and M. Sanford Weil, Jr. Ch. Buscher opened the Public Hearing by reading the Application. Dr. Laband asked, "Who is representing the Airport? Is anyone here?" There was no response. He asked again, and again got no response, and moved that the Public Hearing be closed. Mr. Weil seconded and the motion passed unanimously. Dr. Laband then moved that the Application be denied, citing that as standard procedure, when an Applicant fails to attend his scheduled Hearing, the assumption is that he has lost interest in pursuing the matter. Mr. Weil seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Also present, in addition to those mentioned, was R. J. Pascucci, Board Secretary. Robert C. Buscher, Chairman Rectd in City Clerk's Of 'ce - January 26, 1989 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Hampshire, as. NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC., 7 Plaintiff 7 l vs. ) l ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE 7 CITY OF NORTHAMPTON, ) Defendant 7 88 383 Superior Court Civil Action No. 88-383 INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT This action came on before the court upon a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the Plaintiff, Northampton Airport, Inc. with the assent of defendant, Zoning Board of Appeal of the City of Northampton, and the Motion having been ALLOWED by agreement, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: i 1. That judgment is hereby entered remanding this matter back to the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton for a new public hearing, findings and decision by the Zoning Board of Appeals. 2. The clerk shall within 30 days after entry of this judgment send attested copies thereof to the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Clerk for the City of Northampton. 3. The Superior Court shall retain jurisdiction of this matter. ad,)�-t Northampton, Massachusetts this 23rd day of January, 1989._ FORM OF JUDGMENT APPROVED: By Lawrence B. Urbano Clerk/Magistrate Justice of the Superior Court �r City of Northampton MEMORANDUM TO: Zoning Board of Appeals Office of the Legal Department FROM: Kathleen G. Fallon, Asst. City Sovi��tor SUBJECT: Decisions of the Board DATE: December 16, 1988 FILE: Northampton Airport, Inc. has filed suit against the City in connection with the ZBA's recent denial of a finding to that entity to allow auctions of construction equipment on the airport site. In its decision, the ZBA stated as its reason for the denial the failure of the applicant to appear at the public hearing. Unfortunately, a denial for that reason alone is not legally sufficient. The court must have before it a decision that, at a minimum, addresses the statutory standards for the denial or grant of the relief requested by the applicant. In the matter of a variance for the August property at Damon Road and Bridge Street, the court recently remanded the case because it felt the ZBA had not adequately stated its reasons for the denial in its decision. The decision in the Northampton Airport case lists no substantive grounds at all for the denial. Therefore, the case is sure to be remanded back to the ZBA for further hearing and a more definitive decision. I strongly suggest that the ZBA always list substantive reasons for a denial in its decisions, if possible, even if the applicant does not appear for the hearing. In that way, the court appeal, if taken, can go directly to trial and not be returned for a second hearing on remand before the court deals with the merits of the case. V CITY of NORTHAMPTON OFFICE of PLANNING and DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Kathleen Fallon, Assistant City Solicitor FROM: Robert J. Pascucci kl�� SUBJECT: Northampton Airport, Inc. Appeal DATE: December 20, 1988 FILE: The Complaint alleges, among other things, that "No notice of public hearing was received by the petitioner or by the undersigned counsel for the Plaintiff," and "The Plaintiff failed to appear at the hearing due to the lack of notice as r statute." As I read M. G. L. c. 40A, that "notice shall be sent by "sending" of the document is all is not discussed. Certified Mail applications received in this Hearing before the Zoning Board of are standard practice: equired by Section 11, the requirement is mail, postage prepaid." The that is addressed. "Receiving" is not required. With all Office that require a Public Appeals, the following actions Two sets of envelopes are typed; one set is used to send a copy of the legal notice to the Applicant and all listed abutters, and the second set of envelopes is used to notify the Applicant and abutters of the Board's Decision. If there are fourteen abutters, then two sets of 15 envelopes are typed (abutters plus Applicant). When I .complete the typing, I count the envelopes, and place the Applicant's envelope on top of both Piles of envelopes. They are kept in my desk until needed. When I have a fixed agenda for the Zoning Board meeting which includes this particular Application, I type the Legal Notice for publication in the Gazette. This is a single notice which includes every Public Hearing scheduled for that particular evening. For the Airport's Public Hearing which was scheduled for Wednesday, November 16, the Notice was published in the Gazette on November 2 and 9. A copy of what I t ype for Gazette is sent to each .Applicant and his abutters. Thisthe is mailed deon the day prior to the first publication --in this case, on In the meantime, Mr. Giusto appeared before the Planning Board on October 27, 1988, in response to my letter of invitation, addressed exactly as were the two envelopes for the Zoning Board Public Hearing and Decision announcement, viz.: "Northampton Airport, Inc. c/o Atty. Alan Seewald 5 East Pleasant Street Amherst, MA 01002" The day after the November 16 Public Hearing which was not attended by Mr. Giusto or Mr. Seewald, WIMP reported that Mr. Giusto claimed to not have received notice of the Public Hearing. I checked the second stack of envelopes in my desk drawer which would soon be used to announce the Board's Decision, and the one on top of the stack was addressed to "Northampton Airport, Inc. c/o Atty. Alan Seewald, 5 East Pleasant Street, Amherst, MA 01002. Furthermore, there were perhaps six or seven members of the public in attendance at the ZBA Public Hearing, and presumably they were there because they had received from me a copy of the Legal Notice, and of course those notices were put in the mail at exactly the same time as the notice sent to Atty. Seewald. In conclusion, 1) The Legal Notice was properly published. 2) A copy of the Legal Notice was sent to the Applicant, in care of his attorney, and as far as I can tell, I'm the only person in the world who can testify to that. Someone may allege that I didn't --mail it, but I'm the only one who can say that I did. I notice on the "Notice of Appeal," the Defendants are "Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton." Every other appeal I have seen lists the individual Board members as defendants. The composite Planning Board/Zoning Board file is available for your use. We the following residents of the City of Northampton OCT 2 4 1988 do hereby oppose the giving of any variance of our city zoning.ordinances to the Northampton Airport. - OFFICE OF purpose of conducting heavy equipment auctions on their AND DEVELOPMENT property.Please take this petition into consideration', -i making cision on this matter. 44 / "lat 11& oao J&jvu' ��'1-��� /. /�� !tel' I A r � % u_I jL I _ l 1 • .. • - it Y . II 111110W ��ll il Ill �/ .�- . � Jlllillw-, "AmAll ALI FI . 000 �� t ff-Wj Arm 23 P"FIA .. i - • r p040A 4OTgM uOTSSTWWOO uOT4PA20SuoD a neasnQ '40 •S-TPO OOS-OOi, uT szo u� utoz� umpuPzoutaut P pea.z go SaOaTd 55-05 jjas .TSTA 000'T MPap PUP '4uawdTnba PUP DL6T UT jjTM uOT�OnP abPzaAP uP pTPS a OM Pjag suoT�OnP zo; TOTxaPg auo H 'SL6T paMOgS puP 'aOUPUTPzo buTuO q S4uawaST4,zanpP 04 zoTzd paqOnpuoO azaM �iaq� asnPOa Z auk go abessed agq ago pTPS aH •UOTSSTUIZed aO q Pazag�P�PuPzb azOM SUOT40nP uTPbP wagq anPq O' Azo O PzPog STgq a.aO;aq buTWOO gnog�TM aq PUP `TPbajjT a.zaM unz fou PUP 'wag4 buTneq dOqS O4 paa.zbP p94uTod SPM PPu aq SUOT4OnP 4uawdTnba aqq gpgq qno �T `.zebueq P pjTnq oq UOTSSTwXad zoo buTxooj sent a uagM obP sq4uow jPzanas asnpOaq `buTuana sT aq pTPS aH •asPO sTg Paquasazd qq papog aq4 a.aO;aq ST `04snTD pzPgOTg •zW .w ,d �aodzT� aq4 go s.zaumo aqq go auO MOjjp 04 buTpuTa P 20;5Z=6 b •su�HIOnP �uawdTnba TPUOTSPOOO �sanbaz SgoagIv Nos aW�'H E—ON wFq gpgq pa4STSUT - xzog�s--,zW��t.�, Pule 'papuoOas pjnOU2V •zQ •uotuneas a) T -S; Opassed uoT �4- ago UO pasPq `paTuap aq aauPTzP .j S A4TD T TSSv 'zW •(nPasna) j_5 Passed uOT�ow�a age �Pu4 paAOw u eaef) ' (P) (Z) P • L UOT409S .aapun ODUPT ze11 P aq4 PUP POPUO0IT SO av *,IC[ `D subTs 4eg4 panow aaP� •�ys PUP Q zTag� uo agnZ ���Tr paTuap ant "`STg� Mojje ant uP0 _ubTs panto �� �Pg� �n0 Pa�UTod jjPM jjP UP �o uOT�POOj auk abuegO aO azTs age as uT•oW •ubTs -pamojje fou ST 4Pg4 ubTS P Mojjp O� �gbTz age .4 �ja.zatu- saop 5T UOT4O9S 4P44 ono p94uTod g�Twg .z g aq4 anTb 4ou fou sent 4Pq4 buTpjTnq aq4 go a Ts P uo a PTs abP4UOaj ag.4 aq4 aaagM P P. q ubTS jjPM puooes UO SubTS ZnO2" Pule uQu „`�„ „`��� SP �uapT ` ono pa�uTod xaogOS •zW `� s uejd a�TS age aOueT .X •--A ago 04 sy 'zW 'pa4sanbaa SejsnowTueun passed Ow aqq PUP 4S bUUO s PapuoOas azP� aq 4Tw.aad jPToadS 944 4p44-xpaA puno.zb OM4 MOTTP 04 paquP.zb 04 a.zP SubTs atU • �� • bs nou.ay • as • ubT4 `P92P UT OOT nom peog ab T.z uo auo a5T aq '4; •bs OOT logo: •4S but U g gq PUP aTau� S- 4; a�.Ts ZTOgq go x uo SUB Omq aqj • ubTS AjjPT42ed pup „'•�S BUT abPag� O4 ubTs OjabuV,Q agq asnPoa uP„ aneq daq� as quoa; go qunowP AaPUTPaOP.zgxa 04 ST quPM �iagq qpq ,. �j�ZPd `buTx u0 SubTS OM ane ou'; aaguTpzp g4 OUP Pup peogabpTzg usOOT OTTIe90ueaez aqq Oq Sy uabjnoA pTPS aq SubTS buTpUpgsnPUT a xsP am azagM ST Pup 'OPTS q� 4 uO abPubTs awns pa�uPM ST�uoi4oaS,, (buT?I) SSP 4UPOT dd a pup abPquo.a; ( ab j �' abPquo.a; g� �o uo PTzg) g�zoH aq4 UO SubTS abPubTs °� SP puP `buTpjTnq gaPa go •bs OOT Pamojje azP iia jjPM abe�uoa; gDva uo buTx uO abPquo.a; SPq jaOzed a q� PPOH OBPT29 pup 4aa.z4S •Su TPUPgs-aaZ� puP SuToS q� GOUTS 4eg4 SPM uOT4TSOd STH as Ties s as O jjPM--aaaq sanssT aoCPw omn a.zaM q g ' 3 go x.zOgoS q.anx • zW •agog H�Pu oNasagnvli 5uT499W 886T PaPOg buTUUPjd .zno3 a Pd • LZ .aagogoo U04dwPggaoH • aw aOPT sax 4T ST 20 'UOT0-0 SUT ago 04 4UOWKPd P ao j ST ansST aqy •UTgo?I 'AL44V �o 4senbaa aq4 aq4 SPM SHEA NnTT.n-WTc uoT40n!14SUOO 4Pg4 Pp-TGAa uP ST a.za44 Pp AaOA9 aoj APP sTTPO aTnPauoS 993 UOTgoadsul paPMoH .aadoTanap s4uasa.zda.zJ� qP Ppug5P qqq UO DO; I NoIsI,AIQgns '4TUUad TPTOadS STq z0� dTddP zW • S4Uauta.zTnbga bUTUOZ TTP sqaaui s4Tun TPTozaunuoo q�TM `bttTPTTnq uO s4Tun ZPT4u9pTs;Da aaag4 paU g4TM paTTdwoo sPg aq P94PO aH su2Td STq ssnoSTP O4 4Sa TT �P 1. zoo APP P OP$ 0P 0 D, M G ag�agM OUTOMnOS 0T Odd �xaU r�oOus Oq u�T4 PT04 44TUIS 'zOOTl 4SaTJ ago Uo d ag- -O ZOOT; PU00as aq4 'T4 PUP '-.sanba.a s , pavog agq • :4Oa 10ad qS zuOD 9L sTq Zog 4Uasa.zd sPM l rVWSSIS UaYHOIN PAOTOH - 214Owl,; SnOWTUPun passed uoTgom aqq pup `pgpUooas P anPg r S PXPOU aq4 paAOUI a zP� • ajq „•BUTSOTO pU _3paubis- UPTd eqq peau aM„ PUP 'STPT5[T-TpUy passed UOT40M aqq PUP Oa UoOasPzPbaanPag • zQ Z'(PAOTOH) T -S OdITP agq uPgqTPWaulTz ap aaouI azP SLTOnP a qgpgq SPUnoaBageUo'gSanbgaT ddfaq-4 ;o T 04 panoupTnOUlV -la PTU pUPTutaP; asn s , �a'I„ • QPM Po z a ' POZOTduIT OqS „' sulap; 20; PU auO Pup 'asi aaP P qq UO ssied gouUPO Ivo P pup wagq g quamdTnbe aqq gaodsuP.z-4 04 Pasn spag4PT; aq4 4Pg4 PTPS •4xH '4S .zTP,3 08T UosTTr noZ zP PP02 aq4 Pup pnui gnogP POUTPTdutoo 'pH Xu WzanTdn Uaxozq SUTaq :axods aTdoad bUTMO o a g H 6ZT aUo�S �Pd •�uasazd aaaM auoU TT g� pup `squauoddo ao; paxsP aqS �nq 'KPads oq sququodo.ad ao; paxsP ZTPgo qqy *asn bUT4STxa agq UPgq PoogaoggbTOU agq 0� TP�UaulTz�ap aaoui dTTPT4UPgsgns aq fou TTTM asn 4Pg4 buTpUTd P sT Pasodo'ld aq� -eadpapaaU ST 4Pg4 TTP 'asn bUTuizO;UOOUou bUT�sTxa �lodzTP u�TM �Pg� bUT1CPS ' paa.zbPSTp g4TtuS • zbd • 90UPTZPA P papaau aodtl ago 4Pg4 PUP Z-9 UOT409S Aq uOPPTgao; 929M SUOTgonP aqq dPs 04 aso.a .aPbpng •unoo „•s9xP4 aq4 APd iia aaaM dagq gvgq pOTTdaa ogsnTD '2W Pup q��� �nq `fou aq4 04 TPT4Uassa azaM suoT�OnP a �zOdzT�► age ;o ss000ns P quo 20; pa.aaggP;puP.a5 ST 4aodaT ga �T paxsP azP� • zys • zPa�i aaaM iia • �' g� Uau� apeA P aouO pTaq g� �I OUa aT; � zTag4 Pup ' SL6T 04 aoTad 9sog4 04 �ITuO SOTTddP 5UTaaggP;pUP.a5 gPgq qno pa4UTodaug4Tutg��,nziq OU PPq goTgM 'q�TPaH �o 'suoT�OnP age o� SUOT4091go bUTbzn aTdoad 6Z PzPog age utoz; outaui P p2az PUP 'TPTUap '.4OT24ST q g Pa90in uoT4T49d P p2az OSTP nPasnQ •gD Q �S a UT aO.znos UOT4nTTOd TPT4U94od aq4 ;o asnPoaq .4senbea s,4UPOTTddY aq4 ;O TPTuap puaunuoOaa 04 ATsnouiTUPUn aAT•3ap bUT�aay� 886T 'LZ zagogoo Papog bUTUUPTd UogdumlgqaoH CITY OF NORTHAMPTON OFFICE OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ----------------------------------- MEMORANDUM ----------------------------------------- TO• Police Dept., Fire Dept., DPW, Board of Health Conservation Commission, Law Department FROM: R.J. Pascucci, Board Secretary, Zoning Board of Appeals SUBJECT: Application of Northampton Airport, Inc. re: Equipment Auctions DATE: September 29, 1988 FILE: Attached is a copy of an Application filed by Northampton Airport, Inc. for a Finding under the Provisions of Section 9.3 that the conduct of "occasional auctions of equipment" on the Airport pro- perty will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighbor- hood than the existing use(s) at the Airport. If you have any comments, the Board would be pleased to receive them. October 12, 1988 The Northampton Board of Health reviewed the application referenced above and has no objection to the proposed use. Peter J. McSrlain, Health Agent U CITY OF NORTHAMPTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS 01060 PUBLIC NOTICE The Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS on Wednesday, November 16, 1988 at 7:00 p. m. in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, MA to consider the following: -The continuation of the Public Hearing on the Application of Valley Aggregates Corp. for a Variance, Special Permit and Finding relative to a concrete batching plant on Turkey Hill Rd. -A request for a Finding to add an apartment over an existing snack bar at Clear Falls recreation area. APPLICANT: Clear Falls, Inc. P. O. Box 224, Easthampton, MA -A request for a Finding to allow occasional auctions of equipment on the grounds of Northampton Airport. APPLICANT: Northampton Airport, Inc. Old Ferry Rd., Northampton, MA -The continuation of the Public Hearing on the Application of Robert F. Czelusniak for a Variance and Finding to allow enlargement of the parking lot and a 251 curb cut at 173 North Street. -The continuation of the Public Hearing on the Application of Kevin and Suzanne Coffey for a Special Permit to allow bringing in 2,500 cubic yards of fill at 167 Baker Hill Road. Copies of the Applications are available for public inspection during regular business hours in the Office of Planning and Development, Room 11 of City Hall. /s/ Robert C. Buscher, Chairman PUBLISH: November 2 and 9, 1988 BILL: Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals c/o Office of Planning and Development Room 11, City Hall, 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 L City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development ,City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586.6960 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation • Historic Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals September 29, 1988 Northampton Airport, Inc. c/o Atty. Alan Seewald 5 East Pleasant Street Amherst, MA 01002 Your petition for a Finding under Section 9.3(a) and/or (b) which has been submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals, will be reviewed for recommendation by the NORTHAMPTON PLANNING BOARD when it meets October 27, 1988 at 7:00 p. m. in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building (the building behind City Hall). You and/or your representative are invited to attend this meeting to discuss the merits of your application. This meeting is informal, and the vote of the Planning Board to recommend Approval or Denial of your request is NOT binding on the Zoning Board of Appeals. Approximately two weeks before you are scheduled to attend the Public Hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals, a Legal Notice announcing the meeting will be published in the Daily Hampshire Gazette. You, and all the abutters you listed in your Application, will receive a copy of this Notice in the mail. If you have any questions, please contact the Office of Planning and Development, Room 11 in City Hall, Telephone 586-6950, Extension 262. Sincerely, J Robert J. Pascucci Board Secretary CITY of NORTHAMPTON OFFICE of PLANNING and DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Police Dept., Fire Dept., DPW, Board of Health, Conservation Commission, Law Department R. J. Pascucci, Board Secretary, Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: SUBJECT: Application of Northampton Airport, Inc. re: Equipment Auctions DATE: September 29, 1988 FILE: Attached is a copy of an Application filed by Northampton Airport, Inc. for a Finding under the Provisions of Section 9.3 that the conduct of "occasional auctions of equipment" on the Airport property will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing use(s) at the Airport. If you have any comments, the Board would be pleased to receive them. - ,0 i DECISION OF NORTHAMPTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS At a Special Meeting held on February 22, 1988, the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton rendered a Decision on the Appeal of Emily Saur and Lionel Delevingne for an Appeal under Section 10.7, Page 10-2 of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance relative to their Complaint that the Northampton Airport, Inc. is operating in violation of several Sections of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance, at its property located at 152 Crosspath Road, Northampton, MA (SC Zone). Present and voting were Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Dr. Peter Laband, and M. Sanford Weil, Jr. Chm. Buscher confirmed what was stated and agreed to by all parties at the February 3, 1988 Public Hearing, (with the Attorney for Northampton Airport, Inc. preserving an objection thereto) that the Board in this instance is dealing with an Appeal to the Building Inspector's Decision, not merely his failure to act as alleged in the Applicant's Petition filed December 10, 1987. ii The Applicant's December 10, 1987 Complaint to the Building Inspector alleged that the Northampton Airport, l; Inc. is operating in violation of several Sections of the i�Northampton Zoning Ordinance, to wit: Holding Equipment {".Auctions and Engaging in the Storage of Automobiles; "Intensification of Activity," or an Increase in the Number of Operations at the Airport; Allowing Parachuting, Aerial ;Photography and the Existence of a Sign painted on the Roof !!of a Hangar, and Noise and Vibrations. THE FINDINGS WERE AS FOLLOWS; 1. All parties agreed that Equipment Auctions and Automobile Storage are disallowed extensions of use, and a Cease and Desist Order has been issued. 2. There was little or no evidence presented at the February 3, 1988 Public Hearing relative to Parachute Jumping, Aerial Photography, and the presence of a sign painted on the roof of a hangar, so the Board determined that more information was needed to establish whether or not these activities have been carried on prior to the adoption of a Zoning Ordinance, and continuously since. For this reason, the. Board voted unanimously to remand to the Administrative Officer for further investigation, those portions of the complaint. 3. As to "Intensification of Use," or Increase in the Number of Operations, the Board voted unanimously that the current levels of general aviation and flight training activity are commensurate with airport activities of this nature, and that such activities can continue. The Board I i DECISION OF THE NORTHAMPTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS EMILY SAUR & LIONEL DELEVINGNE COMPLAINT PAGE TWO felt that the application of the tests in Bridgewater v. Chuckran, 351 Mass 20 (1966) were entirely appropriate in this instance. 4. The Board did not specifically render a Decision on the Complaint relative to Noise and Vibration. Robert C. Buscher, Chairman "*� 9"L. - Dr. Peter Laband i i' i M. Sanford Weil, Jr. ;i i Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals SPECIAL MEETING February 22, 1988 The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals met at 6:00 p. m. on February 22, 1988 in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, to render a decision on the Application of Emily.Saur and Lionel Delevingne for an Appeal under Section 10.7, Page 10-2 of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance relative to their Complaint to the Building Inspector that the Northampton Airport, Inc. is operating in violation of several Sections of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance, at its property at 152 Crosspath Road, Northampton, MA (SC Zone). Present and voting were Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Dr. Peter Laband, and M. Sanford Weil, Jr. Chairman Buscher called the Meeting to order to reach a decision in the matter as outlined above. He pointed out, as a procedural matter, that unanimity of the Board is necessary to sustain an Appeal. Mr. Weil opened the discussion by describing the matter before the Board as .Applicants' petition for an Appeal under Section 10.7 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Northampton regarding the function and performance 'of the Administrative Officer (Building Inspector). He saw the thrust of the Appeal as 1) establishing a violation, 2) showing a lack of timely response by the Building Inspector to the complaint, and 3) showing that the late response of the Building Inspector merely made reference to the Assistant City Solicitor's written opinion, and did not in fact state his own response. Mr. Weil felt that the current levels of activity at the Airport required a Finding under Section 9.3b, and the Board must now decide if the present use of the Airport is an extension of a pre-existing, nonconforming use that is more detrimental to the neighborhood than the "grandfathered" use. Dr. Laband agreed somewhat, but reminded. all present that the Board, at its February 3rd Meeting,;•'expanded this to make a decision as if we were hearing an Appeal of the Building Inspector's determination." He found that all parties seemingly agreed that the Heavy Equipment Auctions and the Storage of Automobiles were illegal; that a Cease and Desist Order had been issued by the Building Inspector, and that the Airport management had agreed they would return to this Board for permission if they wanted to engage in those activities in the future. He agreed with Miss Fallon's application of the values in the Bridgewater case re: alteration of a pre-existing, nonconforming use, and found that, as far as general aviation activities go, the evidence at the Public Hearing, and his subsequent visit to the Airport indicated that the intensity of activity has not changed in 30 years. He agreed with Miss Fallon's interpretation of what Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals SPECIAL MEETING February 22, 1988 constitutes "change," and felt that current activity levels did not constitute and alteration or extension. He felt the Building Inspector's letter of December 9, 1988 to Emily Saur was an endorsement of Miss Fallon's opinion, and was a satisfactory response to the Appeal. He argued that, "Touch and go" and parachuting " have been going on for years." Mr. Weil asked if the parachuting was grandfathered, and felt a Finding was required if the Airport wanted to expand further. Dr. Laband stated that a mere increase of activity does not require a Finding, and cited the analogy of a bottling plant that used to fill 10,000 bottles a day. "Does it need a Finding to go to 10,500 bottles a day?" He pointed out that we used to have two airports in Northampton, and a lot more activity than we have now, and in applying the Bridgewater tests, no Finding is necessary. Dr. Laband did feel that a new hangar, for instance, would be an extension of use, as would corporate jets, major physical alterations such as erection of buildings, lengthening of runways, etc. Mr. Weil felt that parachute jumping was such an extension. Chm. Buscher felt the Applicant's Petition addresses several items: A) Equipment Auctions and Automobile Storage: He felt that all parties concurred that these are disallowed extensions of use. B) "Intensification," or Increase in Number of Operations: He agreed with the Assistant City Solicitor (and with Dr. Laband's "bottling plant" analogy) that there was no extension of use because of a possible increase in the number of takeoffs and landings. "That is a condition beyond the purview of this Board. The Building Inspector was correct when he said there was no increase of activity." C) Parachuting and Aerial Photography: Chm. Buscher felt that both of these activities are changes in use. He did not think any evidence was presented at the Public Hearing that these activities had been conducted prior to the enactment of the Zoning Ordinance. The Parachute school, he determined, is not registered with :the City Clerk's Office. D) The Sign on the Roof of a Hangar: Chm. Buscher felt this was an "addition" in the absence of evidence to the contrary that it existed prior to the Zoning Ordinance, and needed a Finding. Chm. Buscher recommended that the Board remand the Parachuting, Photography and Roof Sign issues to the Building Inspector to investigate the history of these uses to determine if they are pre-existing, nonconforming uses and thus "grandfathered." He concurred that intensification as to type of aircraft/activity (commercial commuter airline, package express service) would require a Finding. Chm. Buscher stated we are dealing, as was said and agreed at the February 3rd Public Hearing, with an Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals SPECIAL MEETING February 22, 1988 Appeal to the Building Inspector's Decision, not merely his failure to act as alleged in the Petition filed December 10, 1987. Dr. Laband agrees with Chm. Buscher on the remand recommendation, and moved that the Appeal, as to parachuting, aerial photography and the rooftop sign be remanded to the Building Inspector, but the balance od the Appeal, as to "intensity" and increase in the number of operations be denied, and that flying that is going on can continue. Mr. Weil seconded the Motion. During discussion, Mr. Weil wanted to impose some manner of percentage restriction on growth, but Chm. Buscher felt that was not only beyond the r ability of the Board, but beyond the ability of Mr. Giusto to control, since the Airport is open to the public. Chm. Buscher called for a vote on Dr. Laband's Motion. The vote was unanimously in favor. The Meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p. M. Present, in addition to those mentioned, was R. J. Pascucci, Board Secretary. ;o:bZert C. Buscher, Chairman Patrick T. Gleason, Esq. City Solicitor Kathleen G. Fallon, Esq. Assistant City Solicitor CITY OF NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS CITY HALL 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 ._'11 s � too. l LV }t APP =; LEGAL DEPARTMENT L C ^ 2 .1,%1 586-6950 OrFiCE 3iVD DEVELOPUF"'13 December 1, 1987 William A. Nimohay, Building Inspector Municipal Building Northampton, MA. 01060 Re: Zoning Complaint --Northampton Airport Dear Mr. Nimohay: You have referred the complaint filed with you against the Northampton Airport to me for an opinion as to its merits. In response, may I submit the following. The Northampton Airport is presently a pre-existing, non- conforming use. The airport was established prior to the 1949 enactment of the first comprehensive zoning ordinance. From 1949 to 1978, the type of buildings on the site has changed and their number increased. The zoning ordinances during that period were quite liberal as to the expansion of a non -conforming use on its existing site. Therefore, the site alterations appear to have been proper since they were done in connection with the pre- existing, non -conforming use, i.e., the operation of an airport. However, a change in a non -conforming use has, since 1949, required action by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Since 1978, the zoning ordinance has required a finding by the Zoning Board of Appeals for any change, alteration, or expansion of a non -conforming use. The question is, .then, whether the activities which are the subject of the complaint constitute a change, alteration, or expansion of the non -conforming use. The complaint cites the following activities as alleged expansions of the non -conforming use: 1) general aviation operations 2) aerial photography 3) parachute instruction and jumping 4) construction equipment auctions 5) automobile storage The complaint also lists "noise" and "safety" as subjects of the complaint. I do not think the safety of the aviation operation of the airport is a matter over which the Building Inspector has any control. Nor would noise from the airport be under his jurisdiction unless it were related to a zoning violation. As to the other five activities, it is my opinion that the equipment auctions and automobile storage are clearly not permitted without action by the Zoning Board of Appeals. From 1949 to 1957, the zoning ordinance provided that "any business in operation at the time this Ordinance is passed may expand with the permission of the Building Inspector" (C. 44, s. 8). From 1958 to 1975, the qualification that the expansion must be on the same lot was included as part of that ordinance. In 1975, the ordinance was revised to read as follows: ''1. Any nonconforming use, except agricultural, horticultural, or floricultural, or any open space on a lot outside a structure, or of a lot occupied by a structure, shall not be extended, except that a nonconforming principal or accessory use may be extended within the limits of the lot existing as of the date of adoption of this Ordinance and shall be in accordance with the dimensional and density regulations of Article VI. 2. Any nonconforming principal use of a structure shall not be extended." Finally in 1978 the ordinance was amended to read as follows: "Pre-existing nonconforming structures or uses may be extended or altered provided that no such extension or alteration shall be permitted unless there is a finding by the permit granting authority or by the special permit granting authority that such change, extension or alteration shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood..." Reading these ordinances together, it would.appear that from 1949 to 1957, a non -conforming business could expand onto its original lot or any after acquired property with the permission Airport 2 of the Building Inspector. From 1958 to 1975, such an expansion was confined to the property on which the business was located in 1958, still subject to the approval of the Building Inspector. Between 1975 and 1977 it appears a non -conforming principal or accessory use could expand by right on the property on which it was located in 1975. In 1978 such expansion was made subject to a finding by the permit granting authority. Applying these ordinances to the equipment auctions confirms the illegality of that use. The first auction of which we have notice occurred in 1975. Under the then -current zoning, motor vehicle sales were not allowed in that zoning district. (In fact, such sales were not allowed at least as far back as 1959). At that time a principal non -conforming use or a use accessory thereto were permitted -to expand on the same lot. The principal use on the subject lot was the operation of an airport for the use of small private aircraft. I cannot see that a construction equipment auction is, in any way, an accessory use to that principal use. Therefore, the auctions could not be held by right. Even if the first auction was held prior to 1975, the applicable ordinances back to 1949 allowed a non -conforming "business" to expand with permission of the Building Inspector. The "business" on the subject site from 1949 through 1975 was an airport. Only airport operations and uses accessory thereto could have expanded under the ordinances in effect in these years. A similar line of reasoning can be applied to the automobile storage use. However, the first occurrence of this use seems to be very recent. Within the past year, Mr. Guisto, one of the owners of the airport, asked if he could store automobiles on the site. He was told that a finding by the Zoning Board of Appeals would be required before he could do so. No such finding has ever been requested. This use is clearly in violation of the Zoning Ordinance. In addition, Massachusetts case law has established for general use a three part test for determining whether a non -conforming use has been improperly changed, altered, or extended. As set forth in Bridgewater v. Chuckran 351 Mass 20 (1966), that test is as follows: (1) whether the use reflects the "nature and purpose" of the use prevailing when the zoning by-law took effect; (2) whether there is a difference in the quality or character, as well as the degree, of use; (3) whether the current use is "different in kind in its effect on the neighborhood". Applying this test to the construction equipment auctions and the automobile storage, both uses are obviously improper. They do not reflect the "nature and purpose" of the non -conforming use (the operation of an airport). There is certainly a difference in the character of the use, not just in the degree of the Airport 3 ;x. 0M existing non -conforming use. And, finally, the uses are "d'ifferent in kind" in their effect on the neighborhood. The status of the other activities whichaare the s bjecthas bOf the on complaint is more complicated. that site since 1949. There is no doubt that operation of an h are an airport for the use of smae�ationrconstiaft tutetavvalid preities cexisting intrinsic part of that op non -conforming use. The issue is whether the non -conforming use has been illegally extended by (1) the increase in the number of flights and the number of airplanes sforaaerialthe aphot graphy and irport, and (2) the use of the airport facilities parachute instruction/jumping• r case cited Under the three part test set foyer of flightsn the ofeplanes based above, the increase iot n the numb expansion of the at the airport doeuse. The currentuuse doeste an lre.flecte "nature and non -conforming . the operation of an use, i.e purpose" of the non -conforming aircraft. The first airport for the use of small private criterion of the test is met. than it Although the non -conforming use isnotferent in significantdl different in was in 1949 or even in 1975, it quality or character. If the aairpcommercialhabeCairline reo lanoow scheduled destination for or la accommodated jet airplanes large propeller-driven aechangerineairplanes the clearly quality rather than small private planes, and/or character of the non-con iongofsthe`'Jusedalsoewould rhave Therefore, an impermissible expans occurred under the Bridgewater test crnterbe�• of°flights f small opinion that an increase inthe from the er of private planes to and doesnotconstitute annexpansionall of planes based at the airport do established that an the use. Massachusetts case law has clearly in increase in the degree of a use isexpansionnot the sof significant (See determining if there has been an P Bridgewater v. Chuckran, supra, and Powers v Building Inspector of Barnstable 363 Mass 648 (1973)). The third part of the Bridgewaterffectsonethelneighborh°od.1 mines whether the use This is "different in kind in iother is obviously afar more subjecalwithve sthedeffectathatrantincrease two. It should not be confus in the degree of a use will naturally haveusly onvon a neighborhood.an eT e greater number of flights will noise in the area adjacent to the airport. However, no evidence ct on the has been presented that demferentteina discernable and lecanfebe traced neighborhood which is different directly to increased airport operations. Airport 4 M Finally, it is my opinion that the aerial photography and parachute instruction/jumping are activities which are intrinsically part of the operation of an airport and do not constitute an expansion of the non -conforming use. In summary, it is my opinion that the first three activities mentioned in the complaint do not violate the zoning ordinance at this time. (Please bear in mind, however, that changes in the aviation activities at the airport, depending on the nature of those particular activities, could constitute a violation in the future.) The fourth and fifth activities are in violation of the ordinance. And, while the increase in the number of flights or of aircraft based at; the airport is not an impermissible expansion of the non -conforming use, any major physical alterations to the site will be such an expansion. This would include the lengthening or widening of the runway, the construction of additional runways, or the erection of new buildings. Any of these activities would require a finding by the Zoning Board of Appeals. cc: Mayor David Musante Councilor Leonard JBudgar Lawrence B. Smit Airport 5 Very ruly yours, Kath een G. allon INSPECTOR Edward J. Tewhill FS - — - (Eit of Yart4aurp on - - — jtassacbnsetts DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTIONS 212 Main Street ' Municipal Building Northampton, Mass. 01060 December 9, 1987 Emily Saur 45 Marshall St. Northampton, Mass. 01060 Dear Ms. Saur: Regarding the complaint filed in this office November 3, 1987, against the Northampton Airport located at 152 Crosspath Rd., City Tax Map 25BD - Lots #71 & 15. Enlosed please find the opinion from the Northampton Legal Department. However, if the Airport fails to cease and desist on the storage of vehicles and the operation of a heavy equipment auction, court action will be processed by the Building and Legal Departments. Sincerely/`� Edward J. Tewhill Building Inspector EJT/lb enclosure �.i AIRPORT DECISION The Legal Dept. in a memo dated';Dec.1, 1987 stated, in part, "it is my opinion that the equipment auctions & automobile storage are clearly not permitted without action by the Z.B.A." In the same<ymemd Massli -case-, I aw-es, set forth - -h in Bridgewater v Chuckran 351 Mass 20 (1966) was sited to establish that equipment auctions and automobile storage are both impropper uses since they do not reflect the "nature and purpose" of 'the current non -conforming use (ie. -the operation of an airport.) The applicant has not been able to successfully establish that auctions are a pre-existing non -conforming use. The ZBA decision of Feb. 22, 1988 stated ; in part, "All parties agreed that equipment auctions and automobile storage are disallowed extensions of use." At a meeting on Oct. 4, 1988 the Northampton Conservation Commission reviewed the special permit request and voted unanimously to reccommend thst the request be denied "as the activity is a `..,potential pollution source and an increase in activities which are incompatible with the " purpose and intent of the Special Conservancy (flood plain) District. On Flat: 27, 198 the Conservation Commission reconsidered the Air Port's request for a finding to allow equipment auctions and v-.ced concerns about the requested activity in the flood plain. However because of lack of information on the duration and timing of the proposed equipment sales and water quality concerns relating to how the equipment is stored, they declined to make a specific recommendation. This cannot be construed as a reversal of the prior recommendation to deny. On Oct. 27, 1988 the Planning Board recommended (5 to 1) that the request to run equipment auctions be denied as the activity would be substantially more detremental to the neighborhood than the existing Airport activities. Abuttors have protested the activity, claiming that the increased: ore o€ the streets will cause damage, traffic congestion, environmental concerns, commercialization of the meadows, safety issues for children and other residents of the area. The applicant's reference to similar problems posed by the present Airport operation as well as the Fair Grounds and also activity of farm vehicles, all allowed uses, simply fortifies the undesirability of adding more such activity to the neighborhood. The applicant wants to hold two auctions per year. The auction would take one day, but the arrival and departure of the equipment to be auctioned would take six days, three before and three after the auctions. During these seven days both Crosspath Road and Old Ferry Road will be congested more than normally by parked vehicles and moving equipment. The application for a finding ander section 9.3 is not valid unless the activity is a pre-existing nonconforming use. We have already determined that this is not the case with equipment auctions. - 2 - Alternatively, section 13.4 states that any person desiring a special permit for a use within the Special Conservancy District shall submit an application to the Building Inspector for transmittal to the ZBA. The requirements for a special prrmit per section 10.10 Paragraph 3 page 10-5 are as follows. (read and state reaction to each requirement.) Unless other members of this pannel can produce reasoning and propose safeguards to offset the preponderance of negative evidence, I will be forced to reccommend denial. DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS At a meeting held on August 12, 1987, the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Northampton voted unanimously to grant the Special Permit request of Nicholas D. Duprey, 13 Cedar Street, Northampton, MA, for the purpose of operating a general autobody repair business at property located on the southeasterly side of Easthampton Road (more particularly identified as Parcel 10A of Sheet 51 of the Northampton Assessors' Maps), Northampton, MA. Present and voting were: Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Irene David and Sanford Weil, Jr. The findings were as follows: S. Weil found that the requested use is listed in the Table of Use Regulations; that the requested use bears a positive relationship to the public convenience; that the requested use will not create undue traffic congestion or impair pedestrian safety; that the requested use will not overload municipal systems, as an on-site septic system and well will be installed; and that the requested use will not impair the integrity of the district and is in character with the designated zone. I. David concurred, finding that all criteria necessary to grant a Special Permit have been met. R. Buscher found that the requested use is listed in the Table of Use Regulations; that the requested use will not create undue traffic, although the conversion of the area from wooded to business will result in an increase of vehicles on Route #10, the area was zoned GI and was anticipated to be built up at some point; that the requested use will not unduly impair pedestrian safety, as there is very little pedestrian traffic in this area; that the requested use will not overload municipal systems, as the applicant has indicated that there will be on-site septic and well; that the requested use will not unduly impair the integrity of character of the district, as the applicant has indicated that all work will take place inside of the building and that he already has a contract with a hazardous waste removal company; that the requested use is in harmony with the general intent of the Zoning Ordinance, as this represents a quasi -industrial use in an industrial zone. The following conditions shall apply: 1. That all damaged vehicles or vehicles that are being used for replacement parts must be located within a designated horseshoe -shaped fenced area to the rear of the property. Said fence shall be at least 6 feet high, made of wood, and kept in good repair at all times, in order to block vehicles i i i prnPQ auaz2 / 'zP 'TTa pzoguPs upwaTPuo ' zauOsn$ • o gaagog - 1IP uo o •tu•d 00•L - .W -P 00=8 'APpzngpS P W 4 P94TWTI aq UOTgvaado go sznou auq gpus 'S •94Ts sTu4 qP uo paTzzPO ssauTsnq auq go qTnsaz se pasnPO uOT4PUTUEPgUOO zO 94SPM OT XO� �O aouapTAa OU ST azauq sp buo-1 sP AluO pTTPn aq TTP s u 4Tuizad sTuq qpql •PazP aogsaszou p94PUbTs9p auq UTu4TM pazogs aq 4snui pup 9uiT4 auO 4P SZ Oq paqTWTT ST saTOTuan pabPUlPp zo paTgpsTp pup pazTTPgTuuPO paa-04S go zaqumu au4 gpus .8 P a •4999 SL Uegq ssaT fou ung 'saznqonz4s buT4qn g u4 SP 90uP4srp auiPs au4 spa T 4P ppoz auk. uIozg :[OPq 4as aq azngonags auk. .pus . ' Z •Mary oTTgnd uioz� Zed Aazdna - UOTsToaQ sTPaddy go pzpog bUTUOZ uogduzpu�.zou CITY OF NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS JAMES C. O'DONNELL CITY SOLICITOR DECISION OF THE ZONING THOMAS P. NAGLE, JR. BOARD OF APPEALS ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR On August 179 1977, the Zoning Board of Appeals for the City of Northampton decided to grant the petition of Russell Myette for a variance to purchase a nonconforming lot. The Board finds that there are special circumstances: First the strip of land is owned by one party, and secondly the petitioner owns the structure but not the land. Based upon evidence presented to the Board, the Board made the following findings: 1. Theze exists a special hardship owing to circumstances relating to the soil conditions, shape or topography of such land or structures, but not affecting generally the zoning district. The tract of land which is to be divided into three parts is a long strip without much depth. If the tract was not divided, the petitioner could have an inexcessible structure, if the owner of the land or his successors did not lease the land to the petitioner. The petition can only afford a piece of the land, and the current owner wants to retain the other lots for nonbuilding purposes. 2. The desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good. If the land was subdivided, no further structures could be constructed unless in conformance with the Zoning Code and flood plain regulation. Therefore, the public interest in controling density would not be adversely affected. 3. The desirable relief may be granted without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of zoning. As stated before, the intent was to regulate density and this will not be affected adversely, further the structure is a summer home and not a year—round residence, and the zoning was meant to control such year—round residences and not temporary ccasional use dwellings. C Ger ais, Acting Chairman omas Brus wa Raymo d Capers City of Northampton, Ma&qachu0AHa­ Planning ,D rtment Room 11, y 11, Cit210 Main Street mpto Northan, MA 01060 (413) 584 0344 • servation Commission •HkgoticW Commission • Planning Board *Zoning Board of Appeals July 13, 1977 Mr. Charles W, Dragon, Chairman Board of Appeals Northampton, MA. 01060 OPINION OF THE PLANNING BOARD IN THE MATTER OF - Request by Russell Myette for a variance to purchase a non nforming lot. The Planning Board, at its meeting of July 6, 1977s voted unani- mously to express to the Board of Appeals its opinion that the subject request should be denied. In doing so, the Board noted the extreme nature of the variances which are required (including a reduction in minimum lot size from 1.0,000 sq. ft. t0 4,700 sq. ft. in one case,._7,00p sq. ft. in another, and 7,300 sq. ft. in the third and a reduction in minimum lot width from 175 ft. to 100 ft., 130 ft. and 170 ft,). It noted that the proposed action would create parcels which would be considerably more inappropriate for use than is the existing single parcel. cc: Russell Myette Building Inspector Fiel:## 271 NORTHAMPTON BOARD OF APPEALS Decision on Application of Russell Myette August 17, 1977 The Board of Appeals met on August 17, 1977, at 7:30 PM in the Hearing Room, City Hall, to decide on the variance appli- cation of Russell Myette. Eric B. Gervais, Acting Chairman presided. The public hearing on the matter had been held on August 3, 1977, and had been advertised in the Daily Hampshire Gazette on July 20 and July 27, 1977. The minutes of that public hearing were read and approved unanimously. Mr. Gervais noted that Atty. Ryan, representing the peti- tioner, had submitted the brief on the subject as the Board had requested at the public hearing. Mr. Myette's request was for a variance to purchase a non- conforming lot. The Board had inspected the site after the public hearing. Mr. Brushway found that special conditions do affect the parcel. The property is extremely narrow and cannot be used for building purposes in the future. In this particular instance, the cottage already exists on the parcel, and should the lease be cancelled, the structure would be worthless to the petitioner. Building on the flood plain is restricted by the Zoning Ordinance so the remaining two lots will never be used for such purposes. Mr. Capers agreed with the above findings. He noted that cancellation of the lease is a possibility which could result in an economic hardship to the applicant. Mr. Gervais concurred. He found the situation to be unique in that the petitioner owned the cottage but not the land. Based on these findings, the Board voted unanimously to grant the variance with no restrictions. The meeting was adjourned at 7:40 PM. Present and voting were Eric B. Gervais, Acting Chairman, Thomas Brushway, and Raymond Capers, Associate. Also present were Charlie Pellet of WHMP, and Clare Fennessey, Clerk. • f Grvais Acting Chairman NORTHAMPTON BOARD OF APPEALS Public Hearing on Application of Russell Myette July 13, 1977 The public hearing on the application of Russell Myette, 86 Riverbank Road, for a variance to purchase a non -conforming lot, was called to order at 8:40 PM in the Hearing Room, City Hall, by the Acting Chairman, Eric B. Gervais. The public notice, published in the Daily Hampshire Gazette on June 29 and July 6, 1977, was read into the record, along with a communication from the Planning Board recommending that the request be denied. Atty. William Michael Ryan, 486 Haydenville Road, representing both the petitioner and the owner of the property, Luke Ryan, said that Russell Myette owns a cabin on land owned by Mr. Ryan who now wishes to sell that particular portion. This situation, obviously unique, was created when the previous owner of the land allowed another person to build a summer camp on his land. The land was subsequently sold, but the camp was retained by the person who had constructed it, and was eventually sold to Mr. Myette. These events took place long before the zoning ordinance came into effect and the cabin remains under the "grandfather clause". The building is a summer cottage only, but does have sanitary facilities and a large holding tank. The land in question runs parallel to the Connectigut River and is approximately 412 feet in length. It is proposed to divide the parcel into three parts, thus making three non -conforming lots. The parcel which Mr. Myette wishes to purchase will be approximately 99 feet long with side boundaries of approximately 50 feet, and will be the middle lot. Mr. Ryan wishes to retain ownership of the other two parcels. Mr. Gervais noted that the camp is situated only 4 feet from Riverbank Road,but Mr. Myette claimed that this road is not heavily traveled. Atty. Ryan contended that the situation has the potential for meeting the hardship requirement since Mr. Myette has invested much time and money into the cabin's maintenance, and he is concerned that some future owner might refuse to renew the lease. Mr. Gervais asked why Mr. Myetteis purchasing such a small parcel, and was informed by the applicant that this was for financial reasons. At this point, Mr. Gervais asked Atty. Ryan to present a brief to the Board, and the matter was taken under advisement. The hearing was adjourned at 9:00 PM. Present were Acting Chairman, Eric B. Gervais, Thomas Brushway, and Raymond Capers. Also present were Atty. Ryan, Mr. Myette, and Clare Fennesse , Clerk. B. a ais Acting Chairman NOTICE Wo ZONING ORDINANCE VIOLATION LiV of Noz#ljamptan jelssrchnsrtts DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTIONS 212 Main Street ' Municipal Building Northampton, Mass. 01060 AND Mr./Mrs./Ms. RICHARD GIUSTO/CITY AVIATION order. ORDER �O D TO CEASE, DESIST, AND ABATE , and all persons having notice of this As owner/occupant of the premises, located at 152 & 164 CROSSPATH RD./OLD FERRY RD, Assessor's Map 256D Plot 15 & 71, and known as NORTHAMPTON•AIRPORT , you are hereby notified that you ar, in violation of5t�ep6it�- f# orthampton's ZONING ORDINANCE(s), ARTICLE(s) IXV SECTION(s)9.3B PG. 9-y2 , and are ORDERED '.this date OCTOBER 7, 1987 XIII to: 13.4 PG. 13-2 1. CEASE AND DESIST immediately, all functions connected with this violation, on or at the above mentioned premises. •CONSTRUCTION AUCTION TO.BE HELD ON YOUR PROPERTY, IS IN summary of VIOLATION OF THE NORTHAMPTON CITY ZONING ORDINANCE AS LISTED violation ABOVE. SPECIAL CONSERVANCY DISTRICT. summary of action to abate 2. COMMENCE within ( ) hours, action to abate this violation permanently within days , and if aggrieved by this order; to show cause as to why you should not be required to do so, by filing with Clerk of the City of Northampton, a Notice of Appeal (specifying the grounds thereof) within thirty (30) days of the receipt of this order. If at the expiration of the time allowed, this violation has not been remedied, further action as the law requires shall be taken. By order, /A 4 �, (J� INSPECTOR.OF BUIL INGS C1TYDF NORTHAMPTON'' ZOW? G PERMIT APPLICATION Zoning Ordinance Section 10.2 Map No. Lot **tV �o• Plan File Ownerto — Address fOld Ferry Road, Northampton, MA..��tNl `;''' +ens Old Ferry Road, Northampton, MA. Telephone 584_106n Telephone SR4_�R�n This section is to be filled out in accordance with the "Table of Dimensional and Density Regulations: (Z.O. ARTICLE VI) Zoning Use District Lot Front Depth De Setbacks Area Width Front Side Max. Bid. Min. Op. it or jt-, 1 Acre 370' 300' Rear Cover Space Past ExistingLot 25- 71.`.::2 eriodic Auctio s NA NA t° NA % NA Present SC Proposed Mark the appropriate box to indicate the use of the parcel: EiNon-Conforming Lot and/or Structure. Specify ❑Residential ❑Single Family Unit ❑ Multl-Family 1 Business ❑ Duplex O Other ❑ Individual ❑ Institutional ❑ Subdivision ❑ Regular ❑ Cluster ❑ Subdivision with "Approval -Not -Required" -Stamp: ❑ Planning Board Approval: ❑ Zoning Board Approval (Special Permit 10.9: Variance) ❑ City Council (Special Exception S. 10.10) Watiarah,%A Drnaw..at__ - -- - -lair ic[ Uveriay: (Z.O. Sect. XIV) Parking Snaen O P.U.D. O Other ❑ Yes ry u_ -- - _­ a: W". Ject. 8.1) � flow Loading Space Requirements: (Z.O. Sect 8 2) Required �� Proposed __NA_ ;1y113: K.U. Art. VII) ',vyuIrtri t'roposed _nvironmental Performance Standards: (Z.O. Art. XII) ❑ Yes G No O Yes (F7 No plot Plan S-10.2) EX Yes ❑ No This section for OFFICIAL use only: — ❑ Approval as presented: � Modifications necessary for approval: ❑ Return: (More Information needed) Denial: Reasons: Z BA gna ure of Applican Z� n, X OIV- 1!'yt /!�i rIp, " (. e, Date Site Plan 12 Yes O No (S. 10.2 and 10.11 Waiver Granted — — Date p .., Ar -1 - _A --N SignatureofAdml Of01/w ficer Date -0b Not Write In These Spaces Rec'd. B. 1. Checked sY Date a Filed Fee P Ca �ZBA (s) Parcel(s) 96 Y Date Date A t.% Dat SY Date ' a 16't7l APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE TO:THE CITY OF NOR OARD OF APPEALS: Name of Applicant _Northamptoir ort, Inc. Address Old Ferry Road. P. 0 Box 221 Northampton MA 01061 2. Owner of Property same Address same 3. Applicant is: &Owner; 0Contract Purchaser; ❑Lessee; El Tenant in Possession. 4. Application is made for: D VARIANCE from the provisions of Section page of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Northampton. SPECIAL PERMIT under the provisions of Section page_of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Northampton. IXOTHER: Finding Under Zoning Ordinanceec 'q �tJ 6 �) _ q. Z 5. Location of Property 152 & 164 Cross Path Road/Old Ferry Road theeasterly side of Cross Path Road, being situated on Sheet No. 25BD 91*45t; and shown on the Assessors' Maps, Parcel (s) 15 and 71 6. Zone Special conservancy district 7. Description of proposed work and/or use; Owners intend to have occasional auctions of equipment on property. Owners seek finding that such use is permitted as pre existing non conforming use In the alternative, the owners seek finding under Section 9.3(b) of the Znnino (1rAi„ 8. (a) Sketch plan attached; ® Yes O No (b) Site plan: R]Attched ONot Required 9. Set forth reasons upon which application is based: The prior owners of the airport conducted Periodic auctions on the site which the present owners have continued. These Periodic auctions will not be substantially more detrimental than the existing uses Of this property or of surrounding properties. -These auctions provide a necessary Rublic c 10. Abutters (see instructions; list on reverse side of form). 12. 1 hereby certify that information contained herein is true to the f my knowledge. Date Applicant's Signature � an eewa , a orney or or amp on Airport, Inc. r htirn h11 J f>' ' H1�SIH1 hg 3( N OIfo 2 HI VU SSO�I� nAMSC 8S 2T7 7 o O w N E� ori tz m �, J a a � r D C G� n r�+ nt e S aces Application N ?er:as- kecL Filed Fee Pd. Rec'd. Z A Map(s) Parcel(s) �. z a Date Amt. Date jBy RK/i r�- I AFYE66N 16beEBY MADE TO THE CITY -OF NORTHAMPTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: NIoV� 8T "pMAA$• Russell blyette Address 86 Riverbank Road, Northampton, Plass. 2. Owner of Property Luke F. Ryan Address w3 Dryads Green,. Northampton, Mass. 3. Applicant is: 00wner; MContract Purchaser; OLessee; DITenant in Possession. 4. Application is made graph 6 for: > -" tic/ VARIANCE from the provisions of Section VI page 6-4 Paragraph Zoning Ordinance of the City of Northampton. f _)SPECIAL PERMIT under the provisions of Section page of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Northampton. ❑OTHER: 5. Location of Property Northampton Norther/ p y being situated on theNortherly side of Riverbank Road XXMIK and shown on the Assessors' Maps, Sheet No. 25 BD Parcel(s) number 1 6. Zcne So C- 7. . 7. Description of proposed work and/or use; No additional building or additional use of 'Property npo_s, d,Ap 1 i tent now has a cabin on property W c e willcon nue= to WPIP_ nil 'no 'hoc 17�Aa ;— .-i._ ___i To Russell Myettel land to Luke V_ Rvan 8. Sketch plan attached; X]Yes FI 9. Site plan: I IAttched i.1Not Required 10. Set forth reasons upon which application is based: Applicant is owner of a cottages_ on ownerts_property and would like to purchase the lot on which h;_q to-uTage sits. 11. Abutters (see instructions; list on reverse side of form). 12. 1 he eby certify that information contained herein is true to the best of my knowledge. Date 7 g����� pplicant's Si natu _ �� ".1'1� MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor FROM: OPD RE: Airport DATE: 12/8/95 The brief history: City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall, 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 (413) 586-6950 (413) 586-3726 fax 1990 enforcement order issued by C.C. for bulldozing. No rifle range shown in photos. Guisto ordered to restore the land. 1995 Spring: Guisto received a permit from the C.C. to remove sumac for airport safety purposes. No mention was made of personal use of the area. 1995 Fall: B.I. and Cons. Officer were doing inspections in the Meadows and noted a firing range. The B.I. called Guisto who said he had a permit for such activity. Since a firing range is not allowed under zoning and the C.C. has no record of his request or mention of Personal use, B.I. told him it was not permitted. Mr. Guisto called Mike V. C.C. will review the matter on Monday night. The B.I., as Zoning Enforcement Officer, has authority to have this use stopped. (Safety issues are the overriding concern.) %ot6 by'CNNIE cioRtlClc CoFfey, .sof Wast V;rginia in c bed that a ewe ano,assembled:for the girl. the grow, which ltfs,� traveled 600 miles to .aid int' overished the overall total for seven major coDs on the beat, get guns 011 inn crimes Was down 2 perCellt fl-OWstrcmt and Pmt vlolent•,erlmtnals j 1994. Overall reported crime was behind bars " down in every region, led'bq a 4 percent decline in the Northeast Please see Crime, Page AS, j KUM CLWyer,.i b lash interf6re' neef Undermining a scheduled crafts fair and aviation day are just two of the charges leveled ogainst: city officials. By DAVID REID staff writer - Michael NORTHAMPTON - A lawyer Hamilton, for Northampton 'Airport owners 17, of " Richard Giusto and Russell Benja- , SundeTlend, min gipped just short yesterday .. carries; q of threatening . to sue . the city, claiming city officials publicly mattress impugned his clients' reputations, m a and interfered with their legiti= distribution mate business activities. center set Lawyer Leon, Malinofsky Jr. of . up by Franklin Northamptotl, i' �' F,a letter to Mayor Mary Ford zdat ii May.'6, blamed „:. County city officials for undermining a volunteersscheduled weekend crafts fair and $ri x at the contributing to the paltry turnout Berwind at yesterday's 6th Annual Kids' elementary. ” ` Aviation Day. Both events came under attack School in West Friday from Mayor Mary Ford, k' `Y Virginia. city counc ilors and City Hall staff for having been scheduled without special event permits from the r Photo GENE City Council or 'pernu is from the aoat is Conservatioil:Commission. Both the .6.` is fair and Kid's Y: A&ninistration cool to repeal of gas tax By JIM ABRAMS Associated Press WASHINGTON — Administra- tion officials showed little enthusi- asm yesterday for the repeal 1993 gas tax that Republicans plait to hiring before Congress this week. "I think it is going to be very Aviation were set for Saturday, but were not held because of rain. The crafts fair was canceled alto- gether, the Kid's Day put off until yesterday. A spokeswoman - for New England Air Connection,., the. airport flight school and charter; company that hosted Kid's 'Day, said gesterdaq.that the 700-800 -at=, tendance was far below that of previous years. On Friday, Ford said she shad considered canceling both evhnts because : no permits, had , is-- , sued, but chose instead to let them occur and to assess Giusto "the: maximum fines and penalties the law allows." She said ' special per- mits are required because the air- , port lies within a special conservancy, , zone in , the flood- plain. In his letter, Malinofskq -U% Ford that -members of. youi? ad- ministration" contacted dvent"at- tendees -in an effort to`brand*. Giusto as unethical and to disdu- ade them from. transactingh him. These communications Miy be based partly. on the lays ii's , assumption that it is illegal to"bon- - tract for an event for :which qo Pa Please see Lawyer, 52e'.,0 ' ing the gas tax it Mould be in the context of balancing the budget," added Labor Secretary Robert Reich on Fox's "News Sunday." Just as Democrats have won po- litical points by highlighting Re- publican opposition to a minimum wage rise, Republicans are now striving to link the 4.3 -cent tax in- crease, enacted as part of Presi- A__* l�t:..�....0 100,4 ,iPfieit seniors 0mim9inta computers, Paye C, Business Classified Comics CyberSense Editorial Living Local Obituaries Sports Television A2 D7 D14 A6 C4 51 as riot# .C7 ?961 t Union -News, Monday, May 6, 1996 H WON Laer: ; - � ", 'Ha'4ip.,, cr�.�icxze Continued from Page Al Permits exists, (but), they are slanderous per se,, "Interference with adv'anta-,,, genus, contract or, business rela- tions is a.remedial, tort-i'Mali. nofs I ky continued. j,,No, damages need be proved in pa.instance -of disparagement of one's trade 9r business reputati ' 11 ' 047 Malinofsky. also., A bulletChallenged Conservation Commission . ,, juriSdiction,�:,, over airport events, -stating that to his knowledge the airport is not lo-', cated in a wetland.;; e said "City, officials havw*rePeAted]Yrefused kameet withhis.cUents to the issue. He, said, Glusto Views, pu comments by c0nuldmion rep-' SeAtativos, - as "tendjng.,to rage' him In his reputation business,` in that they impute, to him an IntentionaL, disregard oU lawful '0.. Cited statements by Ford and Ward 3 City Council6rmarWiTyZ j reject mooko that they will reject all fuj,), Lure special event requests by Giusto ..Such P 71. the. city's zoning, WO be,illegal as t4i wrote' nofsky ..wrote. , action . b Crime: Overall Continued from Page Al "This is the,,first 91 In cities of more than'l million the impact_-,'� of. tj generation,� "id prof residents, overall reported crime. ' "fred Blumsteid of Para fell by 6 percent. Suburban coun.' ties,,and lon'Vniversj tYi "b6caus most mid-sized cities a soreported declines I "" but . rural V s auto such a$ bicycle theft Parts and :shoplift .Counties showed a 3 perpeuttin.. the crime., with, the :crease. i 1�? - .. Among violent crimes, murder., crinriinals.l., . 'kThe peak larcenists is" 15 or 16." I dropped the most _ � 8, Percent. Robbery was down 'r,'7'r„pe'rc_6At- glareand robbers :are .ol( rape 6 percent and �aggr,4 , (o ;other crime: join_6, on t.een.4g , amPeO ,assault 3 percent.” .1 Total, 'property crimes -(IrOPPed b ing�,swam muc. y' numbers folks .- ,of;6lder; I'percent, with auto '.,theft ,downfitof {'growing o the- ` biby, 6percent and burglary 5' cent. 7,ggeq4pdgivingu0crimg , 4 The only increase stem added. was in arce-, ny-theft --up I percent.," James Alan Fox" dean incl justice at NoRieast A 0111 O:.iIOSpitaFwar 0 Of'125 16*44i�` , th A 341'4 rom b4t. thi�i� hdiK ire, U11", were infected with AIDS doOVO a, blood donor w6 4ct�0, Crii"(rr 6` mc 7.Jokob. 'diii6so,'ri��*,�:);'��lf4my�Caii�ftm::—. RONAL I. h0i" wbo� must us pop nt 41, 00v mft6ts,,�� m ' " - - __ J have already r J J 4, Y, the latest bloW D6d'3unn1v 'Jii, EXHIBIT D ' LI1L'�T of X�h,M 4i �[:ss=c4aselts DL'PARTMZtNT OF BUZZ.DZNG INSPECTIONS 212 Main Street.* Municipal Building Northampton, Maas. 01060 NOTICE OF AND ZONING ORDINANCE VIOLATION ORDER TO CEASE, DESIST, AND ABATE Mr./Mrs./Ms. RICHARD GIUSTO/CITY AVIATION order. and all persons having notice of this As owner/occupant of the premises, located at 152 & 164 CROSSPATH RD./OLD FERRY RD, Assessor's Mdp Piot --•U� 1 -&71, and known as NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT You are hereby notified that you ar� in violation of5l e ,,CGit pf Northampton's ' ZONING ORDINANCE(s), ARTICLE(s) ` Pu• ? y5 IX , SECTION(s)9.3B PG. 9-2 � and are ORDERED this date —OCTOBER 7 1987 XIII to: 13.4 PG. 13-2 1• CEASE AND DESIST immediately, all functions connected with this violation, on or at the above mentioned premises. immary of olation YOUR PROPERTY IS IN Z• COMMENCE within permanently within ( ) hours, action to abate this days violation nmary of :ion to bate and if aggrieved by this order; to show cause as Co why you should not be required to do so, by filing with Clerkof the City of Northampton, a Notice of Appeal (specifying the grounds thereof) within thirty (30) days of the receipt of this order. If at the expiration of the time allowed, this violation has not been remedied, further action as the law requires shall be taken. By order, INSPECTOR OF BUIL INGS _{ I EXHIBIT D Lid of=f hM 4i DL'PARTML'NT OF BUUDDNG INSPECTIONS 212 Main Street ' Municipal Building Northampton, Mass. 01060 NOTICE ORDER OF AND TO ZONING ORDINANCE VIOLATION Mr./Mrs./Ms. RICHARD GIUSTO/CITY AVIATION order. CEASE, DESIST, AND ABATE , and all persons having notice of this As owner/occupant of the premises, located at 152 & 164 CROSSPATH R0./OLD FERRY RD, Assessor's Map 256D Plot _IJ & 71, and known as NORTHAMPTON•AIRPORT you are hereby notified that you eP�ar�� in violation of thity ?f orthampton's ' ZONING ORDINANCE(s), ARTICLE(s) SECTION( jX 5.Z . 5-y s)9.3B PG. 9-2 , and are ORDERED this date OCTOBER 7 1987 XIII to: 13.4 PG. 13-2 1. CEASE AND DESIST immediately, all functions connected with this violation, on or at the above mentioned premises. CONSTRUCTION AUCTION TO -BE HELD ON YOUR PROPERTY IS IN summary of VIOLATION OF THE NORTHAMPTON CITY ZONING ORDINANCE AS LISTED violation ABOVE. SPECIAL CONSERVANCY DISTRICT. 2. COMMENCE within ( ) hours, action to.abate this violation permanently within days summary of action to abate and if aggrieved by this order; to show cause as to why you should not be required to do so, by filing with Clerk of the City of Northampton, a Notice of Appeal (specifying the grounds thereof) within thirty (30) days of the receipt of this order. If at the expiration of the time allowed, this violation has not been remedied, further action as the law requires shall be taken. By order, 1'{ INSPECTOR OF BUIL INGS I .-� w FOR BOARD OF HEALTH VBD 02TLY Name of Establishment Business Address DATE RP.CEIVP.D: DATE raatrnD; NORTHAMPTON BOARD OP HR LTH 210 MAIN BTRERT NORTHAMPTON, MA 01080 (413) 886.6980 Date Mailing Address (If different) Name & Title of Applioant � `� i S -Q - O UJ N ( yZ A 1 ti n) m ► n- %f �-4, Address of Name of r (Ifdifferent) wuU A If corporation or partnership, give name, title & home address i5f offioers or Title partners. �noNrEs B Eir✓c po Name io. Home Address State of Name & Address of In00rporation Loom Agent Retail Food ❑ Annual ❑ Food Servioe Caterer Mobile Food Temporary Mobile Retail Residential Bed & Breakfast ❑ Seasonal ❑ TOTAL: Dates of Operation if not annual: 1/601-W7—_ /y�/9 Y Z/. %99� ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Water Source Sewage Disposal 'fi03 AtY of Federal r I; • .� '�,, Telephone # :.:i:ture Of IndiVidual or Corporate Of—floer Alice's Popcorn ✓ Y $50.00 016-20-6887 ✓ MOB- 01 S > 1 MOtsiiG FOOS)SERVERS 1996 Darn Good Dogs $50.00 028-30.4018 MOB- fN f I w,,, n+'°,�' Ding Dong Cart $50.00 R p 046-70.4575 MOB- L)& Ed's French Fries $50.00 029-20-0716 MOB. Hot Dog Cart $50.00 7 101.46-0558 t ' f MOB- L? q JOanie'a Twin Twist M1✓ 550.00 N 04-2452543 t MOB- Joanle's Twin TW)O'#2 $50.00 04-2452543�- MOB- Joanie's Twin T at A3 $50.00 04-2452543-' MOB- JOanle's Twin T t #4 $50.00 04 -2452543- MOB - Norm's Mobile Catering ✓ 550.00 04.3174053 MOB- DZ Riga-Bello's$501.0✓ 019-30-7163 MOB -0-3 River Queen (on Connecticut River) $50.00 031-44-2285 MOB - Steve's Hot Dogs 024.42-8247' MOB- 07 The Calico Kitchen #1 $100.00 (2 permits) 031-32.6723 MOBo7 The Calico Kitchen A2 / $100.00 (2 permits) .-� -• 031-32.6723 I MOB- 10 l sows% O)AS DoA,4 f7R ��1�/8z9/ � �rtj y•,�~9G mOls - S1ZY- Dohs I/ R444 ?/NGvaY bZg-,9,x-L/foo £3• 5__ I? -7G /Z !3 /0 /s /6 /7 /R !y ZO NORTHAMPTON CITY COUNCIL T& PORARY EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION Applicant: Q ABOAG SCOTTISH FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION Applicant's Address: P.O. Box 8P3, PALMER, MA 010o<9 Applicant's Status. (civic, non-profit, religious organization, etc. ) tc.) Non-profit • (educational)- Contact educational) Contact Person/Teleahone Jane Robitille 1-(4.13) 7R3 -,4,9F9 Fes$i gal Chairrson Sandy Trubounis 1-(419) 2 I-7250 ecretary: is aymon 1 1 q pej136 (p,E Name and Description of Event:WETERN MASSACHUSETTS HIGHLAND GAMES and CELTIC FESTIVAL - - - This event is an ethnic, cu ura es 1val and a e crevent .re a ing o ac ivi les a are is orica y and Curren ,y in igenous o co an otner ut:!Iulc Ianas & o mericans .I v W">U uctiCll u . Locat_oni NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT Old 'Ferrer Road, Northampton, MA Cwner oL Lccat=on i' different than AnDlicant (attach letter :ermiss'cn) Richard Giusto (co-owner) See letter attached o� Date(s)/Time o= =vent:Saturda;T - June 22, 1996, 9:OOAM to 5sOOPM open to the public. SeluP Friday 1/9 �eq�.teste�' Eight plyv state 91 F signace: (att-acn 2/9( dimensions) with inter - Remove 7-23/9F T~•a:iic cant_ol provisions/ Parking recuirements: Parking on site peri th nr1 n^1 parking arranFrE,A for on the M ORFS nrn rDit a[9 an She -r fs A c n� r+mpy, f rnnteg ^torl and rk a ent . -�_ - -- arre fpr r ffi r. nnntrnl Off ni rnnrt ai tra Vol untaars for on vs • to parking and traffic pton Po1,ne Dept has been notified of event ***Attach site plan;o snow_.n.g area in which event is to be held including location of (1) structures to be used for event, including temporary structures erected for event, (Z) exh'_bits%or displays (including vehicles, models, etc) if outside a permanent structure, (3) signs, (4) fencing or other crowd control and/or security devices, (5) signage, (6) pedestrian access and veh Gula= access/parking, (7) any Ot ;er rel eva%_ - a.; - _nforma�_ Date : April 24, 1 6' _ po icant sident Quaboag Scot tis Festival Assoc. APR 2 5 G% 310 CMR: DEP", OF ENVIRONMENTAL PIWT,,eTION 10.99: continued Doc; 99001496108 /5396/0324 06/11/19981331 4. ❑ The certificate shall be recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located. The Order was originally recorded on 5yi 149— (date) at the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds Book , Page 5. ❑ The following conditions of the Order shall continue: (Set forth any conditions contained in the Final Order, such maintenance or monitoring, which are to continue for a longer period.) Issued by Northampton Conservation Commiccion Signature(s) When issued by the Conservation Commission this Certificate must be signed by a majority of its members. a� On this // day of z" K.J 19%j' , before me personally appeared G - -i Afo — so wo -- —'to me known to be the person described in, and who executed, the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she L,`k%WpdAe as his/her free act and deed. Notary Public A �//�/'��,� My C mm. Expires Dec. 27, 20 2 Notary Public Detach on dotted line and submit to the My Commission Expires &4glu /7l, G."de� NorU4 y ft/iC A) W)q Comm. expo lac.;j To Northampton Conservation Commission Issuing Authority Please be advised that the Certificate of Compliance for the project at the Northampton Airport File Number has been recorded at the Registry of has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property on 19 _ If recorded land, the instrument number which identifies this transaction is If registered land, the document number which identifies this transaction is Signature Applicant AMSTs EWSgIRg,� � GISTEB NE L. DONOHUE and ^ .i Tft'A 4/1/94 310 CMR - 430 430 310 CMR: DEPARTMI,__' OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECT 10.99: continued 4. ❑ The certificate shall be recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located. The Order was originally recorded on (date) at the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds Book 3391 page 153 5. ❑ The following conditions of the Order shall continue: (Set forth any conditions contained in the Final Order, such maintenance or monitoring, which are to continue for a longer period.) Issued by Northampton Conservation Commission Ci onatnrek) When issued by the Conservation Commission this Certificate must be signed by a majority of its members. On this //{s day of -"4:z 19,A , before me personally appeared C. ,- Arv•, , to me known to be the person described in, and who executed, the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/sheuted to ame as his/her free act and deed tr�� •'.'�Y t',n+i1t. Fy,n*;rz D -m 27, 20(12 Notary Public My Commission Expires Detach on dotted line and submit to the Northampton Conservation Commission —AWW%� .................................................................................................................................................................................................................... To Northampton Conservation Commission Issuing Authority Please be advised that the Certificate of Compliance for the project at File Number has been recorded at the Registry of has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property on 19 If recorded land, the instrument number which identifies this transaction is If registered land, the document number which identifies this transaction is Signature Applicant and 4/1/94 310 CMR - 430 430 �1 iiQFCI�T 310 CMR: DEPARTNL-14T OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTEC r r,_JN t�u c� 10.99: continued DEP File No. 246- 181 (To be provided by DEP) Foran 8 Commonwealth City/Town Northampton of Massachusetts Applicant Northampton Airport, Inc. Certificate of Compliance Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 and The City of Northampton's Wetlands Protection Ordinance From No bnmyton f mservation Commission Issuing Authority Northampton Airport, Inc. Old Ferry Road, Northampton, MA 01060 TO (Name) (Address) - May 19, 1998 Date of Issuance Northampton Airport, Inc. This Certificate is issued for work regulated by any Order of Conditions issued to October 18, 1987 dated and issued by the Northampton Conservation (bmmisaion 1. C It is hereby certified that the work regulated by the above -referenced Order of Conditions has been satisfactorily completed. 2. ❑ It is hereby certified that only the following portions of the work regulated by the above -referenced Order of Conditions have been satisfactorily completed: (If the Certificate of Compliance does not include the entire project, specify what portions are included.) 3. - ❑ It is hereby certified that the work. regulated by the above -re er�%&U Order of Conditions was never commenced The Order of Conditions has lapsed and is therefore no longer valid. No future work subject to regulation under the Act may be commenced without filing a new Notice of Intent and receiving a new Order of Conditions. ......................................................................................................................................................................... (Leave Space Blank) 4/1/94 310 CMR - 429 429 310 CMR: DEPARTMh--.x.' OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECT l 10.99: continued 4. ❑ The certificate shall be recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located. The Order was originally recorded on 149 (date) at the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds Book , Page 5. ❑ The following conditions of the Order shall continue: (Set forth any conditions contained in the Final Order, such maintenance or monitoring, which are to continue for a longer period.) Issued by Northampton Conservation Commission When issued by the Conservation Commission this Certificate must be signed by a majority of its members. On this �� 1% _ day of X19 4i 19%x" ,before me personally appeared C r► "fa n /— , to me known to be the person described in, and who executed, the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she a %%edlt 6&4ne as his/her free act and deed. Notary Public My Comm. Expires Dec. 27,20n2 - Notary Public My Commission Expires Detach on dotted line and submit to the NorthamMn Conservation Co To Northampton Conservation Commission Issuing Authority Please be advised that the Certificate of Compliance for the project at the Northampton Airport File Number has been recorded at the Registry of has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property on 19 If recorded land, the instrument number which identifies this transaction is If registered land, the document number which identifies this transaction is Signature Applicant and 4/1/94 310 CMR - 430 430 LEON W. MALINOFSKY, JR. ATTORNEY AT LAW 182 MAIN STREET NORTHAMPTON, MA O 1 060 - 3104 TELEPHONE (4 13) 584-7950 EMAIL LWM @ MAP.COM FAX (4 1 3) 582-1865 27 June, 1997 Members of the Conservation Commission City of Northampton City Hall Re: Certification of compliance with orders of condition and request for certificates To the Honorable Commission: Please accept this letter as certification on behalf of my clients that the Northampton Airport, Inc., has fully complied with orders of condition as follows: #246-181, regarding runway sealant, Book 3391, Page 149.1 33'0v� j /Y,9 #246-190, regarding fuel tank removal; ook 3391, Page 153.2 3) 1/ /'-�) And we respectfully request Certificates of Compliance from the Commission expeditiously to enable our closing on Monday June 300' 1997 of a refinancing transaction. Yo s sincerely, Leon W. Malinofsky, Jr. X70 C'r— Y -b -t C- . o -F O r� P --y 1 This was accomplished years ago and is presumably known to the Commission. 2 The Fire Department witnessed the removal and installation of a new tank. 310 CZAR 10.99 Form 2 .„: Commonwealth of Massachusetts OEPmeNm 246— (ro oe awwa or oCP1 CIWTown Northa=ton Northampton Airport 0M PANUM Rho 3/13/91 Determination of Appiicabitity Massachusetts Wetiands Protection Act, G.L c. 131, X40 & NORTHAMPTON WETLANDS PROTECTION ORDINANCE From North=ron Conservation ommi cci n Issuing Authority Dick Guisto To Northampton Airport Same (Name of person making request) (Name of property owner) P.O. BOX #221 Andress Northampton, MA 01061 Address Same This determination is issued and delivered as follows: by hand delivery to person making request on (date) by certified mad, return receiot requested on March 26, 1991 (date) Pursuant to the authority of G.L c. 131, W, the Northa_ ren Conservation QmMi aci en an has csidered your request for a Determination of Appkmb&y and its supporting documentation, and has made the following determination (check whichever is aopiicabie): Location: Street Address Lot Number. ('KAP ID P - 1. Det The dondepositive: Th a be, which includes alUpart of the area described in your request is an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. Therefore, any removing, tiling, dredging or altering of that area requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. . 2. = The work described below, which includes all/Part Of the work'described in your reo~uesL is within an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act and will remove, fig. dredge or alter that area- There- fore, said work requires the fling of a Notice of Intent. Effective 11110/89 2-1 `dZ-Z •ut=gedt OUl PN U01SWWWOO u0llworJ00 iUl Ol I�JaAt1iD Ot1M1 JO piW pMItUN �Q WN iQ aWt1 ittllS ma X Own Map Adw d'�u1W 10100 f14110 mxft' ! P i1*D on eluWsuiJj Nj PN N{ 6wl1l; iilYCWeee iw tt1!M lYiWlJidiQ i41 01 As"'" U104 BAWD um Y1UlW ( m*ot ld � D OLE u! Pio!�ad m wJOj I 6ulpiSJiOn$ t inset of uot17i1Wd IMUS U040 Y3 ;o Pun Jo aw OMPUSO ISO SDM V 1WaW OUI &nl AWd •j1N10=ldit 40 UDniYlYuiliQ _ tui W1J<d�Q Wl IS�nt»l Ol ws11 JiW110 Deq! u AGDAU an .09111M $! Pwt �S t=4M Y! uM01 Jo jib Y;SIU j�S�Ji •YMO Wl 'lYp!IOdo �. �1JOM pisooWd i41 u714M coon ouil au1 6Y1L1nQi PYeI m JiYM1O'� 'ualeYWwlia s,w !W DLJ a7u11x1sst;o aleo iW MUM SJii� "All CM 0>� *aq� YOntlNtluiliQ sty j •suonslnCaJ JO SJMttW(q DY iW iwayaJ lou 5800 uONMJNWiIiQ SNIT '9aougwpJo 'Salr4MS 10001 JO a181S ta 7 'Mjo"l alj*CM ALUD Ni taw. BU44WAO WW; IUR*"o otlgnd nJMON sojidxa uo!ss!ww03 44 tNst •vL •Nvr :'alaxa NO1StS IVIN40 an tr • �•/ �' Onond J MVX0K -peep pue loe sal; lay/s!y Se awes ay; Kaa�t >R a noaxa oyN+ P� 'ut paquosap uosJad polnoaxe 414SMy 1Byl Pa6patmouXoe Pue ';uaturlJisw 61no6aJo; ayl 'P i aieadde ntieu0s�ad nn ayl aq of uou�i aw 01' zaTua9 PTAEQ P ;o Asp u�SZ !yl u0 aw alo;aq "16 6L uo z8 uolssiwwoo ua;enJasuoa ayl ;o nluu otew a nq pou6!s aq isnw uogeu!ualaa s!y1 (s)alr4eu6!S uoo 'A2'OX na Panssi uotss!wwOo uo!ieniasuoa :paJ!nosi Si lualut;o a3!1oN ou •suo!1etn6aJ aw sluawalmosi ayl slaaw u!aiayi Psq!�osap pue lod ayi u! DeMoads se'uol;dwaxa 6ulanott0; 841 10 d 'sJOM ayi souls inq ':od atu iepun uonoaloid of loatgnS s! lsenbei mon u! paquosap ease a1.tl b lualut;o ao!loN 2 ;0 Dull!; ayi aJlnbaJ lou saop oJN a!� 'aJo;aJayl ',od ayi jeoun uo!loalad of loatgnS Bard uB AM lou 11!m inq 'suo!letn6aJ all w pau!;ap se 'auoZ Jal:na aLU u!yl!M st lssnow anon w paquosap �tJonn ayl C £ a u lualut ;o ao!loN • uoT�Bpuno; BuT2sTxa uo azT3 0661 T Pgem8 P BuTPTTnq uo x3om zog ease leyi Ja1tB Jo 'a6oa�o 'Ill; 'anowaJ lou e 10 6uyl; a,41 aJtnbai lou saop dnn P!� 'alo;aJayl I sanoaJ Jnon u! paquosap XJOm 814 -LZ 9!M inq ,ov awjaou�} uo aloud of loatgn �� ,� •loy aw Jaoufl uolloalad of ioa(gnS Ears' ue lou s, lsanbei mon u! Paa=. SaP ea -B ayl l :ange6au s1 uo!leu!uualao s!yl •lualut ;o ao!loN a;o 6ugg 8111 SInbej moan p!es 'aJo;alayl 'lo`d ayl ea ue lana Mm Pug uo4et 'sool ayl u! Pouilep sE auoZ jam aUi Japun uolloalold 01 3oaicnS fib' uWi!m s! 'isonoei mon w PPaouosap Omayl do sJedntB sapnpw yolynn 'd►o;aq Paa!�sap )tJoM 841 £ NINE COPIES OF C `LETE FILING TO THE NORTHAMPTON "'14SERVATION COMMISSION ONE COPY OF 00MF\,_,1E ??LING TO DEP, Wetlands Divi.-, SPRINGFIELD 310 CMR 10.99 $20.00 CHECK PAYABLE T0: THE CITY OF NORTHAMPTON Form 1 OSP las No. 246- (To 4b-(To tw "vow Dy IEP) Commonwealth Cdylown- Northaamvton of Massachusetts �oa�tan, Request for a Determination of Applicability Mastsachusetlg Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 & NORTHAMPTON WETLANDS PROTECTION ORDINANCE 1. ],the undersigned, hereby request that the ., ,. Northampton Conservation Commission make a determination as to whether the area, described below, or work to be performed on said area, also described below, is subject to the jurisdiction of the W Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40. etlands 2. The area Is described as follows, (Use maps or pians, if necessary, to provide a description and the location of the area subject to this request) ATTACH LOCUS MAP SHOWING SITE LOCATION. Location: Street Address A'�,r�.� Lot Number: CV0 3. The work in said area is desk below. (Use adCitional` Y paper, if necessary, to describe the Proposed work.) ctc.p (p 'bur�i� `e (� ate- 0I�,e tip 0 (b apt , CWS, 'Ot >��e PAM Lo ( ��e1�(a `(%, g C�'10 gcz IWO -V�'4 -gaclv �06c,�, T�a -L 2- Fe *:T- 1.1 Effective 11/10/89 4. The owner(&) of the area If Ot the person making ttvs request, has been given written notification of this request on �1,,.�' ' ...._�......--�.�...(date) The name(s) and adtlrass(es) of the owner(s): 0 5. f have filed a oomolete copy Of this request with the. Depaftment Of Environmental Protection -- DEP Western Regional office State HouSe West, 4th Floor 436 Dwight Street Springfield, MA 01103 6. 1 understand that notification of this request will be placed in a focal newspaperat my expense In accor- Vance with Section 10.05(3) (b)1 of the regulations by the Conservation Commission and that I will be billed accordingly. Slgnatur le/ -I.- �1 Alc , Address All Tel.--��� — 2 1.2 MAR 13 '91 11:40 HUNTLEY ASSOCIATES _ 806 P02 1A.-C12- u.rya i NO,P•T�'tt�na ��" I c6.> ser op F uo e. his i; ', PLC* ,Dp ^4r HeSj r l) #A,V6-A i . i r � I COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT M.G.L. 0.131 $40 310 CMR 10.00 CERTIFICATIOM OF ZHERGZKCT , LOCATION OF WORK: street: r -e -r - h m AirpOrO city/town: ktL -r &=pAnn iiia 1. The applicant hereby requests the Issuing Authority (Conservation Commission or the Department of Environmental Protection) to certify the following project as an emergency project: (describe work to be allowed, and attach sunn1emental information if more. space is needed) 2. The project is necessary for the protection of the health and safety of the citizens of the Commonwealth bAcrset_�_ 3. The agency (or subdivision thereof) of the Commonwealth that has ordered the project to be performed is: 4. No work shall be allowed beyond that nec o abate the emergency. The date work shall be completed by: Not to exceed 30 days without written approval of the is o er of the Department of Environmental Pro . (signatur f applicant) da e) ----------------------------------------------- ----------------------------- On the basis of the above information, and after a site inspection, -the project described above (and in any supplemental information provided) is determined to be a certified emergency pursuant to 310 CMR 10.06. "ISSUING AUTHORITY: (Conservation Commission or DEP BY: mo"'=onl ❑ (if box is checked, see attached conditions) Date Issued: l 1 // e/`3 (Effective 8/14/92) i i APPLICATION FOR ENDORSEMENT ' OF FLAW BELIEVED NOT TO REQUIRE APPROVAL Lto 0 File one completed fora with the Planning board `4 and one copy with the City Clark in accordance with with requirements of. Section 3.02. --- To the Planning Board: The undersigned, believing that the accompanying plan of his property in the City of Northampton dots not constitute division _x1thin the meaning of the Subdivision Control Law, herewith submits said plan for ;a determination and endorsement that Planning Board approval under the Subdivision Control Taw is not required. Print cr type name. Signature X1854 �,�� P n n✓,ma car,., i ' Address -- 2. Owner � Prat o _ t�' f ' =el S' izr.at ire h�sress 3. Surveyor ALNiER HL 'TLEY, JR. & ASSOC. I'NIC. / rrint or type na:-e 125 PLEASANT STREET, NORTHA.�210 ;, !,*.k 011'D50 Addr ess ---Lead--or-p-roperty-reccr :ed in N 2-2SHIRE .C-OrN Y Re - Book Page SSS 5. Location and Description of Frcrerty: OF G2osSf�,g7%`� /�or41� 1;4-e of Sut-tcion March 6, 1985 Asst. City Clerk A4,f,1,j_14f",WC AA. A, a I/P - Sign ur 33 L Form 3 DEQE File No. (To be provided by DEQE) 0 U Commonweafth �` ^ �s c;tyRown Northampton of Massachusetts -� Applicant Northampton Airport, Inc. Notice of Intent Under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 and Application for a Department of the Army Permit. Part !: General information 1. Location: Street Address Northampton Airport off of old Ferry Road Lot Number Main Runway 2. Project: Type Runway Sealant Description The work which is to be done under the "Maintenance and Safety Program of the Massachusetts Aeronautics Commission,, will involve a double slurry seal of this Main Runway. (3600+ ft long x 50 ft wide = 20000 SY ). See below and Exhibits for s ecifics of the work 3. Registry: County Hampshire Current Book 2386 g Page 155 Certificate (If Registered Land) N/A 4. Applicant Northampton Airport, Inc. Tel 584-1860 Address Old Ferry Road, Northampton, MA 01060 5. Property Owner Northampton Airport, Inc.Tef. 584-1860 Address Old Ferry Road, Northampton, MA 01060 6. Representative Almer Huntley, Jr. & Associates, Inc. Tef 584-7444 Address 30 Industrial Drive East, Northampton, MA 01060 7. Have the Conservation Commission and the DEQE Regional Office each been sent, by certified mail or hand delivery. 2 copies of completed Notice of Intent, with supporting plans and documents? Yes ® No O 3-1 8. Have all obtainable permits, variances and Yes ® No approvals required by local by-law been obtained? Obtained: Applied For: Not Applied For; 9. Is any portion of the site subject to a Wetlands Restriction Order c. 1301§105? Yes 0 No ® Pursuant to G.L c. 131, §40A or G.L 10. Last ap plans and supporting documents submitted with this Notice of Intent. Identifying Number/Letter Title, Date Exhibit 1 Protect Description Exhibit 2 Technical Specifications Exhibit 3 Compensatory Storage Calculations Exhibit 4 Federal Insurance Rate Map Exhibit 5 Locus Map Exhibit 6 Layout and Construction Plan 11.�hibit 7 n Runway Plan and 'Compensatory Storage Area eg those resource areas within which work is proposed: (a) 0 Buffer Zone (b) Inland: O Bank* O Bordering Vegetated Wetland* O Land Under Water Body $ Waterway* (c) Coastal: O Land Under the Ocean • 0 Coastal Beach • O Barrier Beach O Rocky intertidal Shore • • 0 Land Under Salt Pond.- ond-0 13 Fish Run -- Land Subject to Flooding, ® Bordering 0 Isolated O I Designated port Area • 0 Coastal Dune 0 Coastal Bank 0 Salt Marsh • 0 Land Containing Shellfish • •Dicey to involve U.S. Army Corps of�•, �9 Pers concurrent jurisdiction. See General instructions for �9 Notice of Intent_ 3-2 Part Ih Site Description Indicate which of the following information has been provided (on a plan, in narrative description or calcula- tions) to dearly. completely and accurately describe eAsft site conditions_ IdenWykV �- Number/Letter (of plan. narrative or calculations) N/A Natural Features.- N/A eatures.N A Sods Vegetation 5, 7 Topography N/A Open water bodies (including ponds and lakes) 4, • � N /A Flowing water bodies (including streams and rivers) ' N/A Public and private surface water and ground water supplies on or within 100 feet of site 4' ' Maximum annual ground water elevations with dates and location of test Boundaries of resource areas checked under Part 1, item 11 above Other Man-made Features: 5 , 7 res (such as buildings, 6 � 7 Structures piers, towers and headwalls) , Drainage and flood control facilities at the site and immediately offthe site, including culverts and open channels (with inverts), dams and dikes ... Subsurface sewage disposal systems N/A Underground utilities 6, 7 Roadways and parking areas 6 Property boundaries, easements and rights-of-way. . Other Part Iih Work Description Indicate which of the following information has been tions to d provided (on a plan, in narrative description or calkuda- early, completely and accurately describe work proposed within each of the resource areas checked in Part 1, item 11 above. Identifying Number/Letter (of plan, narrative or calculations) Pianview and Cross Section of: 5 , 7 Structures (such as buildings, -, 6 , 7 Piers, towers and headwalls) Drainage and flood control facilities, including culverts and open channels (with inverts), N/A dams and dikes Subsurface sewage disposal systems & underground utilities 3& 7 Filling, dredging and excavating, 3 , 6 , 7 g, indicating volume and composition of material Compensatory storage areas, where required in accordance with Part III, Section 10:57 (4) of the regulations Other N/A Point Source Discharge Description of characteristics of discharge from point source (both closed and open channel), when point of discharge fails within resource area checked under Part 1, item 11 above, as supported by standard engineering calculations, -.data and g g plans, including - - but not limited to the following; 3-3 PER ..� I . Delineation of the drainage area contributing to the point of discharge; 2. Pre- and post -development peak run-off from the drainage area, at the point of discharge, for at least the 10 -year and 100 -year frequency storm; 3. Pre- and post -development rate of infiltration contributing to the resource area checked under Part I, item 11 above; 4. Estimated water quality characteristics of pre- and post -development run-off at the point of discharge. Part IV: Mitigating Measures 1. Clearly, completely and accurately describe, with reference to supporting plans and calculations where necessary: _ (a) All measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards set forth under each re- source area specified In Part If or Part 111 of the regulations; or (b) why the presumptions set forth under each resource area specified in Part If or Part Ill of the regula- tions do not apply. 0 Coastal Resource Area Type: M Wand Bordering Land Subject to Floodingldof�9rtdoerorits pPort documents Compensatory storage volumes will be provided as required 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 by 310 CMR Sec. 10.57 (4) (a) (1 and 2), for approximately 140 cubic yards of material to be, used in a double slurry seal to be applied to the airport's main runway. See Exhibits for complete description of the work, and the mitigating measures to be provided. J-4 Part V: Additional Information for a Department of the Army Permit 1. COE Application No. 2 Connecticut River (to be provided by COE) (Name of waterway) 3. Names and addresses of property owners adjoining your property: George F. Reynolds 56 Cross Path Road Northampton, MA 01060 4. Document other project alternatives (i.e., other locations and/or construction methods, particularly those that would eliminate the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters or wetlands). 5. 8%" x 11 'drawings in planview and cross-section, showing the resource area and the proposed activ- ity within the resource area. Drawings must be to scale and should be clear enough for photocopying. Certification is required from the Division of Water Polution Control before the Federal Certification may be obtained by permit can be issued. contacting the Division of Water Portion Control. l Water Street Boslon. Massacni.setts 02108. Where the activity will -take place within the area under the Massachusetts approved Coastal Zone Management Program. the applicant certifies that his proposed activity complies with and will -be conducted in a manner that is oor>si vnt with the approved program. Information provided will be used in evaluating the application for a permit and is made a matter of public record through issuance of a public notice. Disclosure of this information is voluntary. haAever i rwm,saN information is not provided. the application cannot be processed nor can a permit be issued. I herebycern under the certify pains and penalties of perjury that the foregoing Notice of Intent and accompanying Plans, documents and supporting data are PuelrMkpomplete, to the best of my knowledge. �.� �. Signature ofAppli ;North mpton Airport, Inc. Date �ifl1 d Giustq,0,4resident Signature of Applicant's Representative liner Huntley, Jr. & pate Associates, Inc., Mark B. Darnold NED FORM 100 (TEST), "E=eeption to ENC Form 4345 approved by HQUSACE. 8 Moy 1982". 1 MAY 82 "this document contains a joint Department of the Army and State of Massaehusette appliestion for a permit to obtain permission to perform activities in United States waters. The Offlee Of Management end Budget (OMB) bee approved those questions required by the US Army Corps of Engineers. OMB Number 0702-0038 end expiration date of 30 September 1983 applies•'. Thia statement will be set in 8 point type. 3-6 EXHIBIT #1 Description of the Proposed Double Slurry Seal of the Main Runway at the Northampton Airport The Northampton Airport in conjunction with the Massachusetts Aeronautical Commission is proposing to slurry seal their main runway this fall, as part of the States Airport Safety and Maintenance Program. Technical specifications for the work are attached hereto. Generally, a latex modified asphalt is mixed with a uniformly graded sand to form a slurry mix which is spread in two coats over the existing pavement with a spreader box and squeegee. The process is very similar to sand sealing a typical driveway with commercially available mixes, and hand squeegees. The maximum aggregate size of the sand is about 1/8 of an inch. The two coat application, therefore, will result in a total thickness of less that 1/4 of an inch. The total project will cover approximately 20,000 square yards, the size of the existing surfaced runway, and will ultimately ._ involve the placement of approximately 140 cubic yards of material. The elevation runway to be sealed ranges from 119 feet at its southeasterly end to about 123 feet at its center. Since the 100 year flood elevation for this site is about 125 ft, a Notice of Intent, and compensatory flood storage is required by the Wetlands Protection Act. In accordance with the regultions, the compensatory storage is provided at the same elevation at which the fill occurs. �- (See Exhibit #3 for quantity calculations.) All material removed to provide this storage will be properly disposed of off the site. Although erosion of the disturbed areas will be minimal due to the grade of the land, that area will be planted this fall in hopes of establishing vegetation before winter. The work on the runway will be performed by Sealcoating, Inc. of Hingham, Mass. The grading work will probably be done by M.J. Loomis of Easthampton, the con- tractor who will be doing the proposed hanger earthwork. The tentative starting date for both the sealcoating and hanger construction is mid October. M4-5 ALMER HUNTLEY, JR., & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS C. k1 -1Q3 E T TS -4-1 PROJECT ITEMS 4 ASPHALTIC EMULSION SLURRY SEAL IL „^ DESCRIPTION 4.1.1 This work shall consist of a two -course application of latex modified asphalt, aggregate, and water slurry applied on a prepared underlying course or existing wearing course in accordance with these Specifications and shall conform to the dimensions and typical cross sections shown on the Drawings and with lines and grades established by the Engineer. MATERIALS 4.2.1 MINERAL AGGREGATE The mineral aggregate shall meet the designated gradation given in Table 1. The test for gradation shall be made in accordance with AASHTO T 27. Table 1: Requirements for -Gradation of Aggregate Type I -First Course Type II - Second Course Sieve Designation* Percentage by Weight Percentage by Weight (square openings) Passing Sieves Passing Sieves 3/8 -inch (1 cm) 100 No. 4.(4.75 mm) 100 90 - 100 No. 8 (2.36 mm) 90 - 100 65 - 90 No. 16 (1.18 mm) 65 - 90 45 - 70 No. 30 (600 mm) 40 - 60 30 - 50 No. 50 (300 mm) 25 - 42 18 - 30 No. 100 (150 mm) 15 - 30 10 - 21 No. 200 (75 mm) 10 - 20 5 - 15 Asphalt content percent 10 - 16 7.5 - 13.5 dry aggregate Pounds of aggregate 6 - 10 per square yard 10 - 15 The final gradation decided on within the limits designated in the table shall not vary from the low limit on one sieve to the high limit on adjacent sieves, or vice versa. The mineral aggregate shall consist of sound and durable crushed stone or crushed stone and rock dust, and shall be free from dirt, organic matter, clay balls, adherent films of clay, dust, or other objectionable matter. The aggregate shall contain no free water and shall be nonplastic as determined by ASTM D 423 and D_424. Aggregate retained on the No. 50 sieve shall be 100 percent crushed. Material passing the No. 50 sieve shall be 90 percent crushed. 72-9 _ ALMER HUNTLEY, JR., & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS TS -4-2 Care shall be exercised to prevent segregation of the aggregate in storage and handling; if segregation occurs, the material shall be reblended prior to mixing to reduce segregation to the minimum. The aggregate shall be mixed -with the designated emulsion. As determined visually, the total area of the aggregate on which the bituminous film is, retained shall be 95 percent or more. If stripping occurs, the aggregate shall be rejected or treated with the proper antistripping agent to meet this requirement. When tested by AASHTO T 176, the aggregate blend shall have a sand equivalent of not less than 45. When tested 'in accordance with ASTM C 131, the aggregate shall show a loss of not more than 35 percent. 4.4.2 FILLER If filler, in addition to that naturally present in the aggregate, is necessary, it shall be nonplastic inert material such as portland cement, limestone dust, or other suitable material, and it shall meet the require- ments -of ASTM D 242 and shall be used in the minimum required amounts. The filler shall be considered a part of the blended aggregate. 4.2.3 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL The bituminous material shall be an emulsified asphalt, Grade CSS -1h, conforming to AASHTO M 208. The viscosity of the emulsion shall be 20-100, and penetration grade of the base asphalt shall be 40-90. Emulsion for latex modified slurry seal should be 150 degrees to 160 degrees Farenheight before latex is added. The manufacturer shall submit evidence of previous successful use for the intended purpose to the Engineer for approval. The manufacturer and the Contractor shall certify to the Owner that the latex emulsion is compatible with the aggregate to be used. 4.2.4 WATER All water used in the slurry mixture or fog spray shall be potable, free from harmful soluble salts, and compatible with the latex in the modified emulsion. 4.2.5 TACK COAT The tack coat shall consist of one part of to the type specified for the slurry seal water, depending on the condition of th directed by the Engineer. 4.2.6 LATEX ADDITIVE emulsified asphalt conforming and three to five parts of e underlying surface and as The latex additive shall be a cationic type similar to Ultrapave 65k as manufactured by Textile Rubber & Chemical Co., Dalton, Georgia or equal, and shall conform to the following Specifications: 72-9 ALMER HUNTLEY, JR., Sr ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS All methods employed in performing the work and all equipment, tools, and machinery used for handling the material and executing any part of the work shall be subject to the approval of the Engineer before the work is started, and whenever found unsatisfactory they shall be changed and improved as required. All equipment, tools, machinery, and containers used must be kept clean and maintained in a satisfactory condition. Pressure distributors used for application of the diluted asphaltic emulsion tack coat shall be self-propelled, equipment with pneumatic tires, and capable of uniformly applying 0.05 to 0.15 gallon per square yard (0.23 to 0.65 litre per square meter) of the diluted emulsion over the required width of application. Distributors shall be equipped with tachometers, pressure gauges, and volume -measuring devices. . Theslurry mixing machine shall be a continuous -flow mixing unit capable of accurately delivering a predetermined proportion of aggregate, water, and asphalt emulsion to the mixing chamber and to discharge the thoroughly mixed product on a continuous basis. The aggregate shall be pre -wetted immediately prior to mixing with the emulsion. The mixing unit of the mixing chamber shall be capable of thoroughly blending all ingredients together. No excessive mixing will be permitted. The mixing machine shall be equipped with an approved fines feeder that provides an accurate metering device or method to introduce a pre- determined proportion of mineral filler into the mixer at the same time 72-9 ALMER HUNTLEY, JR., & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS TS -4-3 Type of Latex Cationic Monomer Ratio, Butadiene/Styrene 76/24 Solids Content, X 61 Solids Content, lbs/gal 5.0 Coagulum on 80 mesh screen, max % 0.1 Mooney Viscosity of Polymer (ML 100 4 @ 212 degrees F) min pH of latex 5 Surface Tension, dynes/cm 32 Brookfield Viscosity, cps 3000 (Model RVT, #3 Spindle @ 20 RPM) ILThe latex modified emulsion slurry seal shall have two percent by weight of latex additive added to the emulsion at the plant. The manufacturer will certify the amount and compatibility of the latex modified emulsion with the aggregate and water to be used. CONSTRUCTION METHODS 4.3.1 WEATHER LIMITATIONS The asphaltic emulsion slurry seal coat shall not be applied when the weather is foggy, when rain threatens, or when atmospheric or pavement temperature is below 45 degrees F. (7 degrees C), unless otherwise directed by the Engineer. 4.3.2 EQUIPMENT AND TOOLS All methods employed in performing the work and all equipment, tools, and machinery used for handling the material and executing any part of the work shall be subject to the approval of the Engineer before the work is started, and whenever found unsatisfactory they shall be changed and improved as required. All equipment, tools, machinery, and containers used must be kept clean and maintained in a satisfactory condition. Pressure distributors used for application of the diluted asphaltic emulsion tack coat shall be self-propelled, equipment with pneumatic tires, and capable of uniformly applying 0.05 to 0.15 gallon per square yard (0.23 to 0.65 litre per square meter) of the diluted emulsion over the required width of application. Distributors shall be equipped with tachometers, pressure gauges, and volume -measuring devices. . Theslurry mixing machine shall be a continuous -flow mixing unit capable of accurately delivering a predetermined proportion of aggregate, water, and asphalt emulsion to the mixing chamber and to discharge the thoroughly mixed product on a continuous basis. The aggregate shall be pre -wetted immediately prior to mixing with the emulsion. The mixing unit of the mixing chamber shall be capable of thoroughly blending all ingredients together. No excessive mixing will be permitted. The mixing machine shall be equipped with an approved fines feeder that provides an accurate metering device or method to introduce a pre- determined proportion of mineral filler into the mixer at the same time 72-9 ALMER HUNTLEY, JR., & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS TS -4-4 ILand location that the aggregate is fed. The fines feeder shall be used whenever added mineral filler is a part of the aggregate blend. The mixing machine shall be equipped with a water pressure system and fog - type y spray bar adequate for complete fogging of the surface preceding IL spreading equipment with an application of 0.05 to 0.10 gallon per square yard (0.23 to 0.42 litre per sq.m). Sufficient machine storage capacity to mix properly and apply a minimum of 5 tons (4500 kg) of the slurry shall be provided. Proportioning devices shall be calibrated prior to placing slurry seal. Attached to the mixing machine shall be a mechanical -type squeegee distributor equipped with flexible material in contact with the surface to prevent loss of slurry from the distributor. It shall be maintained to prevent loss of slurry on varying grades and crown by adjustments to assure uniform spread. There shall be lateral control device and a flexible strike -off capable of being adjusted to lay the slurry at the specified rates of application. The spreader box shall have an adjustable width. The box shall be kept clean, and built-up asphalt and aggregate on the box will not be permitted. The use of burlap drags or other drags shall be approved by the Engineer. 4.3.3 CLEANING EXISTING SURFACE Prior to placing the tack coat and slurry seal coat, the surface of the pavement shall be clean and free from dust, dirt, or other loose foreign matter, grease, oil, or any type of objectionable surface film. When directed by the Engineer, the existing surface shall be swept with hand brooms or power sweepers or cleaned with a power blower. When required, the pavement shall be flushed with pressure streams of water. It may be necessary to clean the pavement with a strong caustic solution., in which case the residue from this treatment shall be flushed and washed with pressure streams of water taking extreme care that all caustic is removed from the surface. 4.3.4 APPLICATION OF BITUMINOUS TACK COAT Following the preparation for sealing, application of the diluted asphaltic emulsion tack coat shall be made by means of a pressure distributor of approved type and shall be made at the pressure and in the amounts between 0.05 and 0.15 gallon per square yard (0.23 to 0.65 litre per sq. m) as directed by the Engineer. The tack coat shall be reasonably dry before the initial slurry course. 4.3.5 COMPOSITION OF MIX The amount of asphalt emulsion to '- be blended with the aggregate, within the limitations of Table 1, shall be as determined by the emulsion and latex manufacturer. The Contractor shall submit certification of the compatibility of the material and of the mix intended for use at least 2 weeks prior to application of the slurry mixture. The modified latex shall be added to the asphalt emulsion at the refinery. pon request, additional- same es of materials s e u s e to the Engineer during 72-9 ALMER HUNTLEY, JR., & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS TS -4-5 construction, and the amount of asphalt emulsion shall be subject to change as directed by the Engineer. The rate of application shall be as specified in pounds of dry aggregate per square yard. 4.3.6 APPLICATION OF SLURRY SEAL COAT Care shall be taken not to overload the spreader box, which shall be towed at a slow and uniform rate not to exceed 5 miles (8 k) per hour. The action of the squeegee in the spreader box shall permit free flow of the slurry into all surface voids and cracks. A sufficient amount of slurry shall be fed to the box to keep a full supply against the width of the squeegee. The mixture shall not be permitted to overflow the front sides of the spreader box. Adjacent lanes, except for lanes in which two or more boxes are used in tandem in placing the slurry, shall not be sealed until at least 2 hours have elapsed between the placing of one lane and that of the adjacent lane. Adjacent lanes shall be lapped at the edges of a minimum dimension which will provide complete sealing at the overlap. After the final application of slurry, the surface shall be rolled with a rubber tipped roller a minimum of 4 times at 50 psi. When sealing extremely short lanes, the waiting period may be omitted if the adjacent lane can be sealed before the emulsion in the previously sealed lane has broken and started to cure. The fresh mix shall be protected by barricades and markers and permitted to dry for 4 to 24 hours depending on weather conditions. In areas where the spreader box cannot be used, the slurry shall be applied by means of hand squeegees. Any joints or cracks that are not filled by the slurry mixture shall be corrected by use of hand squeegees. Upon completion of the work, the seal coat shall have no holes, bare spots, or cracks through which liquids or foreign matter could penetrate to the underlying pavement. The finished surface shall present a uniform and skid -resistant appearance satisfactory to the Engineer. All wasted and unused material and all debris shall be removed form the site prior to final acceptance. 4.3.7 EMULSION MATERIAL CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITIES The Contractor shall furnish a manufacturer's certified report for the emulsion shipped for the work. The report shall be delivered to the Engineer. The manufacturer's certified report for the emulsion shall not be interpreted as a basis for final acceptance. All such reports shall be subject to verification by testing samples of the emulsion and latex as received for use on the project. METHOD OF MEASUREMENT 4.4.1 The unit of measurement for slurry seal or slurry seal latex modified shall be the square yard. The yardage to be paid for shall be the number of square yards of double slurry seal complete in the accepted work. 72-9 ALMER HUNTLEY, JR., & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS TS -4-6 BASIS OF PAYMENT 4.5.1 Payment will be made at the contract unit price per square yard for "Double Slurry Seal Latex Modified." This price shall be full compensa- tion for furnishing all materials and all preparations, mixing, and applying these materials, and for all labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals necessary to complete the work. Payment will be made under: 4 - Double Slurry Seal Latex Modified - per square yard. AASRTO Standards Referenced in Section 12 Number Title •M 208 Cationic Emulsified Asphalt. t. T 27 Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates T 176 Plastic Fines in Graded Aggregates and Soils by Use of the.Sand Equivalent Test. ASTM Standards to Referenced in Section 12 Number Title C 131 Resistance to Abrasion of Small Size Coarse Aggregate by Use of the Los Angeles Machine. D 242 Mineral Filler for Bituminous Paving Mixtures. D 423 Liquid Limit of Soils. D 424 Plastic Limit and Plasticity Index of Soils. ` D 1250 Petroleum Measurement Tables. j 72-9 ALMER HUNTLEY, JR., & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS �x�rBLr � Almer Huntley Jr. & mcs. Inc. JOB Z .,o - o ---4 - 90 Surveyors - Engineers - Lands�ie Architects SHEET NO. OF 30 Industrial Drive NORTHAMPTON, MA 01061 CALCULATED BYf G6 DATE (413) 584.7444 CMFCKe-n aev r. V y AOOm2w, lac. Galen. Mea oun. Almer Huntley Jr. ,.soca. inc. SOB z - e) 90 Surveyors - Engineers - Lanh6pe Architects SHEETNO.- OF -(f- 30 Industrial Drive NORTHAMPTON, MA 01061 CALCULATED BY DATE (413) 584-7444 CHECKED BY DATE ar�c a�Z U ....:...i�Z_....._.......................................... .............. ............ .1&e..._s........................._'................................... AF, ..._ 3 _Z..........................i............ .............. ............. ....... .... 48b.." _Z - .i � ............................. .........._....- 7...e z..�,........................................................... ..._.....a......� �'............ ._............ ............ _.........................._o................. --... ...... .. ... ...... ............. ...... ... ...... .... ...:....... .............. ..._................................................8y......... ._....... S ... ... .....�..__.. .y........ ......... ....................:..............:....... _..... .... ...... _ ... .._:........ - ...... ..... ................_ ....._: .. _. .......... :............. ..........._:............ ,........... .............. :............. . _.......... ..................... .... ....:........: .......... ............. :................ ......... ..:............. .............. ..._........'............. . .... .. .................. ..... .... ......... ..... ._.. .- ...... ...... ..... _ ..... Almer Huntley Jr. & " rocs. Inc. Surveyors - Engineers - Land-4ie Architects 30 Industrial Drive NORTHAMPTON, MA 01061 (413) 584-7444 JOB Zf U —Ojc:r-7 SHEET NO. 3 OF CALCULATED BY ` DATE - CHECKED BY DATE !!!f SCALE ........... ..�..........� ... Dom/ \.... ... ...i........._ ............. ............ .i..._.y... 1 .............. x�N w �a�,c -2. Via: 7:3 .............../ ......... ............ .... .. .............. .. o... .... .... .... /S .. .. ...... ... . ..... S l D ? .........................................4............ ....... . .,r�.......,.... ...... ..,Z..p................... Z .......... ...... . .......................'5;............;........................,3..0,.............................._ ...:............. .... . ................. .... .... ....... ._I..................... 4g ..........;./..... ..0.--..I. �.......................................... 2 ,� ............ ......._. _ ............ ...... _'7J ... ..... ..... ..... ...... .... ......................... ................Ife ................. ... ....... .......... d .... ......... ...:........:.... ? ........... .... ...... i zZ .. 71 a..� ... ... ..... ........ ....... 1 S: _. ................................. .....; .......: .. ..... ..... ...... ........ ._ ._..._............ : ,., Fmm 2&1® Im. &VOL Ms 01471. i. RUSSELL SYLVA Commissioner JOHN J. HIGGINS nal Environmental Engineer MIA& /3') 78.S :5327 October 20, 193* 7 .his Department is in receipt of the following application filed in accordance with the letlands Protection Act, General Laws Chapter 131, Section 40 ("The rct")_ 4AME NIORTHr'U4PTON AIRPORT, INC. OLD FERRY ROAD°y' NORTHAMPTON, MA. 01060 OCT 2 3 1987 • OFFICE OF PLANNING )WNER(S) OF LAND Same as above AND DEVELOPMENT ,ITY/TOWN;: Northampton LOCATION: Northampton Airport, Old Ferry' -Road Chis project has been given the following Wetlands File Number in accordance with the %ct, 246-131 Please refer to this Pile number wben making any- fu communications with this oTfice. Che following information is missing And must be orwar e o this office for a complete Ming in accordance with the Act and the Regulations 310 CMR 10.00, GI -2. ' See attached.sheet ( ) Two .(2) copies of a completed 2:otice of Intent (Form 3 of Sect. 10.99) or Abbreviated Notice of Intent (Form 4 of sect 10.99), whichever is applicable. ( ) Two (2) copies of plans, supporting calculations, and other documentation necessary to completely describe the proposed work and mitigating measures. ( ) Two (2) copies of plans -showing compliance with Title 5 of the State Environ- mental Code, 310 C14R 15.00, if applicable, i.e., whenever a subsurface sewage disposal system is involved. (See part 1, Sect. 15.02 (5) of the Regulations_) ( ) Two (2) copies of an 8'1 x 11" section of the USGS quadrangle map of the area containing sufficient information for the Conservation Commission and the Department to locate the site of the work.. ( ) Plans should delineate all site areas subject to protection under 310 CMR 10.02(1)(�� Q) Plans and supporting documentation should indicate how the proposed work meets the requirements under 310 CMR 10.54 -10.57 for those areas subject to above that will be altered by the proposed work. ( ) Application has been forwarded to the Division of Waterways to determine if a Chapter 91 license or permit is required_ A decision will be issued by the Division of Waterways within 21 days.. ( ) Application will be forwarded to the Division of Waterways when the above required information is submitted_ cc: Northampton Conservation Commission Almer Huntley & Associates, Inc. SEE REVERSE SIDE NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC. FILE a 246-131 Addendum Please note: Any future applications of sealant will require a new filing. '16 How will toxic substances washed from the runway (during the cleaning process) be prevented from entering any possible adjacent wetland resource areas? Will these substances affect groundwater. quality? Form 5 r `.i Commonwealth of Massachusetts OEOE File No. F2 46-190 (To be WOVKded by OEM City/Town Northampton Northampton Airport, Inc.....____ APPM=t Order of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act G.L. c.1319 §40 From Northam -pt in Conservation Commission Fdexf .4 110t lzeraew'l F"1141 p#'s Northampton Airport Inc. same To (Name of property owner) (Name of Applicant) Address PO Box 221, Northampton, MA 01061 Addresssame This Order is issued and delivered as follows: (date) C1 by hand delivery to applicant or representative on M—X by certified mail, return receipt requested on January 6, 1988 (date) This project is located at Northampton Ai ort Cross Path Rd. Hampshire County The property is recorded at the Registry of Book 2789 _Page 316 Certificate (if registered) The Notice of Intent for this project was filed on November 2 1987 (date) The public hearing was closed on November 9, 1987 - (fig) Findings The Northampton Conservation Commission has reviewed the above -referenced Notice of Intent and plans and has held a public hearing on the project. Based on the information available to the Conservation Commission at this time, the Conservation Commission has determined that the area on which the proposed work is to be done is significant to the following interests in accordance with the Presumptions of Significance set forth in the regulations for each Area Subject to Protection Under the Act (check as appropriate): ❑ Public water supply ❑ Private water supply $3 Ground water supply Effective 11 /1 /87 ❑ Flood control ❑ Storm damage prevention x® prevention of pollution 5-1 ❑ Land containing shellfish ❑ Fisheries ❑ Protection of wildlife habitat , ........ Therefore, the Conservation Commission hereby finda that the following conditions are necessary, in accordance with the Performance Standards set forth in the regulations, to protect those inter- ests checked above. The Conservation Commi ss ion orders that ail work shall be performed in accordance with said conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above. To the extent that the fol- lowing conditions modify or differ from the pians, specifications or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall control. General Conditions 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein, and with all related statutes and other regulatory meas- ures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 2. This Order does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges: it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal. state or local statutes, ordinances. by-laws or regulations. 4. The work authorized hereunder shad be completed within three years from the date of this Order unless either of the following apply: (a) the work is a maintenance dredging project as provided for in the Act: or (b) the time for completion has been extended to a specified date more than three years, but less than five years, from the date of issuance and both that date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth in this Order. 5. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or more perioda of up to three years each upon application to the issuing authority at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the Order. c ' 6. Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill, containing no trash, refuse, rubbish or de- bris. including but not lknited to lumber, bricks, plaster, wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe, tires, ashes, refrigerators, motor vehicles or parts of any of the foregoing. 7. No work shall be undertaken until ad administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed or, if such an appeal has been filed, until all proceedings before the Department have been completed. 8. No work shad be undertaken until the Final Order has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In;4he case of registered land, the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. The recording information shad be submitted to the Commission on the form at the end of this Order prior to commencement of the work. 9. A sign shad be dlapiayed at the site not less than two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the words, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering, Fie Number 246-190 10. Where the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering is requested to make a determination and to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shad be a party to ad agency proceedings and hearings before the Department. 11. Upon completion of the work described herein, the applicant shad forthwith request in writing that a Certificate of Compliance be issued stating that the work has been satisfactorily completed.<==' 12. The work shad conform to the following plans and special conditions: 5-2 Plans: Title el tank replacement (as own in plan attached to NOV Dated Signed and Stamped by: On File with: ,cia3 Conditions (Use additional paper if necessary) All construction areas small be restored to original condition or better upon completion of the project, including vegetation; No areas within the 100 year floodplain nor within 100 feet of a wetland area, as defined in Chapter 131, Section, M.G.L., shall be permissable disposal sites, unless otherwise approved by the Conservation Commission; Excavated material and topsoil stockpiles shall be located and stabilized so as to mini+M ze washing into wetland areas or waterways; Adequate measures shall be taken to prevent erosion and siltation of all disturbed areas; 5)This Order of Conditions small apply to any successor in interest or successor in control; Members and agents of the Conservation Commission shall have the right to enter and inspect the premises to evaluate compliance with the Conditions and to require the submittal of any data deemed necessary by the Commission for that evaluation; (if checked) Upon completion of the project, the Applicant shall submit a statement from the Project Engineer that all work has been done in conformance with the provisions of the approved Order of Conditions. ( ) YES (XI .w ............................................................................................... (Leave Space Blank) 5-3A ial Conditions (continued) DEQE File No. 246- 190 The Applicant small notify the Conservation Commission, in writing, as to the date that work will be commencing on the project. Said written notification must be received by the Commission no sooner than ten (10) days and no later than seven (7) days prior to the commencement of the approved activity. �(if checked) The Applicant shall complete and execute the attached ATTAC@MNT "A"/NOTICE OF POSSIBLE WETLANDS RESTRICTIONS UNDER M. G.L. C. 131, S.40 relative to this project on this A ar ce l )Said ATTAC19IMT "A" shall be attached to, become a part of, and shall be filed with this Order Of Conditions at the Registry of Deeds. The Applicant shall return a copy of the completed and notarized ATTACME T "A" to the Conservation Commission when the bottom portion of Page 5-4A of this Order of Conditions Of Conditions' is returned. ({)J YES ( ) NO I The applicant shall provide a Performance Guarantee for a system that would contain a fuel spill of up to 50 gallons at the fueling pad. 5-3B Issued By Northampton Conservation Commission This Order must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission. On this 18th day of December 1 g 87 before me personally appeared Ralph Emrick , to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she executed the same as his/her free asci and deed. WL„?✓'Y NTAZZA Notary public My commission expires My COMMISSION EXPIRES OC T OSER 24,1991 The applicant. the owner. any person aggrieved by this Order, any owner of land abutting the land upon which the proposed work is to be done of any ten residents of the city or town In which such land is located are hereby notified of their right to request the Department of Environmental Oualib tcngineering lo issue a SuOe �. ixovidkW the raqusat is made by cartltled mail or ttsrtd delivery to the Department within ten days from the date of Issuance of this Order. A copy of the taquest shall at the some time be sent by cerfffwd mad or hand delivery to Ute Conservation Commission and the applicant. Detach on dotted llneand submit loth* Northampton Conservation rnMM s s icpior to commencement of work. To Northampton Conservation Commission - Issuing Authority please be advised that the Order of Conditions tot the project I File Number 246— 190 has been recorded at the Registryof Re edq«HamP `t" re """ r and has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property in accorda%l with General pCondition a on t g it recorded land, the instrument number which identifies this transaction is It registered land, the document number which identities this transaction Signature Applicant . 5-4A 5 A 'Pomp 4,0osmov& F. o �' " - S O n DJ 7 A0 3c '7� o o Q X ter -o �A CC A 1+ City Jf c4iof,nz <S-totz Northampton Airport P.O. Box 221 Northampton, Massachusetts 01061 413/584-1860 November 2, 1987 Northampton Airport, Inc. proposes to: A. Install one 10,000 gallon Double Walled Cathodic protected Aviation fuel tank with all associated piping, fuel pumps, hose and cement pada; underground except for venting and fill station which would be mounted on or through the top cement pad. B. Remove two underground 4,000 gallon steel tanks, pumps, piping, hoses, and anything else associated with the old system from the airport and disposed of in accordance with current rules and regulations enforced by the DEQE and local authorities. 1. Any fill from the new fuel tank system will be used to fill the hole that the old tanks create. Any excess will be removed from the flood plain. The new fuel tank system will be level with the surrounding grounds except .for the pump housing and venting. 2. The new fuel tank system will be relocated to a less congested and more isolated area of the airport. Electricity to the system will be run underground by a licensed electrician. No other utilities will be needed. 3. According to the local Fire department, a double walled tank is not required as of this time. We have decided to install one at a considerable expense over single wall tanks (approximately 60%) for the protection of the surrounding area being so close to the river (approx. 1,000 feet). These tanks have a 30 year warranty on material and workmanship. The tank will also be pressure tested on site before installation to insure against damage during transit. 4. The FAA has approved this system. The Massachusetts Aeronautical Commission has approved the location of it on the airport along with the local Fire department. Prior City Council approval gave us 20,000 gallons underground storage capability. 5. The above ground portion of the new installation takes up about 52 cubic feet with a cabinet that water will flow through at the 124 feet level while the old system takes up approximately 123 cubic feet at the 122 feet level. 6. The time frame for this project is to begin immediately upon approval from the Conservation Commission and hope to have it done by December 31st subject to delays in project approval, weather, or unforeseen delays in delivery of equipment. 7. Any further questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (413) 584-1860. Thank you. J Russ Benjamin Form 4 Commonwealth ,i of Massachusetts V r— _ �y 0EDE File No. 246- O (To bo provNed by bEQQ City/TownNorthampton Appii,ant Northampton Airport,In Abbreviated Notice.of Intent Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 To be used only for projects of minimum impact, as described In the General lnstricttons for Completing the Notice of Intent. 1. Location: Street Address Cross Path Road Lot Number 25-71 2. Project: Type Fuel Tanks Description T n G t a.l 1 ( I t nTCOO gallon tank with associated equipment and.remove (2) 4,000 gallon _tanks with associated equipment. 3. Registry: County. amv sh i r e Current Book 2789 Page 31 k Certificate (If Registered Land) N / A 4.Applicant•• Northampton Airport, Inc. Tel. 584-1860 Address:P.O. Box 221, . Northampton, MA 01061 5. Property Owner: Northampton Airport_, Inc. Tel. 984-1 860 Address: P.O. Box 221, Northampton, MA 01061 6. Representative: Russ Benjamin Tel, 5 8 4 -18 6 0 Address P.O. Box 221, Northampton, MA 01061 T. Have the Conservation Commission and DEGE Regional Office each been sent, by certified mail or hand delivery, 2 copies of completed Notice of Intent, with supporting plans and documents? Yes Q No -C1 8. Have all obtainable permits, variances and approvals required by beat by-law been obtained or applied for? Yes R No O # Obtained: Applied For: Not Applied For: City Council Approval Conservation- Commis sinn Northampton Fire Dept 9. Is any portion of the site subject to a Wetlands Restriction Order pursuant to G.L. e. 131, §40A or G.L. c.130,§105? Yes X No j? 10. List all plans and supporting documents submitted with this Notice of Intent. Identifying Number/Letter J. Title/Date 1 Tank TnStallntinn nrnwin& 2 Topo May -- 3 ^Local Licenses 4 _ Equipment Specs 5 ^Airport Area Map 4-1 1 1. For work proposed within the Buffer Zone (as defined in Part I. Sections 10.02(2) and 10.04 of the reg- ulations) describe, with reference to supporting pians and calculations where necessary: /a (a) The size, shape, type and !ocation of the proposed work. t° N/A (b) Mitigating measures and designs to insure that the proposed work will not alter the resource area which said Buffer Zone borders; or if it will alter said resource area, the mitigating measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standard established for that resource area to Part ii or Part Ili of these regulations. N/A 12. For work proposed within land Subject to Flooding (as defined in Part ill, Section 10.57(2) of the reg- ulations) describe, with reference to supporting plans and calculations where necessary: (a) The size, shape, type and location of the proposed work. See enclosures (b) Mitigating measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards set forth in Part III, Section 10.57(4) of the regulations. I See enclosures I hereby certify under the pail is and penalties of perjury that the foregoing Notice of Intent and accompanying pians ument"d supporting data are true and complete, to the best of my knowledge. Signature of November 2, 1987 Date Signature of Applicant's Representative Date 4-2 Z city U Aviation ' And G c4i gifanE GSt02E Northampton Airport P.O. Box 221 Northampton, Massachusetts 01061 413/584-1860 November 2, 1987 Northampton Airport, Inc. proposes to: A. Install one 10,000 gallon Double Walled Cathodic protected Aviation fuel tank with all associated piping, fuel pumps, hose and cement pads; underground except for venting and fill station which would be mounted on or through the top cement pad. B. Remove two underground 4,000 gallon steel tanks, pumps, piping, hoses, and anything else associated with the old system from the airport and disposed of in accordance with current rules and regulations enforced by the DEQE and local authorities. 1. Any fill from the new fuel tank system will be used to fill the hole that the old tanks create. Any excess will be removed from the flood plain. The new fuel tank system will be level with the surrounding grounds except for the pump housing and venting. 2. The new fuel tank system will be relocated to a less congested and more isolated area of the airport. Electricity to the system will be run underground by a• licensed electrician. No other utilities will be needed. 3. According to the local Fire department, a double walled tank is not required as of this time. We have decided to install one at a considerable expense over single wall tanks (approximately 60%) for the protection of the surrounding area being so close.to the river (approx. 1,000 feet). These tanks have a 30 year warranty on material and workmanship. The tank will also be pressure tested on site before installation to insure against damage during transit. 4. The FAA has approved this system. The Massachusetts Aeronautical Commission has approved the location of it on the airport along with the local Fire department. Prior City Council approval gave us 20,000 gallons underground storage capability. 5. The above ground portion of the new installation takes up about 52 cubic feet with a cabinet that water will flow through at the 124 feet level while the old system takes up approximately 123 cubic feet at.the 122 feet level. 6. The time frame for this project is to begin immediately upon approval from the Conservation Commission and hope to have it done by December 31st subject to delays in • project approval, weather, or unforeseen delays in delivery of equipment. . 7. Any further questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (413) 584-1860. Thank you. Russ Benjamin t I 11 w. i Q � \ 1 \125. • .�i \\ •1255 � - ,r ��` + I .. l i � �V I • 623 �� fq►12a 0 i iii� `� ... r,.�• .'� , VA '.1t75 / 1 124.5" t;t24 0 .122,0 r 12 4.0 122 `LA F�,�. t1t' • a "r. R PpR'T �''• 143 J 140 �1• � 455 Silk.` , « �. ,. f e "� ",a. fit, y. .�,1 a Ise: • 122.0 v F3 '5 > .; k ;`fid• , �>� � at: a � ,. x t . roe 44 to .. 144 Je w- Northampton, Mass ................ .............. 19 >11 .............. 7 ...... ..................... r ...... TO THE HONORABLE, THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN OF THE CITY OF NORTHAMPTON: The undersigned respectfully pray _- -that a License may be granted to ........... ................. 1;;o ............................ ........ to establish a GASOLINE FILLING STATION at ................. �*** ............................ Street, Northampton, p . y and to use a building o structure at said location for the keeping, storage, or sale of GASOLINE, in structure with plan filed with this petition, subject to the provisions of Chapter 148, General Laws, and Acts in amendment thereof and supplementary 'thereto. Number of Tanks-...- .. .. ...... .. .. ...... ........................... Capacity of each Tank ................................................... gallons Number of Measuring P, (Name) ....... ............................................ (Residencef; 7-- 11,1 WARD OF Ail.DERMZ14 11a te ............. -.1 to CoM:.--jt,,-7 .e , .1 T Petition Number A:>-0 P Licenses and. lic Plan Number > I -7 -wring set, :or -X-14'4�- ......... ie I.%LT Dt..".7;D OF Baa. ................ CIEY­G� Date..L�>.....�..���...�',�It�Board of Aldermen June 21, Referred to J'�,o�n roAir ea c e mz- es and -Yi_ 1928 License granted. He Ing tt Attest: C i e rk ic- I I •:}�'7r4'wN�iR'��:R�41M'A t • Q!•'�4 K 6 c t� ' • ' a .. .r - .. tet. _, 1•�• i a' w+<•� .a� t' T � � .tYta t � � rt;` ' n.i;�,•+tt� z �'q'"S; f�;°l,;'.s"f?'.`"S=�i•"'+n�'t••''r."!;��'}��•'`' •�'�;�FS�i?r:.,., M�;•`y: •, ;.�i, �' In City Council,4/18/61 - Referred to Comm. on Lie. and set date of May 2, 1961 for hearing. n 0 Z 'n 0 r - n m z m 4 D a ° z ° � c+ 1 ••1 0 1� � 7 g-O M •J M O r, � � � M ra "mq o t m 07 s 0 E x) y C o r�- �. p 0 a: 3 vi p • V "7'( O �� ,_, .y m o Col' N y z < `V •, o xu 3 _,7A O'q NZ 0 to Z 0 $3 H � �+ � -ice O 7-� r �•� O � LL b lit G �. m m m --n q" � ��.•�z Via; \ N C ►Ai o CLI •�.� to : c l " ' 1 1 'O, tC i i ZI M ?A p ►' e `b li ;.� O�i .sc '^ b o �. cr cr cr cr ['-• �• O G n 0 Z 'n 0 r - n m z m 4 D N � c+ 1 ' 3 ; Z "mq Q C 0 E nr O 0 3 3 vi O D Z rm <d y z < a �. ,ern N O'q NZ 0 to Z 0 $3 H b lit m m H 6 In C ty Council ;: ',';�.;; .��"t;�5•i;; Ref • Tune ^•j•i' [._: .�•._• � erred to the 19. 1980 .. �::. date set f Public Police Committee_ ring. a July �:. ;;'�:�:' ��.: ;ti. _z_°- .: r r •�.,; I Attes n9. 17 �.:;.. �;�.�.�' roti � r .. � i.�rAa i � • • �•�'Tj o ty C L ':r.,. `• - •-:. t•1•.'((21 :y :.'.' •'x� a•:." a' .•b .0 n e- JO' ••"a C .�T. •�'%• _ - .- _•��r:{�`,_'-'.`i":rye;+tj•r�.7�;, ( � � �n 7e 0./i � [p �• .'�. _ .....�•!..i.; A; 'A rJ'' :• .{till ,R: .. ,�• ,q'•• � "'•a � iQ � � r�a '+ •fm� -'+:.; �': •:: ,,�':'; fill �' cr p A SA -4 :: r... .A.;..i ` ;.a'':•'r t.i:� 4.t.j f% s:[ p;.. : t:� : { ..h<' . '�• f! Q7 fh . (b _ m ;.i ':' .;:i .... iv.. '::.:y �`;c''?•i!'„-lP•: - SJ;.' •:: "= ( I � t c F1 23 `° p•• '•�,.•. �•`�'•''�, • yia:T'. _ '�r,,•.Y -t is:r}' �..wl.�.j;yc}' ' i”' i �J' �l"% C [.. •z,:.; i.rr �• ,•�' •'.r':'r�:'•_a.i...�.�;L::i<•,,s]••f:. ` �f�, 00 It +'f' . O fir, t_`tr:: rtir.if6.$'�i4': $e;�.!r[ti'• , �[ C i'<, d' � CS � f+ . 1 •1 - �,." Vis:::. • .... �+, �. O ,,:' `.. •yya '•,'i':'�-` :2:�; '-•^,2�..,. is .. , }•<• '7 d O n IkO rg > a fig r i v• e-t a ''v M o Q to L 9 Bib M w 00 o bt1 i-3 AL ct NO I-as rn o Z 86t `Lt �Tnr Pa�ue�9 tFouno3 F� uI 4 �} NI, r 9f :fa� n fly �ki lt��� �,jire�±'d�U��@�}1�y ������� '+�ri°'h n S•�� 'i�?�t� "� —'�' r--�' '°q�'��' �'1"..9 t � i �� v " -? r "hit �"+E•J''�' t�`,.d�a } i Tn � � ; � r, .> •<n.'Fi.: � +� p( iw°"G�y.* � � + fs t t •1 ' 1 3 1 s„ i .�; '� j�4'� •'v, � yak.' a c' � ���+ _1Sij�`�%L' rtC:ttsF35C'i� VClIl1'i'7C' wow Y.af tOt� t PlV1 f � Ale v�ti i rbf M6'' fs C S1Ub�� 200�'M.fif�ir.• Avlfabfe(nb('ht�ttrr,), fi fk °...': WALLED TA14 , DOUBLE WALLED TANKS Buffalo Tank has been developing double wall tank systems for over a decade. In recent years, corporations and government agencies concerned with environmental protection have tightened regulations on underground storage of hazardous materials. Many of these have recognized the advantages of double walled steel tanks over other secondary containment technologies available. Double walled steel tanks are easily monitorable by either mechanical or electronic means, and are not subject to rupture, cracking or the types of failure typical of other secondary containment systems. All Buffalo Double Wall tanks are fabricated from carbon steel in accordance with UL 58 for the primary tank.' This tank is tested at 5-7 psi pressure with soap suds on all seams. The secondary tank covers approximately 97% of the volume of the primary tank. The integrity of the secondary tank is proved by a 2-3 psi air test. An electronic monitoring system is mounted in a 2" diameter pipe at one end of the tank, between the primary and secondary heads, with a solid-state sensor and is water tight. The system provides an• Audio Visual alarm if the power source is disconnected and re -connected, f or if any liquid, whether water or product, is present in the monitored space. There are, in addition to the above, other types of monitoring systems available. In addition, the tank can be fabricated of stainless or other alloys, or can be lined for service if desired. Double wall tanks can also be designed for aboveground installation, either horizontally or vertically and can, in some instances, be used in lieu of expensive and space - consuming dikes. Double Wall Tanks are supplied with standard fittings and are available in sizes ranging from 550 to 50,000 gallons. Technical data: Surface load, per axle: AASHTO H-20 (32,000 pounds) Pressure: atmospheric Specific gravity of product: not to exceed 1.1 Tanks can be modified to store products with a greater specific gravity and can also be designed to withstand internal pressure applications. Exterior Protection systems include our BUFFHIDETM and BT -1.0 with warranties as outlined on p. 4 & 5. Other types of coatings are available and can be furnished if specified. 'Buffalo double wall tanks are also available to meet the requirements of New -York City. U 0 From Northampton Conservation Commission Issuing Authority To Northampton Airport Inc. Date of Issuance 5/2/89 Property lot/parcei number. address Cross Path Road and Old Ferry Road Extent and type of activity: Riverbank restoration & Fuel Tank placement & runway sealant & Construction of new airport hanger and associated earth moving for all projects The Conservation Commission has determined that the activity described above is in violation of the Wetlands Protection Act, G.L c. 131, §40, and the Regulations promulgated pur- suant thereto 3.10 CMR 10.00, because: ❑ Said activity has been/is being conducted without a valid Order of Conditions. (E Said activity has beenlis being conducted in violation of an Order of Conditions issued to Northampton Airport dated File number_, Condition number(s) EN Other (specify) Order of Conditions 246-134 & 246-178 & 246-181 & 246-190 have not been recorded in the land records (or if they have been recorded no notice has been provided to the Conservation CommissiAn) The Conservation Commission hereby orders the following: ❑ The property owner, his agents, permittees and all others shall immediately cease and desist from further activity affecting the wetland portion of this property. ❑ Wetland alterations resulting from said activity shall be corrected and the site returned to its original con- dition. - - - 9-1 Effective 11 / 1 / 87 -' - - - - - - Q Completed application forms and plans as required by the Act and Regulations shad be filed with the on or before and no further work shad be performed until a public hearing has been held and an Order of Omd=ns. has been issued to regulate said work. Appfi=tfon torms are available at Q The property ownershad take every reasonable step. to prevent furtherviolations of the act E Other(specify) The permits (Order of Conditions) shall be recorded by May 11, 1989 in the Registry of Deeds of Hampshire County , Failure to comply with this Order may constitute grounds for legal action. Massachusetts General Laws Chap- ter 131, Section 40 provides: _ Whoever violates any provision of this section shad be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months or both. Each day or portion thereof of continuing violation shad constitute a separate offense. Questions regarding this Enforcement Order should bedirected to Wayne Feiden 586-6950 Issued by n 114"id Or,/, ve ��d A L .q.v SEF 4,4c0 (Signature of delivery person or certified mail number) 92 U Form 4 DERE Filo No. (To be be p Wv — by DEQE) Commonwealth Citynown- Nor hamnton _ = of Massachusetts l Applicant Northampton AirpDort,In Abbreviated Notice of Intent Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 To be used only for projects of minimum Impact, as described in the General Instructions for Completing the Notice of Intent. 1. Location: Street Address Cross Path Road Lot Number, 2 5 - 71 2. Project: Type Fuel Tanks Desc ' tion_ T ns t a.1 i l gallon tank with associated equipment and.remo e 2 4,000 1 00 lLon tanks with associated a ui ment. 3. Registry: County. Hampshire Current Book -Z2-0-2--& page 31 6 Certificate (If Registered Land)- N/A 4. Applicant: Northampton Airport, Inc Address: P.O. Box 221 Northampton, MA 01061 Tel. 584-1860 5. Property Owner: -Nor thaMD tonAi rnnrt Tnr Tel. SRL.-1 RF,(1 Address: P.O. Box 221, Northam ton MA 01061 6. Representative: Russ Benjamin rel. 584-1860 Address P.O. Box 221 Northampton., MA 01061 7. Have the Conservation Commission and DEQE Regional Office each been sent, by certified mail or hand delivery, 2 copies of completed Notice of intent, with supporting plans and documents? Yes Q No • 0 8. Have all obtainable permits, variances and approvals required by local by-law been obtained or applied for'1 Yes X No 0 Obtained: Applied For: Not Applied For. City Council Approval_ Con rva ion-Commi.Sinn Northampton Fire Dept. 9. is any portion of the site subp!ct to a Wetlands Restriction Order pursuant to G.L. c. 131, §40A or G.L. c.130.§105? Yes No j? 10. List all pians and support] g documents submitted with this Notice of Intent. Identifying Number/Letter Title/Date 1 Tank Tn�tallatinn i1T 2 Topo Map 3 Local Licenses 4 _ Equipment Specs 5 Airport Area Map 4.1 city Northampton Airport P.O. Box 221 Northampton, Massachusetts 01061 413/584-1860 November 2, 1987 Northampton Airport, Inc. proposes to: A• Install one 10,000 gallon Double Walled Cathodic protected Aviation fuel tank with all associated -piping, fuel pumps, hose and cement pads; underground except for venting and fill station which would be mounted on or through the top cement pad. B. Remove two underground 4,000 gallon steel tanks hoses, and anything else associated with the old system fromnthe airport and disposed of in accordance with current rules and regulations enforced by the DEQE and local authorities. 1. Any fill from the new fuel tank system will be used to fill the hole that the old tanks create. Any excess will be removed from the flood plain. The new fuel tank system will be level with the surrounding grounds except for the pump housing and venting. 2. The new fuel tank system will be relocated to a less congested and more isolated area of the airport. Electricity to the system will be run underground by a• licensed electrician. No other utilities will be needed. 3. According to the local Fire department, a double walled tank is not required as of this time. We have decided to install one at a considerable expense over single wall tanks (approximately 60%) for the protection of the surrounding area being so close to the river (approx. 1,000 feet). These tanks have a 30 year warranty on material and workmanship. The tank will also be pressure tested on site before installation to insure against damage during transit. 4. The FAA has approved this system. The Massachusetts Aeronautical Commission has approved the location of it on the airport along with the local Fire department. Prior City Council approval gave us 20,000 gallons underground storage capability. 5. The above ground portion of the new installation takes up about 52 cubic feet with a cabinet that water will flow through at the 124 feet level while the old system takes up approximately 123 cubic feet at the 122 feet level. 6. The time frame for this project is to begin immediately upon approval from the Conservation Commission and hope to have it done by December 31st subject to delays in project approval, weather, or unforeseen delays in delivery of equipment. . 7. Any further questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (413) 584-1860. Thank you. l Russ Benjamin t t 4 r i _ 1 1 ` � , • 12 5 5 ,, - Cn ! 1 I2 3 0 s11 ` � \ � - �\ • 1175 U \ -1220 •124S \ \ \ •.1240 s •1220 1 .�� \\\\?0\. INI -124 IN, \ \\ 22 1 v \\ \\ LA FL EUS. 14 }� ` ` ` r`� .••,,`!�1 ..:1.- •. _ ' t 121• p � PLO FRR -�. ` 135 S ?! O ` 122..0 1i F3&5 310 CMR 10.99 Form 8 Commonwealth of Massachusetts MAP ID. # 25 - 071 DE" Fie No. 246- 178 tto tie womw ov ce?l Ca. Towr ---Northampton Aooucant Northampton Airport Certificate of Compliance Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, C.L. c. 131, §40 NORTHAMPTON WETLANDS PROTECTION ORDINANCE From Northampton Conservation Commission Issuing Authority Tc Northampton Airport Old Ferry Road, Northampton (Names (Address; Date of Issuance July 23, 1990 This Certificate is issued for work regulated by an Order of Conditions issued to Northampton Airport, Inc. dated 9/28/90 and issued by the Conservation Commission 1.. S It is hereby certified that the work regulated by the above -referenced Order of Conditions has been satisfactorily completed. 2. = It is hereby certified that only the following portions of the work regulated by the aaove-refer- enced Order of Conditions have been satisfactorily completed: (if the Certificate of Compliance does not include the entire project. specify what portions are included.) 3. = It is hereby certified that the work regulated by the above -referenced Order of Conditions was never commenced. The Order of Conditions has laosed and is therefore no longe. -valid. No future work subiect to regulation under the Act may be commenced without filing a new Notice of intent and receiving a new Order of Conditions. .......................................... '..{..........................................................................................................._........................... Ilene SaaCa Blank) S." few ive 1/10/Q3 This certificate shall be recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the land Court for the district in which the land is located. The Order was cngtr dy recorded on Kate) at the Registry of Book . Page The following conditions of the Order stag continue: (Setforth any conditions contained in the Final Order. such as maintenance or monitoring. which are to continue for a longer pend.) Issued by Northampton Conservation Commission Signaturef s) When issued by the Conservation Commision this Certificate must be signed by a majority of is members. On this 23rd day July 1990 before me personally appeared %/9& -?0 d-k�x Fey to me known to be the person described in and w" executed the foregoing instrument and acfmc►viedged that he.�she executed the same as his/her free act and deed. MM 16 � NOTAR1r PU smile, - tM N lafamm .sit.. to is" Notary Public My commission expires Oetach an dotted fin* and submit to the NorthA=ton Conservation CommictQi on is Northampton Conservation Commission fsstart4 Authority Men* beadvised ammeCamficateofCbrimwnutar meamfe=a. Northampton Airport ��ie+vumoer 246— 178 t1SDew sw &anmeq",ryof Hampshire County arc nas Dean noise :� ;rr :-am of !:ne c: Me arsec:ee ore=ar:y en : •e__�Dec re ^er-:sin— _ --ansa: =:n:s r•g s:erre tanD.:-r nurser .vn :den es...j 3asac. rn :S ,Q 34ma"ire :cdxant City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hail • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation • Historic Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals • Northampton Parking Commission July 25, 1990 Richard Guisto Northampton Airport Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Dick: Enclosed is the Certificate of Compliance for your hanger expansion project (246-178). You should record this at the Registry of Deeds as soon as possible. Mark Darnold's letter of June 29, 1990, in which he requests a Certificate of Compliance for the above referenced project, does not request a Certificate for other outstanding permits at the Airport and does not certify that work required under those permits has been completed. You mentioned that it was your understanding that the conditions in the Order for your fuel storage tank and the Order for the resurfacing of your runways have been complied with. Before you can receive a Certificate of Compliance for those projects, your engineer must review the Order of Conditions and the submitted plans and certify that all conditions in those Orders have been complied with. His letter should go through all the conditions and respond to each one. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Wayne M. Feiden Environmental Planner cc: Mark Darnold, Huntley & Associates, PO Box 568 ALMER HUNTLEY, JR. & ASSOCIATES, INC. ALMER HUNTLEY, JR., PE., PLS SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 30 INDUSTRIAL DRIVE EAST / P.O. Box 568 / NORTHAMPTON, MASS. 01061 DOUGLAS W. THOMPSON, PLS (413) 584-7444 FAX (413) 586-9159 WILLIAM R. GARRITY, LA STEPHEN J. DEMSKI, PE PAUL R. LUSSIER, PLS #230-103-91 June 29, 1990 City of Northampton 21990 Conservation Commission City Hall ` Northampton, MA 01060 RE: Certificate of Compliance Northampton Airport File # 246-178 Dear Commission Members: As a followup of our letter dated December 12, 1988, (attached) we have observed that the disturbed area of the site is vegetated, and the stockpiles of excava- ted material have been removed. The spill storage capacity of the new concrete pad located over the fuel storage tank was checked and found to have at least 55 gallons of storage. This completes the compensatory storage area requirements for this project and should enable the Commission to issue the Certificate of Compliance. Very truly yours, ALMER HUNTLEY, JR. & OCIATES, INC. Mark B. Darnold, P.E. Manager, Civil Engineering Dept. MBD: j be cc: Dick Guisto ALMER HUNTLEY, JR. & ASSOCIATES, INC. ALMER HUNTLEY. JR, PE., RLS SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS DOUGLAS W. THOMPSON, RLS P.O. Haat SW / 301NDUSTRIAL DRIVE EAST / NORT�IAMpPOM. MASS. 01061 141313&4-74" WILLIAM R GARRPTY, LA JOHN G. RAYMOND. PE #230-103-91 December 12, 1988 City of Northampton Conservation Commission City Hall Northampton, PSA 01060 RE: Certificate of Compliance Northampton Airport #246-178 Dear'Commissioners: As required by the "Order of Conditions" for the hanger construction at the Northampton Airport, we inspected the site on December 7, 1988 and hereby report that all work is substantially complete and in accordance with the plan and the . Order of Conditions, except for the following: 1. Final seeding of the area excavated for compensatory storage will have to be done in the spring due to the weather. 2. Although the stockpile of excavated material was at the site during our inspection, the Contractor has reportedly started moving it off site and should finish the work soon. On behalf of the airport, we respectfully request that the Conservation Commis— sion issue a Certificate of Compliance for this project at its earliest conven— ience. Very truly yours, ALMER MMTLEY, JR. 6 ASSOCIATES, INC. Steve G. Mason, P.E SGS: kmc cc: Mr. Richard Guisto F• Fr :'City of Northampton, Massachusetts t''Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01080 • (413) 5866950 • Community and Economic Dwslopmsnt r • Conservation* Historic Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals Richard Guisto, President Northampton Airport, Inc. Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. Guisto: \� January 9, 1989 At their meeting on January 9, 1989, the Conservation Commission voted to delay issuing a Certificate of Compliance for the work on your new hangers (Order of Conditions 246-,8) until the stockpile of excavated material on the site has.been removed and the full .,.,,,,-compensatory storage shown in the original Order of Conditions ;;exists on the site. The Commission visited the site on January 5, V�`;=1989 afterour consultant Steve Mason requested quested a Certificate of ompliance on your behalf . When all the excavated material has been removed, your consultant ;.,should request the Certificate. -The Commission will not issue the ,Certificate unle-ss your Pro'ect Engineer states that all work was done in conformance with the provisions of the approve Order o approved notice of intent has been provided on the site. Having both the excavated material and your new building on the site at the same time reduces the amount of compensatory flood ,storage on your site and as such is a violation of the Wetlands _.......,,Protection Act. If the fill is not removed by the spring the '. 'Commission intents on taking enforcement action against the Airport. ' you f have an �Y y questions, Blease contact Wayne Feiden in the $:Planning Department. ncerely, f ` vid Gentler, -Chair t- Conservation Commission ti Fart 5 Commonwealth of Massachusetts – – " OEGE Fits too. 246–.1-78 �} (To be provosci by oEQE) City/Tawn Northampton Applicant Northampton airy_ Order of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act G.L. c. 131, §40 Fro the Northampton Conservation Commission TO No_rthamptnn Ai rp,=t Inc (Name of Applicant) same (Name of property owner) Address Old Ferry Rd., Northampton Address same 01060 This Order is issued and delivered as follows: ❑ by hand deiivery to applicant or representative on (date) �M by certified mail, return receipt requested on February 12, 1900 (date) This project is located at Northampton Airport 01 d Ferry Roan The property is recorded at the Registry of Deeds . Hampshire County Book_ 2386 Page 155 Certificate (if registered) The Notice of Intent for this project was filed on September 21, 1987 (date) The public hearing was closed on September 28, 1987 (date) Findings The Nnrthamntnn r�n�Ar-r�r; �n r�n,��; �T has reviewed the above -referenced Notice of Intent and plans and has held a public hearing on the project. Baked on the information available to the Conservation Commission atthistime. the Conservation Cormiss =—has determined that the area on which the proposed work is to be done is significant to the following interests in accordance with the Presumptions of Significance set forth in the regulations for each Area Subject to Protection Under the Act (check as appropriate): ❑ Public water supply ❑ Storm damage prevention ❑ Private water supply ❑ Prevention of pollution ❑ Ground water supply ❑ Land containing shellfish XM Flood control ❑ Fisheries ` 5-1 .1-J Therefore, the _ Conservation Commission hereby finds that the following conditions are necessary. in accordance with the Performance Standards set forth in the regulations. to protect those inter= ests checked above. The rnngtPryation Comm; a a; on orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with said editions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above. To the extent that the fol- lowing conditions modify or differ from the plans. specifications or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall control. General Conditions 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein, and with all related statutes and other regulatory meas- ures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 2. This Order does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges; it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying withal other applicable federal, state or local statutes, ordinances, by-laws or regulations. 4. The work authorized hereunder shall be completed within three years from the date of this Order unless either of the following apply: (a) the work is a maintenance dredging project as provided for in the Act,, or (b) the time for completion has been extended to a specified date more than three years, but less than five years, from the date of issuance and both that date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth in this Order. 5. This Order maybe extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods of up to three years each upon application to the issuing authority at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the Order. 8. Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill, containing no trash, refuse, rubbish or de- bris, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster, wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe, tires, ashes, refrigerators, motor Vehicles or parts of any of the foregoing. 7. No work shall be undertaken until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed or, if such an appeal has been filed, until all proceedings before the Department have been completed. 8. No work shall be undertaken until the Final Order has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of registered land, the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. The recording information shall be submitted to the on the form at the end of this Order prior to commencement of the work. 9. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less than two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the words, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering, File Number 246- 178 im. 10. Where the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering is requested to make a determination and to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shall be a party to all agency proceedings and hearings before the Department. 11. Upon completion of the work described herein, the applicant shall forthwith request in writing that a Certificate of Compliance be issued stating that the work has been satisfactorily completed. 12. The work shall conform to the following plans and special conditions: 0. Title Dated - Signed and Stamped by: Cn File wit!►: Plan of Land :gc( 3/25/86 �Almer Huntley, Jr.Surveyed for T-3 DEQE & N'ton Consv_ Comp, Northampton Airport Plan Accompanying 9/21/87 _Mark B_ narnnld_Gy ^ Comm. Notice of Intent Special Conditions (Use additional paper it necessary) 1) All construction areas shall be restored to original condition or better upon completion of the project, including vegetation; 2) No areas within the 100 year floodplain nor within 100 feet of a wetland area, as defined in Chapter 131, Section 40, M.G.L., shall be peraissable disposal sitas, unless othecrise approved by the Consecration Commission; 3) Excavated material and topsoil stockpiles s:.ail be located and stabilized su as to minimize washing into wetland areas or wale: -.rays; 4) Adequate measures shall be taken to prevent erosion and siltation of all disturbed areas; 5) This Order Of Conditions shall apply to any successor in interest or successor in cont_o'L. 6) Members and agents of the Conservation Commission shall have the right to enter and i=spect the premises to evaluate compliance with the Conditions and to require the submittal of any data dee=ed necessary by the Commission for that evaluation; 7) (if checked) Upon completion of the project, the Applicant shall submit a statement from the Project Engineer that all work has been done in con— fo:—mance with the provisions of the approved Order of Conditions. Yrs ( ) NQ it.eay. Space Blanks ._.......�..._..._................._._.................... 5-3A DEQE File No. 178 Special Conditions (continued) . 8) The Applicant shall notify the Conservation Commission, in writing, as to = the date that work will be commencing on the project. .Said written noti- fication must be received by the Commission no sooner than ten (10) days and no later than. seven (7) days prior to the commencement of the approved activity. __ - -- ----- - 9) (if checked) The Applicant shall complete and execute the attached ATTACM4 "A"/NOTICE OF POSSIBLE WETLANDS RESTRICTIONS UNDER I.G.L. C.131, S.40 relative to rhp 4`l -P of thp Northampton Ai parr Old Ferry Rd Northampton MA Said ATTACMIT "A" chall ba attached to; become a part of, and shall be filed with this Order Of Conditions at the Registry of Deeds. The Applicant shall re- turn a copy of the completed and notorized ATTAC=T "A" to the Conservation Commission when the bottom portion of Page 5-4A of this Order Of Conditions Of Conditions' is returned. (R) YES ( ) NO s Issued By Northampton Conservation ConunhWon Signatures This Order must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission. On this / day19-7 before me personally appeared it , /-'� T_� �' '�� , /: r . to me known to be the r- person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she executed the same as "her free act and deed. C:z Notary Public My commisslon expires The applicant, the owner. any person aggrieved by this Order. any owner of land abutting the land upon which the proposed work Is to be done or any ten residents of the city or town in which such land is located we hereby notified of their right to request the Oepertment of Envirwrnentai Quality Engineering to issue a Superseding Order. providing the request is made by cerdfled mad or hand delivery to the Oepertment within ton days from the date of Issuance of this Order. A copy of the request ahaat at the acme &m be sent by certfied mai or hand delivery to the Conservation Commission and the applicant. Detach on dotted line and submit to the Northam2ton Con_aervatinn Commisai Wlortocommencementofwork. To Northamoton Conservation Commission IssuingAuthorrty Please be advised that the Order of Condluons for the project err File manber 246-178 has be*nrecorded st the Registryof ��� Hamn ch i •^o rnt,n ryz and has been noted in the chain of title of the affected prop" in accordance with General Condition a on � If recorded land. the instrument number which identifies this transaction is 0i ;.1911 it registered Land, the document number which identifies this transaction in signature Applicant 5-4A SEP 2 11987 Coamnonwesltft of Etta OF PLANNING EVELOPMENT OWE rf. NO. 1 of t16 - / iy fro boaa-14a s 1 CiWT~ Northampton _.... _.. _-Awkw t Northampton Airport, In Notice of Intent P N_ = .�/aIF/ F�2 Under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 and Application for a Department of the Army Permit Part 1: General Information 1. Location: Street Address—No_ rthaMn on Airport off --O-f rrnss Path Rn -f _ Lot Number B X= rh_ rte.. existing hangers 2. Project: Type Hanger Building Description Steel framed "Erect -A -Tube" Airplane Hanger 250 feet long, 50 feet wide and 28 feet high The building's frame to be set on concrete piers at grade The hanger floor and common access way will be paved with Type I bituminous concrete (see Exhibits) 3. Registry: County Hampshire` Cun'ertt Book_. 2386 -& Page 155 Certificate (If Registered Land) N/A 4. Applicant Northampton Airno r Inc-.—Tel._584-1860 Addraw Old Ferry Road, Northampton, MA 01060 5. Property Owner Northampton Airport, Inc Tel. _584-1860 Address__ Old Ferry Road, Northampton, MA 01060 S. Reprssentathrs Almer Huntley, Jr. -& Associates, Inc. Tel. 584-7444 Achap 30 Industrial Drive East Northampton, MA 01060 T. Maus the Conservation Commission and the OEOE Regional Offlae each been sent, by certified mail or hand daWary. 2 copies of completed Notice of Intent, with supporft plans and doc meats? Yes XX No 3-1 8. gave d obtahable parnilb, and 4pprOV016 reQukred by local by-leNr been obkae Yes [� ISO ea Obh*wid: APPIed For. NotAPP14d For: Finding b ZBA RE: Sec. 9.3B Building Permit 9. Is any Portion of the site subject to a Wetlaft Restriction L • C. 130, $105? Yes © No rk order Pursulnt tO G.L c. 131. WA Or ML 10. Last d plans and Dnp docurnents submitted with this Notice of Intent. IdentIfyft Number/Letter Title, Date Exhibit 1 — Locus Map ' Exhibit 2 Federal Insurance Rate Map Exhibit 3 Project Description Rxh;},; r 4 r Exhibit 5 Runoff Calculations Exhibit 6 Plan Accompanying Notice of Intent Prepared for N irport, nc. •rthampton Exhibit 7 Plan of Land in Northam on Airport, Inc. Mass• Surveyed for Northampton — 11. Check those msokuce areas withun wn= wont is MV=em (a) 0 &Wer zone (b) Lrnend: © Bads• QBordwft VOWtIated Wei- Landt to FWodk M Land Ute Water Bwdeft Body d Waterway . Isoia ted (0) CoesW: © land Ltnder ft ocean . ' © COaatM Bych • ted Port Area • [] awriw sea COMM Dune © Rocky k*N* d &We. ©Cosawagnk Land LlnderaW per. p SO Marsh. © Fish Run • © Land Contoft . - 'Like* to invoke U.S. Ann* COrPa of EngP we s current aPbkq Notice of Intent. bion• See hm&ucwm for 3-2 Part it: Site Description kX20 to which of the following bfvrtnation has been Provided (on a per. in narrative �PPon a -- *N*to may. C=Pietsly and s axettirq ails . . . Nwnbar/Metter (of plan. nwrativs cr edcu istions) Natural Features: 5 - 33 ----- -5 Sof —N/a Vegetation 6 -- Topography N/A I / Open water bodies (including ponds and lakes) N/A Flowing water bodies (including streams and rivers) ----- Public and private surface water and ' _ Maximum annul ground wafer supplies on or within 100 feet of site 2 ground water elevations with dates and location of test Boundaries of resource areas checked un Other der Part 1. item 11 above L Man-made Features: 6, 7. 8Structures 6 (such as buildings, piers, towers and headwalls) Drainage and flood control facilities at the site and immediately off the ding 6 site, inclu culverts and open channels (with inverts). dams and dikes /A Subsurface sewage disposal 6 9 poral systems 6 Underground utflitles ----- 7 Roadways and parking areas Property boundaries. easements and rights-of-way --- Other Part III: Work Dsserippion indksite which of the following information has been` provided (on a plan, in narrative description or pkula. tions) to clearly- completely and accurately describe work proposed within each of the resource areas checked in Part 1. item 11 above. IdenWykV lumber/Letter (of Pian. narrative orc alcuiattons) Plwwiew and Cross Section of: . --�-8 Structtues (such as 6buildings. piers, towers and headwaft) Drainage and flood control facilities.dams and dikes hdu&culverts and open charnels (with inverts). A-6 Subsurface sewagedisposalMems d WIdstground FWkV. dredging utiBtles 4-6 and evatinq. indicating vokrms Position of mete Comperlsotory storage areas, where rMCluired in WcOrdance with Part ill. Section 10:37 (4) of the regulations Point Source Oiech e DQ*CN /A Wn of characteristics of channel). whendischarge frvn Point source (both cloned and open 11 above. as supporteddischarge fa�a within fesotrre area checicad undw Part 1, item by standard enowering calculations, data and pts, but not omited to the following: 3.3 I • DaW1sWon of flea draiMpe area contr*U&V to the point of discharge; 2. Pnp-and postpeak nxwoff from the drainage area, at the point of dischaqs. forstleast the 1 O"w and t 00 -year frequency storm; 3. Pre- and poa _*w6lopment rata of inrlatra*m conthuft to the resource area checked under Part 1. item 11 above,- 4. bove;4• 81ed water query acteriatics of pro. and post -development rung at the point of . Past N: MWOOft Messwes I • Clearly. completely and accurately describe, with reference to supporting plans and cdCLtations where (a AM "sures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards set forth under each W source area specified In Part 11 or Part IM of the regulations; or (b) why the Presumptions set forth under each resource area specified in Part 11 or Part IM of the regule. tions do not apply. O C" M Remwm Area Type. ® Ywend Bordering Land Subject to Flooding �lyinp�orWw ng � suPport doasnenb The finish floor elevation of 121.0 feet and the grading 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 as shown on the plan and cross-sections, Exhibit 6, results -- in significantly more excavation (1,300 cy±) than fill . (700 cy). These volumes have been worked out so as to be in conformance with 310 CMR Sec. 10.57 (4)(a)(1 & 2). See Exhibit 4. All surplus material will be properly disposed -of off-site. A net increase of about 650 cy of flood storage will be ` provided by this project. LIIL� O Cord ROMOM Mee Type•. O U+hnd of aupportdoovW4ws 2. Clearly, completely and accurately describe, with reference to supporting plans and calculations where necessary: (a) all measures and designs to regulate work within the Buffer Zone so as to insure that said work does not alter an area specified In Part I. Section 10.02(1) (a) of these regulations; or (b) if work in the Buffer Zone will after such an area, as measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards established for the adjacent resource area specified in Part If or Part III of these regulations. 0 Corm I Resource Am Type Norders ey t oo-Foot obovdanwy Ion.: Iden VkV nwnbw or Ww N�IsrNr of support docu n nts 3-S Part V: Addl%lwel bMormatlon for a Deparbneet of the Army Permft _ I. COE No 2, Connecticut River (to be Pfd by COE) (Name of waterway) 3. No. end a of property owners your prgMtr George F. Reynolds 56 Cross Path Road Northampton, MA 01060 4. Document other project alteratives (i.e., other locations and/or construction methods =, that would eliminate the d' those Ischar�e of dredged or fid materia! into waters or wetlands). S. 8%" x 11 " drawings in pianview and cross-section, showing the resource area and the proposed actin ity within the resource area. Drawings must be to scale and should be clear enough for Photocopying. Cerd icatl0r) is required from the Divsion of Water Polution Conal before the Federat permit can be issued. Calfication may be obtained by contacting the Divsion of Water potion Corto'o1,1 Writer Street Bosmn. Massachusetts .02108. Where the acli* will -take place vvd*l the area under the MassachAm approved Coastal 7_one Managemera P109am, the appicart certifies that his proposed activity Wyom vvith and willbL. in a marner shat is cmvsoent weh the appoed program ktfofrnation provided will be used in evaluating the appication for a peirrtit ands made a matter of pubic record though &%M-oe of a pubic rlo6ca. Disdosure of this information is voluntafy hovuevw f necessary dwTwlt on s not provided. the ap*8tion carrot be Proees,ed nor can a pefrtm be issued. I hereby certify under the pains and of perjury that the foregoing Notice of intent and accompenyin9 Pte' documents true and complete, to the heat of my knowledge. . `- Sipatllre of Applican Northampton Air rt, Inc. Date Richard Guist resi ent SiBrlature of Applicant's NED FORM 100 1 MAY 82 Nl,ft# a Almer Huntley, Jr. & p��� Associates, Inc., Steven G.-11mason " "tsce►ties to INC Form fu" appre"d `y XQUSACZ. 4 61 1442". (TEST) "Tito* d"sawst ten"'" a joist Ocprtwest of the Army and State of Nomm4►eactts apllcatitw for a permit to e►tais pmrwiaeies to perform activities is United States maters. The offlee of Masagemest and Budget (OUB) ban "Prev" tbe" peatiewa rgsired by On Us Army Grp Of Zsgiseera. OMB Member 0102-0034 eat "Oration dote of 30 Septembe IS" applies". Thin etatemest will be met is 4 pint type. 3-6 EXHI--..... BIT 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT The Northampton Airport is proposing to construct an airplane hanger on land it owns adjacent to Cross Path Road. The 12,500 square foot building, to be con- structed by Quabbia Construction, will be located 75 feet off of and parallel to an existing hanger, as shown on the attached plans. The site of the proposed hanger is completely within the 100 -year flood plain of the Connecticut River, as is moat of the airport. This Notice of Intent is being filed in compliance with the Wetlands Protection Act for bordering land subject to flooding. The Plan and calculations attached show that the proposed work will satisfy the per- formance standard for bordering land subject to flooding (Sec. 10.57 (4) a (i b 2). In fact, to satisfy cut and fill requirements at each 1 -foot interval ele- vation, about 650 C.Y. (0.4 AC -FT) of additional storage had to be provided. The elevation of the 100 -year storm for this site is about 125 feet. This Notice of Intent also contains site runoff calculations, although they are not expressly required by the Act for this type of resource area. Since the watershed drains to a somewhat isolated area with minimal outflow through the nearly buried existing 12" V.C. pipe, these calculations were performed, assum- ing essentially zero outflow. The analysis of the 10 -year event for the 8.6 acre water shed showed that, due to the added storage provided, the water level in this depression is actually reduced from 119.5 feet to 119.4 feet (see hydro - graphs attached). This would be the governing 10 -year flood for the area since the 10 -year flood of the river is about 118.5 feet. As the storm intensity increases, however, the flood levels, due to the site runoff, becomes insigni- ficant, as the flood of the river is more intensive. As stated above, the general contractor for the work will be Quabbin Construc- tion Co., Inc. of Belchhertown, MA. The proposed steel building will be pro- vided by Erect -A -Tube Inc. of Harvard, IL. The building frame will be set on concrete footings which will be set at finish grade (121.00). The only flood storage occupied by the building would be the steel I -beams and 28 gage siding. This volume is less than 1 C.Y. at each one -foot elevation and is negligible. In the event of a severe flood, the planes will be moved out and -the hanger will flood (4 feet deep for 100 -year flood). �-- The floor of the hanger and the access road will be constructed of about 3 inches of bituminous concrete laid on about 12 inches of compacted gravel. In addition to the estimated total of 650 C.Y. of material to be removed, matching volumes of the gravel and bituminous concrete must also be removed and properly disposed of so that the finish grades on the attached plan are achieved. After final grading and paving, remaining areas will then be seeded as soon as is practical. ALMER HUNTLEY, JR., & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS Almer Huntley Jr. & ' -�socs. Inc. Surveyors - Engineers - Lan&ipe Architects 30 industrial Drive NORTHAMPTON, MA 01061 (413) 584-7444 Joe Zen — 10� — 90ToR ► �'fT9�6� SHEET NO. OF Z CALCULATED BY �� DATE CHECKED BY G / DATE + l � Almer Huntley Jr. & ' -sots. Inc. JOB Surveyors - Engineers - Lin& -Am Architects SHEET NO. OF -- 2 30 Industrial Drive NORTHAMPTON, MA 01061 CALCULATED BY l DATE = :Z- (413) 584-7444 9Q Q ...,. CHECKED BY �� DATEl 6— Data for NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT Pape 1 ._ Prepared by ALMER HydroCAD ray, 3/25/87 HUNTLEY Jr & ASSOCIATES INC.: ENGINEERING 9-21-87 (c) 1986 AQolied Microcomputer Systeme SUBCATCHMENT t to 9999 ::.::-__-.-.--:..:-------------------------::..:._:.-_-_ �- SUBCATCHMENT 1 -> DETENTION POND 1 X,Y = 4.4 5.9 <1 2> SUBCATCHMENT 1 EXISTING PERCENT 100 CN 67 AREA- 8.60 ACRES SCS TR -20 METHOD — 0 0 LENGTH- 0 FEET TYPE II 24-HOUR STORM 0 0 SLOPE- 0.0 % RAINFALL- 4.2 INCHES 0 0 Tc- 82 MINUTES PEAK- 4.1 CFS 0 12.92 NRS — 100 67 VOLUME- .90 AF -- SUBCATCHMENT 1 RUNOFF EXISTING 4.0-. AREA— 8.6 AC 3.5 CN= 67 ' t 3.0 Tc= 82 MIN 2.5 SCS TR -20 METHOD 2.0 TYPE II 24—HOUR STORM RRINFRLL= 4.2 IN 3 .: O 1.5- _j PEAK= 4.1 CFS 1.0- e 12.92 HRS — .5 VOLUME= .9 AF I 0. M m — N M d' 0 I I TIME (hours) 3 SUBCATCHMENT 10 -> DETENTION POND 10 X,Y - 6.6 5.9 <1 2> i` SUBCATCHMENT 10 PROPOSED ' PERCENT 100 CN 69 AREA- 8.60 ACRES SCS TR -20 METHOD 0 0 LENGTH- 0 FEET TYPE II 24-HOUR STORM -- 0 0 SLOPE- 0.0 X RAINFALL- 4.2 INCHES 0 0 Tc- 82 MINUTES PEAK- 4.7 CFS 0 12.91 HRS i 100 69 VOLUME- 1.00 AF Data for NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT Pape 2 Prepared by ALMER HUNTLEY Jr & ASSOCIATES INC.: ENGINEERING 9-21-87 HvdroCAD rev. 3/2S/87 (c) 1986 Applied Microcomputer Systems SUBCRTCHMENT 10 RUNOFF PROPOSED 4.5 4.0 AREA— B.S RC CN= 69 3.5 Tc= 82 MIN n 3.0 �- SCS TR -20 METHOD 2 -5 - TYPE II 24—HOUR STORM 3 2.0 RRINFRLL= 4.2 IN 1.5 PEAK= 4.7 CFF 1.0 @ 12.91 HRS ' VOLUME= 1 AF 6 • cu m err- to to N m 07 © Cu m qr to fU CV CU N ru ru TIME (hours) Data for NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT _ Prepared by ALMER HUNTLEY Jr & ASSOCIATES INC.: ENGINEERING 9-21-87 HydroCAD rev. 3/2S/87 (c) 1986 Applied Microcomputer Systems "- DETENTION POND t EXISTING DET. STARTING ELEV= 117.0 FT FLOOD ELEV 120.0 FT ELEVATION STORAGE ELEV/HEAD DISCHARGE STOR-IND METHOD (FT) (AF) (FT) (CFS) PEAK ELEVATION- 119.5 FT 117.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 PEAK STORAGE _ .90 AF 118.0 .03 0.0 0.0 Qin - 4.1 CFS 0 12.92 HRS 119.0 .SO 0.0 0.0 Qcut= 0.0 CFS 0 25.00 HRS '- 120.0 1.38 0.0 0.0 ATTEN-100 % LAG 43479 SEC 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 IN/OUT= .90 / .01 AF INVERT (FT) OUTLET DEVICES _ 117.0 t" CULVERT n-.03 L=30' S=.0001'/' Ke -.S Cc -.9 Cd -.G TOTAL DISCHARGE vs ELEVATION FEET 0.0 .1 .2 .3 .4 5 6 7 $ 9 117.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 118.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 119.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 t20.0 0.0 DETENTION POND 1 INFLOW & OUTFLOW EXISTING DET. 4.0- 3.5- STOR-IND METHOD PERK ELEV= 119.5 FT 3.0 PERK STOR= .9 RF 2.5 Q i n= 4.1 CFS 2.0 Gaut- 0 CFS 3 LAG= 43479 SEC 4 1.5 1.0 i .5 cu M d' tt] t0 I` CD m © CV (Y1 v- 0 TIME (hours) "- Data for NORTHAMPTON A ORT 4.0 STOR-IND METHOD Prepared by ALMER HUNTLEY Jr & ASSOCIATES INC.: ENGINEERING 9-21-87 HydroCAD ey • c) 1 9$B Applied M t croc., ., a Systems-ystems- O1 n= 4.7 CFS DETENTION POND 10 PROP. DET. Clout- 0 CFS o 2.0 LAG= 43535 SEC `- STARTING ELEV- 117.0 FT 1.5 � FLOOD ELEV- 120.0 FT 1.0 .5 -- ELEVATION STORAGE ELEV/HEAD DISCHARGE STOR-IND METHOD tti M d' il) tD I` tb fi © d' L!) Ln (FT) 117.0 (AF) 0.00 (FT) (CFS) 0.13 PEAK ELEVATION- PEAK STORAGE - 119.4 FT AF 0.0 118.0 .03 0.0 0.0 Qin - 4.7 CFS .99 0 12.91 HRS 119.0 .61 0.0 0.0 Qout- 0.0 CFS 0 25.00 HRS 120.0 1.51 0.0 0.0 ATTEN-100 % LAG 43525 SEC 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 IN/OUT- 1.00 / .01 AF _INVERT (FT) OUTLET DEVICES 117.0 1" CULVERT �- n-.03 L-30' S=.0001'/' Ke -.S Cc -.9 Cd -.G TOTAL DISCHARGE va ELEVATION FEET 0.0 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 g 117.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 118.0 i '- 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 119.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 120.0 0.0 DETENTION POND 10 INFLOW & OUTFLOW PROP, DET, TIME (hours) 4.5 4.0 STOR-IND METHOD 3,5 PERK ELEV=.119.4 FT PERK STOR= .99 RF 3.0 2.5 O1 n= 4.7 CFS `-f Clout- 0 CFS o 2.0 LAG= 43535 SEC 1.5 � 1.0 .5 6 • -^ tti M d' il) tD I` tb fi © d' L!) Ln CU TIME (hours) t 4.0 X22. LA 145.14& 140 0` 1� Dia A.).09 6 E QRcp00 Zov 9'Z/ - l Form S DEOE File No. 246- M �-` fro be Provided by DECEI Commonwealth City/Town Northampton of Massachusetts Apaicant .Northampton Airport, Inc. Order of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act G.L. c.131, §40 From the Northampton Conservation Commission ToNorthampton Airport, Inc. same (Name of Applicant) (Name of property owner) Address Old Ferry Rd., Northampton, MA Addresame This Order !s issued and delivered as follows: D by hand delivery to applicant or representative on (date) D by certified mail, return receipt requested on (date) This project is located at Off Old Ferry Rnad The property is rec&ded at the Registry of Deeds, Hampshire County Book 2386 page 155 Certificate (if registered) The Notice of Intent for this project was filed on 9 / 30/ 87 (date) The public hearing was closed on 10/5/87 (date) Findings The has reviewed the above -referenced Notice of Intent and plans and has held a public hearing on the project. Based on the information available to the Conservation Commission at this time. the Conservation Commission has determined that the area on which the proposed work is to be done is significant to the following interests In accordance with the Presumptions of Significance set forth in the regulations for each Area Subject to Protection Under the Act (check as appropriate): D Public water supply Q Storm damage prevention 0 Private water supply D Prevention of pollution D Ground water supply 0 Land containing shellfish 15 Flood control 0 Fisheries I Therefore, the Conservation Commission hereby firic"t the following conditions are necessary. in accordance with the Performance Standards set forth in the regulations, to protect those inter- ests checked above. The cnns ervat i nn commission orders that ail work shall be performed In accordance with said conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above. To the extent that the fol- _ t lowing conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shag control. General Conditions 1. Failure to comply with ail conditions stated herein, and with all related statutes and other regulatory meas- ures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 2. This Order does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges; it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal, state or local statutes, ordinances, by-laws or regulations. 4. The work authorized hereunder shag be completed within three years from the date of this Order unless either of the following apply: (a) the work is a maintenance dredging project as provided for in the Act; or (b) the time for completion has been extended to a specked date more than three years, but less than five years, from the date of issuance and both that date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth In this Order. S. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods of up to three years each upon application to the issuing authority at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the Order. 6. Any fill used in connection with this project shad be clean fill, containing no trash, refuse, rubbish or de- bris, including but not limited to limber, bricks, piaster, wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe, tires, ashes. tr refrigerators, motor Ahicles or parts of any of the foregoing. 7. No work shall be undertaken until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed or, if such an appeal has Been filed, until ail proceedings before the Department have been completed. 8. No work shad be undertaken until the Final Order has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shag also be noted In the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of registered land, the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. The recording Information shad be submitted to the Pranm4 3S 7 AT on the form at the end of this Order prior to commencement of the work. 9. A sign shag be displayed at the site not less than two square feet or more than three square feet In size bearing the words, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering, File Number' 246- r 10. Where the Department of Environmental Ckiaity Engineering is requested to make a determination and to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shad be a party to all agency proceedings and hearings before the Department. 11. Upon completion of the work described herein. the applicant shad forthwith request in writing that a Certificate of Compliance be issued. stating that the work has been satisfactorily completed. 12. The work shall conform to the following pians and special conditions: 5-2 Plans: Title Dated Signed and Stamped by: On File wittt: Layout•& Construction Plan, -7/8/87 Mark B. Darnold N'ton Consv. Comm. Vacinity Map & General Notes, 1/8/87 Mark B. Darnold It Exhibit #7 (Comp. Storage) " of of Special Conditions (Use additional paper if necessary) 1) All construction areas shall be restored to original condition or better upon completion of the project, including vegetation; 2) No areas within the 100 year floodplain nor within 100 feet of a wetland area, as defined in Chapter 131, Section 40, M.G.L., shall be permissable disposal sites, unless otherwise approved by the Conservation Commission; 3) Excavated material and topsoil stockpiles shall be located and stabilized so as to minimize washing.into wetland areas or waterways; 4) Adequate measures shall be taken to prevent erosion and siltation of all disturbed areas; 5) This Order Of Conditions shall apply to any successor in interest or successor in control 6) Members and agents of the Conservation Commission shall have the right to enter and inspect the premises to evaluate compliance with the Conditions and to require the submittal of any data deemed necessary by the Commission for that evaluation; 7) (if checked) Upon completion of the project, the Applicant shall submit a statement from the Project Engineer that all work has been done in con— formance with the provisions of the approved Order of Conditions. (X) YES ( ) NO ... ............. ................ .................... .................... ..................................................... ..... ............. ................................... (leave Space Blank) 5-3A Issued By Nor * h an o [ o n Conservation Cott lm4wjon Signatures This Order must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commisslm Ont 18th day of October $ — before before me Personally appeared Ralph Emrick , to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she executed 19,51 -Wile as his/her free act and deed. Notary Public . MY coftrunission expire"' `- :`;.'�__ "�.t - 7z The applicant. the owner. any person sggrieved by this prow. any owner of hand abut&V the tared upon which the proposed work is to be done or any ten rea+dents of the city or town to which auch tend is located are hereby notated of their right to request the Department Of Environmental Cudiry Engineering to issue a SupersedIng Order. providing the request is made by Certified mail or bend dWvery to the Department wimin ten days from the date of Issaiance of this Order. A copy of the request aha/ at the same time be sent by certrred mad or laid delivery 10 the Cer cnays*m Commission athe 41100--41100--mLnd p Detach on dotted line and submit to the No r th atm= n Cong e rte•= r; mn r•mmm * prfor to Commencement of work. Issuing Authority Please be advised mat the order of Conditions for the proiect �'i�/r'V/� v Fiie Number 246 -hes been recorded at Meiie9aetrY of De od a damn ch i rA and �+ � has been noted in the chain of title of the alfected properly in actor with General bon a on t gam. It recorded land. the instrument number which identities mis If re9i31ered land. e document number which identifies it" transaction IC th S�gnaturs 5-4A f - -- - - - -Form 5 - - - 11411102 - - - -- - - bEOE File No. 246— - — -- — — (To be provided by DEQE) city/Town Northampton Applicant Northamntnn ai•rpnrt Order of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act G.L. c. 131, §40 From the Northampton Conservation Commission TO Northam! tnn Air art TUU �p (Name of Applicant) (Name of property owner) Address Old Ferry Rd., Northampton Address— This Order is issued and delivered as follows: ❑ i by hand delivery to applicant or representative on i/a (date) ❑ by certified mail, return receipt requested on (date) This project is located at Northampton Airport . Old Fprry Rnad The property is recorded at the Registry of Deeds, Hampshire County Book 2386 Page_ X55 Certificate (if registered) The Notice of Intent for this project was filed on September 21, 1987 (date) The public hearing was closed on _September 28, 1987 (date) Findings The Nnrtham++tnn rnn -- has reviewed the above -referenced Notice of Intent and plans and has held a public hearing on the project. Based on the information available to the Conservation Commission at this time, the—Cons rva ion Commission has determined that the area on which the proposed work is to be done is significant to the following interests in accordance with the Presumptions of Significance set forth in the regulations for each Area Subject to Protection Under the Act (check as appropriate): ❑ Public water supply ❑ Storm damage prevention ❑ Private water supply ❑ Prevention of pollution ❑ Ground water supply ❑ Land containing shellfish 13 Flood control ❑ Fisheries 5-t Therefore, the _ Conservation Commission hereby finds that the following conditions are necessary, in accordance with the Performance Standards set forth in the regulations, to protect those inter--- eats nter-eats checked above. The Con s P rva t i on cn,, m i s s i o., orders that all work shall be performed In accordance with said conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above. To the extent that the fol- lowing conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications or other proposals submitted with the Notice of7ntent, the conditions shall control. General Conditions 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein, and with all related statutes and other regulatory meas- ures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 2. This Order does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges; it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal, state or local statutes, ordinances, by-laws or regulations. 4. The work authorized hereunder shall be completed within three years from the date of this Order unless either of the following apply: (a) the work is a maintenance dredging project as provided for in the Act; or (b) the time for completion has been extended to a specified date more than three years, but less than five years, from the date of issuance and both that date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth in this Order. 5. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods of up to three years each upon application to the issuing authority at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the Order. 6. Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill, containing no trash, refuse, rubbish or de- bris, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster, wire, lath. paper, cardboard, pipe, tires, ashes, refrigerators, motor Vdhicles or parts of any of the foregoing. 7. No work shall be undertaken until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed or, if such an appeal has been filed, until all proceedings before the Department have been completed. 8. No work shall be undertaken until the Final Order has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of registered land, the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. The recording information shall be submitted to the _r��4�n on the form at the end of this Order prior to commencement of the work. 9. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less than two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the words, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering, File Number 246- 10. Where the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering is requested to make a determination and to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shall be a party to all agency proceedings and hearings before the Department. 11. Upon completion of the work described herein, the applicant shall forthwith request in writing that a Certificate of Compliance be issued stating that the work has been satisfactorily completed. 12. The work shall conform to the following plans and special conditions: 5-2 Plans: Title Dated - Signed and Stamped by: on Fie with: Plan of Land s,arvc�-� �� 3/25/86 - Almer Huntley, Jr. T3 DEQE & N'ton- Con v_ Copes, Northampton Airport_ - _Plan Accomnanvin 9/21/87 irk R. narnnla Notice of Intent -nFQF W' r^^ :oa_,i4 _ Comm. Special Conditions (Use additional paper if necessary) 1) All construction areas shall be restored to original condition or better upon completion of the project, including vegetation; 2) No areas within the 100 year floodplain nor within 100 feet of a wetland area, as defined in Chapter 131, Section 40, M.G.L., shall be permissable disposal sites, unless otherwise approved by the Conservation Commission; 3) Excavated material and topsoil stockpiles shall be located and stabilized su as to minimize washing into wetland areas or waterways; 4) Adequate measures shall be taken to prevent erosion and siltation of all disturbed areas; 5) This Order Of Conditions shall apply to any successor in interest or successor in control L_ 6) Members and agents of the Conservation Commission shall have the right to enter and inspect the premises to evaluate compliance with the Conditions and to require the submittal of any data deemed necessary by the Commission for that evaluation; 7) (if checked) Upon completion of the project, the Applicant shall submit a statement from the Project Engineer that all work has been done in con- formance with the provisions of the approved,Order of Conditions. ( ) YES ( ) NO ...........................................................». (Leave Space Stank) 5-3A Special Conditions (continued) DEQE File No. 246- 8) The Applicant shall notify the Conservation Commission, in writing, as to the date that work will be commencing on the project. Said written noti- fication must be received by the Commission no sooner than ten (10) days and no later than seven (7) days prior to the commencement of the approved activity. 9) (if checked) The Applicant shall complete and execute the attached ATTACHMENT "A"/NOTICE OF POSSIBLE WETLANDS RESTRICTIONS UNDER M.G.L. C.131, S.40 relative to the cite of the Northampton Airport Old erred Northampton MA Said ATTACHMENT "A" chall ba attached to, become a part of, and shall be filed with this Order Of Conditions at the Registry of Deeds. The Applicant shall re- turn a copy of the completed and notorized ATTACHMENT "A" to the Conservation Commission when the bottom portion of Page 5-4A of this Order Of Conditions Of Conditions' is returned. (X) YES ( ) NO t Issued 8y Nor thamg ton Conservation Commisslon This Order must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commisslon. On this XIP day of 19- if :Z . before me personally appeared . to me known to be the person described In and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she executed the same is/her free act and deed. f Notary Public My cc nvf expires The applicant. the owner. any person aggrieved by this Order. any owner of land abutting the land upon which the proposed work Is to be don* or any ten residents of the city or town In which such land Is located am hereby notified of their right to request the Deperanent of Environmental Quality Engineering to issue a Superseding Order, providing the request is made by certified mail or hand delivery to the Department within ton days from the date of Issuance of this Order. A copy of the request &W at the same time be sent by certified mat or hand delivery to the Conservation Commission and the applicant. Detach on dotted line and submit to the Northampton Conservation Gomm i a c i gwIor to commencement of work. To Northampton Conservation Commission Issuing Authority Please be advised that the Order of Conditions for the project at File Number 246— has been recorded at the Registry of Deesis Hamm ch i req rni in t -1z and has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property in accordance with General Condition 8 on .19 If recorded lard, the instrument number which identifies this transaction is If registered land, the document number which identifies this transaction is Signature Applicant 5-4A r Jv Form 3 oECE Fk No. �. (To be proridod by cem :�•�� pin. Northampton Commonwealth ., own of Massachusetts- AaaKane Northampton Airport, In Notice of Intent Under the Massachusetts Wetlands protection Act, G.L. c.131, §40 and Application for a Department of the Army Permit Part 1: General Information 1. Location: Street Address Northamson Airgorr off of Cross Path Road_ Lot Number p^ rhe two existing hangers 2. Project: Type Hanger Building Description Steel framed "Erect -A -Tube" Airplane Hanger 250 feet long, 50 feet wide and 28 feet high. The building's frame to be set on concrete piers at grads The hanger floor and common access _way will be paved with T pe.I bituminous concrete (see Exhibits). 3. Registry: County iiamashire (Current Book 2386 & Page_ 155 rarNt4-mtsillf Reeistered land) N/A 4. � Address Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA 01060 5. Propertyowner Northampton Airport, Inc. Tel, 584-1860 Address Old Ferry Road, Northampton, MA 01060 • 8. Representative Almer Huntley, Jr. & Associates, Inc. Tel. 584-7444 Address 30 Industrial Drive East Northampton, MA 01060 T. Have the Conservation Commission and the DEOE Regional Office each been sent. by certified mail or hand deanery, 2 copies of completed Notice of Intent, with supporting pians and documents? Yes X1 No 3-1 8 Have all obtainable permits. variances and approvals required by kxud by-law been obtained? Yes C3 No ��I-1-'_; Applied For. Not Applied For. Findinft by ZBA RE: Sec. 9.3B Building Permit S. Is any portion of the site subject to a Wetlands Restriction Order pursuant to G.L C. 131, §40A or G.L c. 130, §105? Yes C3 . No �k 10. List all pians and supporting documents submitted with this Notice of Intent. Identifying Number/Letter. Title. Date Exhibit 1 Locus Map Exhibit 2 Federal Insurance Rate Map Exhibit 3 Project Description Exhibir 4 Comppnaarnry Storage Calculation, on, Exhibit 5 Runoff Calculations Exhibit 6 Plan Accompanying Notice of Intent Prepared for Northampton irport, Inc. Exhibit 7 Plan of Land in Northampton, Mass. Surveyed for Northampton Airport, Inc, 11. Check those resource areas within wnicn worn is proposes: (a) 0 Buffer Zone. (b) Inland: 0 Bank* Lard Subject to Flooding. 0 Bordering Vegetated Welland• ® Bordering 0 Land Under Water Body & Waterway • 0 Isolated (c) Coastal: C3 Land Under the Ocean• C3 Coastal Beach • C3 Barrier Beach C3 Rocky Intertidal Shore • 0 Land Under Salt Pond • C3 - Fish Run • C3 I Designated Port Area - 13 Coastal Dune 0 Coastal Bank C3 Salt Marsh • C3 Land Containing Shellfish• •Likely to involve U.S. Army Corps of Engineers concurrent Jurisdiction. See General Instructions for Completing Notice of Intent. 3-2 I Part II: Site Description Indicate which of the following information has been provided (on a plan, in narrative description or caicula. tons) to dearly. completely and accurately describe existing site conditions. Identifying Number/Letter (of plan, narrative or calculations) Natural Features: 3-5 Soils N/A Vegetation 6 Topography N/A Open water bodies (including ponds and lakes) 1-2 Flowing water bodies (including streams and rivers) N/A Public and private surface water and ground water supplies on or within 100 feet of site NIA Maximum annual ground water elevations with dates and location of test 2 Boundaries of resource areas checked under Part I, item 11 above Other Man-made Features: 6. 7, 8 Structures (such as buildings, piers, towers and headwalls) 6 Drainage and flood control facilities at the site and immediately off the site, including culverts and open channels (with inverts). dams and dikes N/A Subsurface sewage disposal systems 6 Underground utilities 6 Roadways and parking areas 7 Property boundaries, easements and rights-of-way Other Part III: Work Description Indicate which of the following information has been provided (on a plan, in narrative description or calcula- tions) alculations) to clearly, completely and accurately describe work proposed within each of the resource areas checked in Part I, item 11 above. Identifying Number/Letter (of plan, narrative ' or calculations) Planview and Cross Section of: 6-8 Structures (such as buildings. piers, towers and headwalls) 6 Drainage and flood control facilities, including culverts and open charnels (with inverts). dams and dikes Subsurface sewage disposal systems d underground utilities �►-� Filling. dredging and excavating, indicating volume and composition of material 4-6 Compensatory storage areas. where required in accordance with Part III. Section 10:57 (4) of the regulations Other Point Source Discharge N/A Description of characteristics of discharge from point source (both closed and open channel), when point of discharge falls within resource area checked under Part 1, item 11 above, as supported by standard engineering calculations, data and plana, including but not limited to the following: 3-3 1. Delirieat1cm of the drainage area contributing to the point of discharge; 2. Pro- and post-deveiopntent peak nm -off from the drainage area, at the point of discharge. for at bast the 10-yeer and 400 -year frequency storm: 3. Pro- and post -development rate of infiltration contributing to the resource area checked under Part 1. item 11 above; 4. Estimated water quality characteristics of pro- and. post -development run-off at the point of discharge. Part IV: Mitigating Measures' 1. Clearly, completely and accurately describe, with reference to supporting plans and calculations where necessary: (a) AA measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards set forth under each re. Source area specified in Part II or Part 10 of the regulations; or (b) why the presumptions set forth under each resource area specified in Part II or Part III of the regul& tions do not apply. 0 Coestd R"o uoe Area Type. ® k*nd Bordering Land Subject to Flooding Went yinp number or letter of supportdoouments The finish floor elevation of 121.0 feet and the grading 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 as shown on the plan and cross-sections, Exhibit 6, results in significantly more excavation (1,300 cy!) than fill . (700 cy). These volumes have been worked out so as to be in conformance with 310 CMR Sec. 10.57 (4)(a)(1 & 2). See Exhibit 4. All surplus material will.be properly disposed -of off-site. ` A net increase of about 650 cy of flood storage will be provided by this project. r 0 Coestd Resource Area Type: 0 howl kbnti ving number or Wrier dsupportdoatunents 3-4 Part Y- AddittlOnaf Inforft511"n for a Dipirtment of the AmnY eitiinIt, Connect- c ut Iti er I. COEApp�itionNo. -, 2 (to be provided by COE) (Name of waterway) 3. Names and addresses of property owners adjoining your properly: George F. Reynolds 56 Cross Path Road Northampton., HA 01060' 4. Document other project alternatives (i.e., other locations and/or construction methods particutarty those that would eliminate the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters or wetlands). $- 8'/2 0 x 11 drawings in planview and cross-section, showing the resource area and the proposed actio ity within the resource area. Drawings must be to scale and should be clear enough for photocopying. Certification s required from the Dwsion of Water PoIkAon Contrd before the Federal' perm can be sued Certification may be obtained by contacting the Division of Water Pollution Control.1 Wi Street Bosoon, Mameay.-setts 02108. Where the act * will -take place within the area under the Massachusetts approved Coastal Zone Management per, th eappbcarlt Certs that his proposed activity oornp6es with and will be conducted n a mar m that is consetent with the approved prograrTM Inforrrlation pr'wided will be used in evaluating the application for a Mn*and is made a matter of P record thrrxrgh ssuance of a pubs Dsdosure of this Wformatbn s wkmtW.. howeRr if necessary application cannot be processed nor can a permit be slued. irdotmati0n s not prpvided. t ps of perjury that the foregoing Notice of Intent and accompanying true and complete, to the best of my knowledge - i hereby certify under the pains and plans, documents ao=POrl Date Signature of Applicant Northampton Air rt, Inc. e Richard Guist resi ent t'sRepresentative Almer Huntley, Jr. ggtt 7 -- SignatweofApplican Associates, Inc., Steven G DVason - "Lss@tatiew te LNG lora /illi afPneed by NQUSACL. 0 May low. FORM TESTI wtYwtia a�!"*&" w _ N E D 100 � + -"lUia d.ewa.wt s.wtaiwa a joint Department of the Atwf awl Stat..f Ma 1 MAY 82 b► a perwi& to 0tais permission to perform &e"ti@& in limited stat*@ waters. The Office of Maa&Remost and Budtet (OM1) Mu s00reed abuse 4e*@tiow& required by the US Army Corp of Lweiwesn. OMD 14%mber 0702-0030 awl 0200`11060 dste of 00 September 1"S 111001*@". Thi& &&&&@west will be set in $ point type. 3.6 EXHIBIT 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT The Northampton Airport is proposing to construct an airplane hanger on land it owns adjacent to Cross Path Road. The 12,500 square foot building, to be con- structed by Quab.bin Construction, will be located 75 feet off of and parallel to an existing hanger, as shown on the attached plans. The site of the proposed hanger is completely within the 100 -year flood plain of the Connecticut River, as is most of the airport. This Notice of Intent is being filed in compliance with the Wetlands Protection Act for bordering land subject to flooding. The plan and calculations attached show that the proposed work will satisfy the per- formance standard for bordering land subject to flooding (Sec. 10.57 (4) a (1 & 2). In f act, to satisfy cut and fill requirements at each 1 -foot interval ele- vation,' about 650 C.Y. (0.4 AC -FT) of additional storage had to be provided. The elevation of the 100 -year storm for this site is about 125 feet. This Notice of Intent also contains site runoff calculations, although they are not expressly required by the Act for this type of resource area. Since the watershed drains to a somewhat isolated area with minimal outflow through the nearly buried existing 12" V.C. pipe, these calculations were performed, assum- ing essentially zero outflow. The analysis of the 10 -year event for the 8.6 acre water shed showed that, due to the added storage provided, the water level in this depression is actually reduced from 119.5 feet to 119.4 feet (see hydro - graphs attached). This would be the governing 10 -year flood for the area since the 10 -gear flood of the river, is about 118.5 feet. As the storm intensity increases, however,"the flood levels, due to the site runoff, becomes insigni- ficant, as the flood of the river is more intensive. As stated above, the general contractor for the work will be Quabbin Construc- tion Co., Inc. of Belchhertown, MA. The proposed steel building will be pro- vided,by Erect -A -Tube Inc. of Harvard, IL. The building frame will be set on concrete footings which will be set at finish grade (121.00). The only flood storage occupied by the building would be the steel I -beams and 28 gage siding. This volume is less than 1 C.Y. at each one -foot elevation and is negligible. In the event of a•severe flood, the planes will be moved out and.the hanger will flood (4 feet deep for 100 -gear flood). The floor of the hanger and the access road will be constructed of about 3 inches of bituminous concrete laid on about 12 inches of compacted gravel. In addition to the estimated total of 650 C.Y. of material to be removed, matching volumes of the gravel and bituminous concrete must also be removed and properly disposed of so that the finish grades on the attached plan are achieved. After final grading and paving,' remaining areas will then be seeded as soon as is practical. ALMER HUNTLEY, JR., & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 0130'71 V Form 3 S DEQE F7e wo. 246- 134 (To be provided by DEQE) Commonwealth City/Town Northampton Um of MassachusettsApplicant City Aviation •A OJT 3 Order of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act G.L. c. 131, §40 From— the Northampton Conservation Commission r ' To City Aviation Northamptorii: Airport, Inc. (Name of Applicant) (Name of property owner) Address P.O. Box 221 , Northampton Address Old Ferry Rd., Northampton This Order is issued and delivered as follows: ® Eby hand delivery to applicant or representative on _ u n P 4 , 19 R 5 (date) ❑ by certified mail, return receipt requested on (date) This project is located at Northampton Air -port, Old Ferry Rd., Northampton, MA The property is recorded at the Registry of Deeds. Hampshire County Book 2386 Page 155 ' Certificate (if registered) The Notice of Intent for this project was filed on May 22, 1 985 (date) The public hearing was closed on May 28, 1985 (date) Findings The Nnrrt,a,n_tnn res �-.,a r; ., Com.,,.,,; on has reviewed the above -referenced Notice of Intent and plans and has held a public hearing on the project. Based on the information available to the Conservation Comm�sai�n at this time, the _Conservation Commission has determined that the area on which the proposed work is to be done is significant to the following interests in accordance with the Presumptions of Significance set forth in the regulations for each Area Subject to Protection Under the Act (check as appropriate): ❑ Public water supply = Storm damage prevention ❑ Private water supply ❑ Prevention of pollution ❑ Ground water supply ❑ Land containing* shellfish XZ Flood control ❑ Fisheries 5-1 Duvn v•tt'V I num WV'tV Therefore, the Conservation Commission hereby finds that the following conditions are necessary, in accordance with the Performance Standards set forth in the regulations, to protect those inter- ests checked above. The _Cor, s erva t i on Commission orders that all work shad be performed in accordance with said conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above. To the extent that the fol- lowing conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall control. General Condltlons 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein, and with all related statutes and other regulatory meas- ures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 2. This Order does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges; it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with ad other applicable federal, state or local statutes, ordinances, by-laws or regulations. 4. The work authorized hereunder shall be completed within three years from the date of this Order unless either of the following apply: (a) the work is a maintenance dredging project as provided for in the Act; or (b) the time for completion has been extended to a specked date more than three years, but less than five years, from the date of issuance and both that date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth in this Order. 5. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods of up to three years each upon application to the issuing authority at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the Order. 6. Any fill used in connection with this project shad. be clean fid, containing no trash, refuse, rubbish or de- bris, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster, wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe, tires, ashes, refrigerators, motor vdhicles or parts of any of the foregoing. 7. No work shall be undertaken until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed or, if such an appeal has been filed, until all proceedings before the Department have been completed. 8. No work shall be undertaken until the Final Order has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shalt also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of registered land, the Final Order shall alsobe noted on the land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. The recording information shall be submitted to the rnmm; scion on the form at the end of this Order prior to commencement of the work. 9. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less than two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the words, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering, File Number 246- 134 10. Where the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering is requested to make a determination and to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shad be a party to all agency proceedings and hearings before the Department. 11. Upon completion of the work described herein, the applicant shall forthwith request in writing that a Certificate of Compliance be issued stating that the work has been satisfactorily completed. 12. The work shall conform to the following plans and special conditions: 5-2 Plans: Title Dated Signed and Stamped by: VWX ,31U6 PAGE 0.341 On File with: TOPOGRAPHIC PLAN OF SITE included in the original Northampton Conservation (Exhibit 2) _ Notice of Intent Commission and DEQE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION OF included in the original Northampton Conservation PROP. GRADING (Exhibit 4) Notice of Intent Commission & DEQE (Pre -Existing ONLY) Special Conditions (Use additional paper if necessary) 1) All construction areas shallbe restored to roginal condition or better upon completion of the project, including vegetation; 2) No areas within the 100 year floodplain nor within 100 feet of a wetland area, as defined in Chapter 131, Section 40, M.G.L., shall be permissable disposal sites, unless otherwise approved by the Conservation Commission; 3) Excavated material and topsoil stockpiles shall be located and stabilized so as to minimize washing into wetland areas or waterways; 4) Adequate measures shall be taken to prevent erosion and siltation of all disturbed areas; 5) This Order Of Conditions shall apply to any successor in interest or successor in control 6) Members and agents of the Conservation Commission shall have the right to enter and inspect the premises to evaluate compliance with the Conditions and to require the submittal of any data deemed necessary by the Commission for that evaluation; 7) All "filled" areas shall be restored to their original elevations (.to ensure the there is no loss of compensatory flood storage) and the disturbed (bulldozed) bank of -the Connecticut River shall be*restored to as close to a 1/1 slope as possible using only on-site materials removed from the "filled" areas. Said slope shall continue at least 5 feet above the rip -rapping (unless the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service and/or the Army Corps of Engineers require ... .............o therwi-se).................................................................................................................................................. (Leave Space Blank) 5-3A ORDER OF COND 3 (246-134) City Aviation/Northampton Airport ,� 8) To prevent undermining of the re—established bank, the toe of the slope shall be rip—rapped 3 feet above and 3 feet below the average water line _ of the Connecticut River (unless the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service and/or Army Corps of Engineers require otherwise). 9) All fallen vegetation, both in the river and on the bank, shall be removed from the site prior to rip—rapping the toe of the slope or final grading, 10) The restored bank and 100 foot buffer zone of the bank shall be mulched and seeded (with a mix approved by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service) and appropriately stabilized with jute mesh. Shrubs and trees (the type of which must be recommended and approved by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service) shall:be_uniformally scattered over the re—established bank and 100 foot buffer zone of the bank and shall be planted densely enough so as to prevent and prohibit vehicular access (and its resulting potential erosion problems) across the area. The purpose of the tress and shrubs is to establish a natural, extensive and deep system of roots to stabilize and hold the bank, and the 100 foot buffer zone of the bank, against flooding. 11) The restoration work shall commence in the following order: 1) Removal of fallen vegetation, 2) Rip—rap toe of bank, -.- 3) Re—establish slope and restore "filled" areas to original grades, 4) Mulch, seed, jute mesh, trees and shrubs 12) The restoration of the disturbed and altered areas shall be completed as follows: 1) all work relative to re—establishing the bank of the river shall be completed by June 24, 1985, 2) all work relative to re—establishing the -100 foot buffer zone of the river's bank shall be completed by June 24, 1985, though should there be a lack of available trees for planting by June 24, 1985 for the 100 foot buffer zone only, all trees shall be planted by September 1, 1985 (unless otherwise recommended by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service). 13) All trees planted shall have a minimum two inch diameter to be measured one foot up from the base of the tree, when planted. 5-3B BGGK 3406 PAGE 0343 .' Issued By Northampton Conservation Convy sslon Signatures) This Order must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission. On this 3 n eQ y TN NC da of 19 � S� before me personally appeared �� c ka. e C . Cal, r% e c , to rile known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she executed the same as his/her free aCtand deed. Notary Public 9 a r + T 6v- A—^ My Commission expires The applicant. the owner, any person aggrieved by this order, any owner of land abulli ng the kind upon which the proposed work Is to be done or any ten residents of the city or town In which such land Is located are hereby notified of their right to request the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering to issue a Superseding Order. providing the request is made by cerdtled mail or hand delivery to the Department within ten days from the date of lasuance of We order. A copy of the request shah at the same time be sent by comrad mail or hand delivery to the Conservation Commission and the applicant. Detach on dotted line and submit to the Northampton Con a rya ion .omm i a a i cpior to commencement of work. To Northampton Conservation Commission Issuing Authority Please be advised thal the order of Conditions for the proiect at R, /?al File Number 246-/3Y has been recorded at the Registry at' Deeds Hamnshi rp rnrinry and has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property in accordance with General condition a on 19 Q recorded land, the instrument number which identifies this transaction Is It registered land, the document number which identifies this transaction is Signature Applicant HoTti-ahire ss. 5-4A n 1989 a�o'clock anal D �minut P .M., Rec'd ent'd and Oil. (DAY) 4 exam'd th Hampshire Reg. of Deeds, l3ooky. ��P =- ._. , Attes% REAIST�R 4 ..r RITCHIE, ENNIS tB SEEWALD, P. C. ROBERT W. RITCHIE JOHN R. ENNIS ALAN SEEWALD July 13, 1989 Mr. Wayne Fyden Conservation Commission City of Northampton City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 RE: Northampton Airport, Inc. Dear Wayne: �r a tic - it t FIVE EAST PLEASANT STREET AMHERST, MASSACHUSETTS 01002 (413) 849-0041 283-3408 MAS Thank you for faxing me the February 14, 1989 letter from David Gengler, Chair of the Conservation Commission and the minutes of the Commission's February 13, 1989 meeting. This will confirm our telephone conversation of July 12, 1989 in which you indicated that according to the vote of the Commission the only items left for Northampton Airport, Inc. to do in order to fully and completely comply with all conditions of the Commission's Order of Conditions relative to the riverbank restoration are those indicated in the February 14 letter. It is thus my understanding, based upon the February 14 letter, the February 13 minutes and our telephone conversation, that if this work is performed a Certificate of Compliance shell issue forthwith. ,As you know, Mr. Giusto of Northampton Airport firmly believes that he is entitled to a Certificate at this point based upon earlier site inspections by the Commission and representations made at that time. This letter is simply and solely intended to assure my client that if he does in fact comply with the requests of the February 14 letter, a Certificate Of Compliance will issue forthwith without any further work to be done. I would appreciate your bringing this matter to the attention of the Commission so that I may be assured that my understanding relative to this matter is accurate. Your help and attention in resolving this matter is greatly appreciated. Very truly yours, /lan�Seewald xc: Richard Giusto, President Northampton Airport, Inc. City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586.8960 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation• Historic Preservation • Planning Board Zoning Board of Appeals July 31, 1989 Alan Seewald Ritchie, Ennis & Seewald 5 East Pleasant Street Amherst, MA 01002 RE: Northampton Airport (permit #246-134, Map ID 25-053) Dear Alan: At their last meeting, the Conservation Commission discussed your July 13, 1989 letter requesting that the Commission clarify what work remained to be done before the Northampton Airport can receive a certificate of compliance for their riverbank restoration project. The Commission reaffirmed that the two items discussed in David Gengler's February 14, 1989 letter must be done before a certificate can be issued. These items are filling in an eroded dingle that resulted from the original riverbank project and stabilizing the fill, and planting trees to prevent access to the riverbank. The Commission indicated that if a site visit to be held on July 27, 1989 does not show any other problems, then the Commission will issue a Certificate upon completion of the two items discussed before. At the site visit held on July 27, 1989 we found no additional items, beyond the two discussed, that need to be completed before a certificate can.be issued. I think both these items should be fairly easy to resolve. You should be aware that the Commission recorded the Order of Conditions for this project, in accordance with 310 CMR 10.05 (6)(g)• Sincerely, Wayne M. Feiden Planner y' v City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 686.6950 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation • Hiatoric Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals a 14OgMWETCH CONSERVATION COMUSSION Minutes: February 13, 1989 The Northampton Conservation Commission met on February 13, 1989 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 112 of the Northampton High School, Northampton. Members present were Chairperson David Gengler, Ralph Emrick, Frank Peters, and Mason Maronn. Associate members Kathryn Lamay, Mark NeJame and Elaine Contant and planning staff Wayne Feiden and Larry Smith (leaving at 8:15) were also present. The meeting was delayed until a quorum was present and Gengler opened it at 7:40 p.m. Minutes: The minutes of January 31 were amended to show that Louis Moore was present. Upon motion by Gengler and second by Peters, the amended minutes were approved unanimously. Correspondence: Mason Maronn was appointed to the Management Plan and the Bylaws/Forms/Procedures study groups. The Commission discussed a copy of a letter from John Cotton to the Planning Board opposing the Valley Aggregates cement batching plant on Turkey Hill Road. The Commission felt that a Determination of Applicability should be filed if Mr. Cotton or other Turkey Hill residents believes the Commission has jurisdiction over any aspect of the project. Proposed Zoning Change: Larry Smith presented a proposed zoning map change in the area around Atwood Drive, which is currently Highway Business. The upland portion of the Highway Business zone would be changed to General Business (to allow a hotel and zone for the best use of the area) and the area most prone to flooding at the toe of the slope leading to Atwood drive would be rezoned special conservancy -flood plain. Smith also presented a proposed zoning text change to delete a section of text which prohibits the removal of soil from the watershed district. Removing this section will allow the Commission to order compensatory storage and allow other reasonable projects, if the Conservation Commission issues an Order of Conditions and if a Special Permit is issued (when over 10 cubic yards of material will be removed.) Upon motion by Marone and second by Emrick the Commission moved unanimously to support the proposed changes. Public Hearing Continuation: Mathias Duda: Gengler reconvened the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. Mr. Duda was not present. The building inspector's letter of 2-9-89 requesting that the Commission take no action until certified elevations are provided by the applicant and until pending enforcement action is resolved was read into the record. Upon motion by Emrick and second by Peters the Commission voted unanimously to continue the hearing to 2-27-89 at 7:30 p.m. in Council Chambers when Mr. Duda can be present. Enforcement Action Continuation: Tacy: Gengler reconvened this matter at 8:20 p.m. Mr Tacy was not present but had called to request that the matter be continued to the next Commission meeting. Upon motion by Emrick and second by Peters the Commission voted unanimously to continue the hearing to 2-27-89 after 7:30 p.m. in Council Chambers. .� Certificate of Compliance Request: Northampton Airport: The Commission determined that most of the work at the Airport's riverbank restoration project has been completed, but that the project is still not in compliance with its Order of Conditions (especially special condition 10). To comply with the Order, the Commission felt that trees and shrubs must be planted thick enough to prevent vehicular access within 100 feet of the bank and the eroded channel on part of the bank must be filled and stabilized. Upon motion by Emrick and second by Peters, the Commission voted unanimously to deny the request for a Certificate of Compliance. Certificate of Compliance Request: Lot 1. Kennedy Road:_ Upon motion by Emrick and second by Peters, the Commission voted unanimously to grant a Certificate of Compliance for Lot 1 (246-211), with the condition that the final driveway must be build as shown on the approved plans and the Order of Conditions. This Certificate does not apply to lot 51. Certificate of Compliance Request: Graham/Yankee Hill Machine Co: A letter from Graham agreeing to place permanent barriers around his parking lot in the rear of the property was entered into the — record. Upon motion by Peters and second by Emrick, the Commission voted unanimously to grant the Certificate (246-165), with the condition that the parking lot size not exceed that shown on the approved plans. Enforcement/Complaint: Susco Upon motion by Peters and second by Emrick, the Commission voted to write Mr. Susco and express concern that his fill is extending beyond the area shown on the approved plans and Order of Conditions (246-194). Enforcement/Complaint: Three County Fairground: A letter from the Fairground stating that they will remove all the fill on their property along the road was entered into the record. The Commission felt this would satisfy their concerns, as long as the fill is removed in the spring. Emergency Certification: DPW: Upon motion by Maronn and second by Peters, the Commission voted unanimously to notify the DPW that their Emergency Certification has expired for the culvert work on b s City of Northampton, Massa use Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 5864M • Community and Economic Development • Conservation• Historic Pnaemation • Planning Board• Zoning Board of Appeals Tp ' A 4A& S�,Ey eco " Richard Giusto Northampton Airport d/b/a/ City Aviation PO Box 221 Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Richard: February 14, 1989 The Conservation Commission inspected your riverbank restoration project (246-134) on Feb. 2, 1989 and feels that most of the bank restoration work has been completed. Only two aspects of the project still need to be completed." First, a small erosion channel is developing on the south side of the riverbank because there was not adequate vegetation to stabilize the soil. This erosion gully should be filled in and vegetated to stabilize the area. Second, as noted on the Order of Conditions special condition 10 and special condition 13, trees and shrubs must be planted 100 feet back from the Pank to stabilize the bank and prevent vehicular access. All planpd trees shall have a minimum of a two inch diameter one foot '{gyp from the base of the tree. You may want to place wooden railroad ties on the ground to prevent vehicles from damaging the trees and shrubs you plant. The Commission is confident this work can be done this spring and they will then be able to issue a Certificate of Compliance on the project. They felt they could not, however, issue a Certificate until this work has been done. If you have any questions, please contact Wayne Feiden, who is the planner assigned to the Conservation Commission. Thank -you for you help on this project. DG/WF �IL'SfG C—"ICs; fi!• c( f cis ,.' r -r t • !, J ..- C Si cerely Davi Gen er, Chair Conservat on Commission t ti r <o <., <.,, sr. �•., ..� City of Northampton, Massadwsetts Office of Planning and Development City HaH • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 5864WO • Community and Economic Devdopownt • conservation• Historic Preservation • Planning Boards Zoning Hoard of Appeals Richard Giusto Northampton Airport d/b/a/ City Aviation PO Box 221 Northampton, MA 01060 % Dear Richard: February 14, 1989 The Conservation Commission inspected your riverbank restoration project (246-134) on Feb. 2, 1989 and feels that most of the bank restoration work has been completed. Only two aspects of the project still need to be completed. First, a small erosion channel is developing on the south side of the riverbank because there was not adequate vegetation to stabilize the soil. This erosion gully should be €illed in and vegetated to stabilize the area. Second, as noted on the order of Conditions special condition 10 and special condition 13, trees and shrubs must be planted 100 feet back from the Pank to stabilize the bank and prevent vehicular access. All plaApd trees shall have a minimum of a two inch diameter one foot 'hp from the base of the tree. You may want to place wooden railroad ties on the ground to prevent vehicles from damaging the trees and shrubs you plant. -- ,The Commission is confident this work can be done this spring and they will then be able to issue a Certificate of Compliance on the project. They felt they could not, however, issue a Certificate until this work has been done. If you have any questions, please contact Wayne Feiden, who is the planner assigned to the Conservation Commission. Thank -you for you.help on this project. Si cerely cS� Davi Gen er, Chair Conservat on Commission DG/WF .rF Givsfo Oiled S•s•'d `ie Gro. -I'4 X""11 rpt 'A0 C f/fi�Cclr .-� 4---� a jib/fes /!, /y &.9 crh�r Jfeb. T ti t C'O ls. Nr.'jf:'oq i'ic DEQE File No. 246- ITo be provided by DEOE) Qty/Town Nnr ham= tnn Applicant /9 :9/7iPC7jT% Notice of Intent Under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 and �- Application for a Department of the Army Permit Part I: General Information 1. Location: Street Address Off of Riverbank Drive behind the Airport Lot Number 2. Project:Type -c learing/ Description The applicant has cleared the site of grading trees and brush up to the River and intends to regrade the bank of the River so that it slopes more gradually to the water for possible future access and passive recreational use. All disturbed areas will be stabilized and seeded or used for planting -of crops. 3. Registry: County - Hampshire Current Book 2386 & Page 155 Certificate (If Registered Land) N/A 4. Applicant City Aviation Tel. 584-1860 P.O. Box 221, Northampton, MA Address S. Property Owner Northampton Airport Inc. Tel. 584-1860 Address Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA 6. Representative Almer Huntley, Jr. & Assoc. Inc., Tel. 584-7444 Steven G. Mason Address 125 Pleasant St., Northampton, MA 01060 7. Have the Conservation Commission and the DEOE Regional Office each been sent. by certified mail or hand delivery. 2 copies of completed Notice of Intent, with supporting plans and documents? Yes OX No 0 3-1 8'7 8. Have all obtainable permits, variances and approvals required by local by-law been obtained? Yes D No D Obtained Applied For. Not Applied For: B. to any portion of the site subject to a Wetlands Restriction Order pursuant to G.L c.131. §40A or ML c.130, 1105? Yes 0 No '– 10. List aii plena and "porting documents aubmttted with this Notice of Intent (Identifying Number/Letter Title, Date 1 Federal Ins,+rancP Rata Majl, — 2 Topographic plan of site 1"-200' City of Northampton 1965) 3 Soils Data T 4 Typical cross sections of Prop. grading 5 Locus Ma 11. Check those resource areas within which work is proposed: — (a) 0 Buffer Zone (b) Inland: ' 23 Bank- Land Subject to Flooding, -, Q Bordering Vegetated Wetland* [I Bordering _ p Land Under Water Body & Waterway' O Isolated — (c) Coastal: • O 1 Designated Port Area' O Land Under the Ocean O Coastal Beach • O Coasts! Dune 0 Barrier Beach Coastal Bank ... p Rocky Intertidal Shore' 0 Salt Marsh • D Land Under Salt Pond' 0 Land Containing Shellfish • O Fish Run' _ Likely to involve U.S. Army Corps of Eng:^Pers concurrent jurisdiction. See General instructions for Completing Notice of Intent. 3-2 Part 11: Site Description _ Indicate which of the following information has been provided (on a plan, in narrative description or calcula- tions) to clearly, completely and accurately describe existing site conditions. Identifying Number/Letter (of plan, narrative or calculations) Natural Features: 3 Soils 2 Vegetation Topography Open water bodies (including ponds and lakes) 1-2 Flowing water bodies (including streams and rivers) Public and private surface water and ground water supplies on or within 100 feet of site Maximum annual ground water elevations with dates and location of test 1-2 Boundaries of resource areas checked under Part I, item 11 above Other Man-made Features: Structures (such as buildings, piers, towers and headwalls) Drainage and flood control facilities at the site and immediately off the site, including culverts and open channels (with inverts), dams and dikes Subsurface sewage disposal systems Underground utilities 2 Roadways and parking areas Property boundaries, easements and rights-of-way 4 -Other Regrading typical cross sections Part 111: Work Description Indicate which of the following information has been provided (on a plan, in narrative description or calcula- tions) to clearly, completely and accurately describe work proposed within each of the resource areas checked in Part I. item 11 above. Identifying Number/Letter (of plan, narrative or calculations) Planview and Cross Section of: Structures (such as buildings, piers, towers and headwalls) Drainage and flood control facilities, including culverts and open channels (with inverts). dams and dikes .r Subsurface sewage disposal systems & underground utilities Filling, dredging and excavating, Indicating volume and composition of material Compensatory storage areas, where required in accordance with Part III, Section 10:57 (4) of the regulations 4 Other regrading typical cross sections Point Source Discharge Description of characteristics of discharge from point source (both closed and open channel), when point of discharge falls within resource area checked under Part I, item 11 above, as supported by standard engineering calculations, data and plans, including but not limited to the following: 3-3 �- I . Delineation of the drainage area contributing to the point of discharge; 2. Pre- and post -development peak run-off from the drainage area, at the point of discharge, for at least the 1. Removing trees that have or may fall into the river 10 -year and 100 -year frequency storm; 3. Pre- and post -development rate of infiltration contributing to the resource area checked under Part 1, item 3. Planting protective ground cover to reduce.erosion 11 above; ` 4. Estimated water quality characteristics of pre- and post -development run-off at the point of discharge. Part IV: Mitigating Measures ' 1. Clearly, completely and accurately describe, with reference to supporting pians and calculations where necessary: (a) AO measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards set forth under each re- source area specified in Part it or Part III of the regulations; or (b) why the presumptions set forth under each resource area specified in Part II or Part III of the regula- tions do not apply. ❑ Coastal Resource Area Type: ER Inland Bank identifying number or letter of support documents The stability of the bank will be improved by: 1. Removing trees that have or may fall into the river 2. Regrading to a more stable slope 3. Planting protective ground cover to reduce.erosion The carring capacity of the river should be uneffected and possibly minutely increased due to improvement of the cross section. O Coastal Resource Area Type: kAand Bordering vegetated wetland Identifying number or letter ofsupport documerft Generally the river banks in this area are nearly vertical with exposed silty sand slopes. As can be seen from the topographic map (Exhibit 2), there exists a small depression below the 115 contour within the disturbed area. This area may have contained wetland vegetation although given it's height above the water table, it is doughtful that it is a significant area as defined by the act. The flat contours of the surrounding field would yield very small flow which might be detained by this area. However, since this area is flooded by most severe storms, any flood and storm drainage protection that may be provided by this area would not exist. 3-4 _ O Coastal rumource Area Type: _ M Wand Bordering land subject to flooding (b) Regrading of the site will move existing material from lower to higher elevations within the flood plain resulting in zero net change to 100 year flood storage volumes, but possibly incrementally.'increasing flood storage capacities for more frequent storms. klentifyinp r oMw or letter of support docu nents 1, 4 2. pearly, completely and accurately describe, with reference to supporting plans and calculations where necessary: (a) all measures and designs to regulate work within the Buffer Zone so as to insure that said work does not alter an area specified in part I. Section 10.02(1) (a) of these regulations; or (b) if work in the Buffer Zone will after such an area, an measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards established for the adjacent resource area specified in Part 0 or Part III of these regulations. FC num Coastal I i;esouroe`Area Type Bordered By 1 OC) -Foot Diacxetionary ZonekMntityinp ber or letter Wand Bank, bordering Veg. Wetland of support docwmnts After the area has been graded and made ready for planting, protective vegitation will be established in accordance. with the recommendations of the soil conservation . services, guide to "Vegitative Practices in Site Development " The proposed ground cover used will be the SCS mix #6 comprising of crown vetch, Lathco Flat Pea,'Redtop and Perennial Byegrass with -oats added for quicker cover. 3-5 Part V: Additional Information for a Department of the Army Permit 1. COE Application No. 2. -- - - (to be provided by COE) (Name of waterway) 3. Names and addresses of property owners adjoining your property: 4. Document other project alternatives (i.e.. other locations and/or construction methods, particularly those that would eliminate the discharge of dredged or fm materiat into waters or wetlands). 8. 8%0 x 11 " drawings in planview and cross-section, showing the resource area and the proposed activ- ity within the resource area. Drawings must be to scale and should be clear enough for photocopying. Certifications requied firm the Divsion of Water Pollton Cormd before the Federat permit can be ssued C lication may be obtained by conractirdie Divsion of Water PoL = Cancel• 1 Wryer Street Bosi+on. Massacnt-setts 02108. Where the ac&* will take place vvitm the area under the Massad iusetts approved Coastal Zone Management Program, the ap* : t certifies shat his proposed actrvity complies with and writ be conducted in a manner that is consistent wdh the appraed program. Worrnation provided will be used in evaluating the application for a permit ands made a matter of pubiic. �- record through ssuance of a pubic notice. Disclosure of this informations voluntary. hDAeAy t necessary informations not provided. the application cannot be processed nor can a permit be ssued. I hereby certify under e #s and penalties of perjury that the foregoing Notice of Intent and accompanying plans, d e 0orting ata aria- tniq and complete, to the best of my knowledge. Signature of A Date Signatur of Applicant's Representitive Date FORM ••Eacaptisa to 8NG Fern a3" approved by HQUSACB. 6 May 1902". TIED 100 (TEST) 1 MAY 82 —Mis decameat ceatains a joint Department of the Army and State of Massacbmaetts application for a permit to obtain permission to perform activities is United States waters. The Office of Masagement and Budget LOMB) has approved those questions required by the US Army Corps — of Engineers. OMB `:umber 07,02-0036 and expiration date of 30 September 1963 applies". This c statement .ill be set to 6 point type. 3-6 18 extends into the substratum. Reaction in unlimed areas Is very strongly acid or strongly acid. Most areas of these soils are in woodland. Some areas are farmed, and some have been developed for homesites. The stones on the surface make these soils poorly suited to cultivated crops, but the soils are suited to hay and pasture. The low available water capacity makes irrigation necessary in some areas. Proper stocking rates, deferred grazing, and pasture rotation help maintain desirable plant species. Removal of the surface stones improves the suitability of the soils for cultivation. These soils are suited to the growth and harvesting of trees. Droughtiness causes a high rate of seedling mortality. Reducing plant competition and planting drought -resistant species will help to reduce seedling mortality. Large stones in the substratum limit these soils as a building site. Slope is an additional limitation for building sites in unit GhC. The rapid permeability limits this soil as a site for septic tank absorption fields and causes a hazard of contamination to ground water and nearby wells. The capability subclass is Vis. GxB—Gloucester very stony fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes. GxC—Gloucester very stony fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes. GxD—Gloucester very stony fine sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes. These soils are deep and somewhat excessively drained. Map units GxB and GxC consist of soils on ridges and on the sides and lower slopes of hills; map unit GxD consists of a soil on the sides of hills. The areas of these units are irregular in shape and range .from 5 to 70 acres. Stones 5 to 20 feet apart are on the surface. Typically, the surface layer of these soils is dark brown fine sandy loam about 5 inches thick. The subsoil is yellowish brown and is 17 inches thick. It is gravelly sandy loam in the upper 9 inches and gravelly loamy sand in the lower 8 inches. The substratum is loose gravelly loamy sand to a depth of 60 inches or more. It Is yellowish brown, dark grayish brown, and grayish brown. Included with these soils in mapping are a few small areas of Charlton and Montauk soils. Small areas of Scituate soils are in units GxB and GxC and typically are in concave areas or in lower positions on the slope. Included areas make up about 20 percent of the acreage of these units. The permeability of these Gloucester soils is rapid, and available water capacity is low. The root zone extends into the substratum. Reaction is very strongly acid or strongly acid. Most areas of these soils -are in woodland. Some have been developed for homesites. Soil survey The stones on the surface make these soils poorly suited to cultivated crops or to hay and pasture. Slope is an additional limitation for the use of equipment in unit GxD. Proper stocking rates, deferred grazing, and pasture rotation help to maintain desirable pasture plant species. These soils are suited to trees. Droughtiness causes a high rate of seedling mortality; reducing plant competition and planting drought -resistant species will help to reduce seedling mortality. The stones and boulders on the surface limit the use of harvesting equipment, and its use is further limited by slope in unit GxD. The stones on the surface are the main limitation to use of these soils as building sites. Slope is also a limitation, especially in units GxC and GxD. The rapid permeability limits the soils as a site for septic tank absorption fields and causes a hazard of contamination to ground water and nearby wells. The capability subclass is Vlls. a l 'dley s11t vioam:' his soil is deep, nearly level, nd w 11 drs fined. It is on flood plains adjacent to streams and rivers. The areas are irregular in shape and range from 10 to 75 acres. Typically, the surface layer is very dark grayish brown silt loam about 11 inches thick. The substratum is $ilt or silt loam to a depth of 72 inches or more. It is olive brown, brown, and light olive brown. Included with this soil in mapping are a few small areas of Suncook and Winooski soils. The Suncook soils typically are on the streambanks, and the Winooski soils are in lower positions. Included areas make up about 15 percent of the unit. The permeability of this Hadley soil is moderate or moderately rapid throughout. Available water capacity is high. Root growth extends into the substratum. Flooding for brief periods in winter and spring is common on these soils. Reaction of the soil ranges from very strongly acid to neutral in the upper 40 inches and from medium acid to mildly alkaline at a depth of more than 40 inches. Most areas of this soil are farmed. Some areas are in woodland, and the soil is well suited to trees. Some areas have been developed for homesites. This soil is well suited to cultivated crops and to hay and pasture (fig. 7). Good tilth is easily maintained in cultivated areas, and the erosion hazard is slight. In the spring, soil blowing is a hazard on some unprotected fields. The use of cover crops and mixing crop residue and manure into the surface layer help to maintain filth, minimize soil blowing, and increase the organic matter content in cultivated areas. Proper stocking rates, deferred grazing, and pasture rotation help to maintain desirable pasture plant species. Flooding in unprotected areas is a limitation of this soil as a building site and as a site for septic tank absorption fields. The capability class is I. 42 Inches thick. It is mottled in the lower 8 inches. The substratum is stratified, mottled, gray and yellowish brown very fine sand and silt to a depth of 60 inches or more. The other soils in this unit have a wide range of textures in the surface layer and subsoil. Some of the soils are as much as 50 percent gravel. Permeability is rapid or very rapid throughout the Windsor soils and slow or very slow throughout the Scitico soils. It is moderately rapid in the subsoil of the Amostown soils and moderate to slow in the substratum. Available water capacity is low in the Windsor soils, high in the Scitico soils, and moderate in the Amostown soils. The root zone extends into the substratum in all three soils. Reaction is very strongly acid or strongly acid throughout the Windsor soil and in the subsoil of the Amostown soil. It ranges from strongly acid to neutral in the substratum of the Amostown soil and from medium acid to neutral throughout the Scitico soil. The Amostown and Scitico soils have a seasonal high water table in winter and spring. Slope and the seasonal high water table make this unit poorly suited to farming. Most areas of this unit are wooded, but the unit is poorly suited to trees. The slope of the Windsor soils and the seasonal high water table in the Amostown and Scitico soils limit the use of harvesting equipment. Droughtiness in the Windsor soils and the seasonal high water table in the other soils cause a high rate of seedling mortality. The water table also restricts rooting, making trees susceptible to uprooting during windy periods. - The slope of the Windsor soil and the seasonal high water table of the Scitico and Amostown soils limit the unit as a building site and as a site for septic tank absorption fields. The use of septic tank absorption fields is further limited by the rapid permeability of the Windsor soils and the slow permeability of the Scitico and Amostown soils. Onsite investigation generally is needed to determine suitable uses. This unit is not assigned to a capability subclass. MIN I his soil is deep, nearly 641b y re"�1I airied. It is on flood plains adjacent to streams and rivers. The areas are irregularly shaped or crescent shaped and range from 5 to 50 acres. Typically, the surface layer is very dark grayish brown silt loam about 17 inches thick. The substratum is olive, mottled very fine sandy loam in the upper 10 inches; olive gray, mottled silt loam in the next 17 inches; and olive, mottled silt loam to a depth of 60 inches or more. Included with this soil in mapping are a few small areas of Hadley and Limerick soils. Included areas make up about 15 percent of the unit. The permeability of this Winooski soil is moderate or moderately rapid throughout. Available water capacity is high. The root zone extends into the substratum. Soil survey Flooding for brief periods is common. This soil has a seasonal high water table between depths of 1.5 and 3 feet in winter and early spring. Reaction of the soil in unlimed areas ranges from strongly acid to neutral. Many areas of this soil are farmed. Some areas are in woodland, and the soil is well suited to trees. Some areas have been developed for homesites. This soil is well suited to cultivated crops, hay, and pasture. Flooding is the main hazard, and the seasonal high water table is the main limitation for farming. Good filth is easily maintained in cultivated areas. The main management needs include the proper timing of farming operations, providing protection from flooding, and providing drainage. Minimum tillage and the use of cover crops and grasses and legumes in the cropping system help to control flood scouring. Mixing crop residue and manure into the surface layer improves tilth and increases the organic matter content. Proper stocking rates, deferred grazing, and pasture rotation help to maintain desirable pasture plant species. Flooding and the seasonal high water table are limitations of this soil as a building site and as a site for septic tank absorption fields. The capability subclass is Ilw. WtA—Woodbridge fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes. WtB—Woodbridge fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes. These soils are deep and moderately well drained. Map unit WtA is a nearly level soil at the base of slopes. Map unit WtB is a gently sloping soil on hills and ridges. The areas are rectangular or oval and range from 5 to 30 acres. :E Typically, the surface layer of these soils is very liable, very dark grayish brown fine sandy loam about 7 inches thick. The subsoil is friable fine sandy loam 18 inches thick. It is yellowish brown in the upper 14 inches and light olive brown and mottled in the lower 4 inches. ; The substratum is very firm, olive fine sandy loam to a depth of 60 inches or more. Included with these soils in mapping are a few small areas of Paxton, Charlton, and Ridgebury soils that make up about 15 percent of the acreage of these units. The permeability of these Woodbridge soils is moderate in the subsoil and slow or very slow in the substratum. Available water capacity is moderate. The root zone extends to the very firm substratum. These soils have a seasonal high water table perched above the substratum in winter and spring and for short periods after prolonged rains. Reaction of the soil in unlimed areas ranges from strongly acid to medium acid. Many areas of these soils are farmed. Some areas are in woodland, and the soils are well suited to trees. Some areas have been developed for homesites. These soils are well suited to cultivated crops and to iampshire County, Massachusetts, Central Part 155 TABLE 14. --ENGINEERING INDEX PROPERTIES --Continued Classification rag- , Percentage passing , Soil name and IDepthl USDA texture I I iments I sieve number-- iLiquid I Plas- map symbol I i 1 Unified I AASHTO i> 3 1 1 limit i ticity linchesl 4 1 10 1 40 1 200 1 1 index n , ,I rat, I I , 1 1 1 i i I ,1 i I It I B, GfC---------0-5 IFine sandy loam ISM IA -1, A -2,I 0-15 180-95 170-90 135-75 115-45 1 --- 1 NP -Lloucester i I 1 ! A-4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 5-14IGravelly sandy ISM, SW -SM iA-1, A-2,1 5-30 160-85 140-75 120-50 110-40 1 --- 1 NP I i loam, sandy 1 1 A-4 I i I 1 i 1 1 I I loam, fine sandy! I i ! 1 1 I It { i loam. i 1 ! ! ! i ! 1 1 1i4-601Very gravelly ISM, SW-SM,IA-1, A-2 '15-40 140-70 120-60 110-40 1 5-25 1 --- 1 NP I I loamy coarse 1 GM, GW-GMI i ! I I I { { I I sand, gravelly I i I ! i It i ! I i i loamy sand, 1 I ! 1 i I 1 i I i i gravelly sandy 1 1 ! ! ! 1 1 I 1 i i loam. i I I I '1B, GhC--------- 1 0-5 !Stony fine iSM, SW -SM !A-1, A-2,110-20 170-95 160-90 130-75 110-45 1 --- 1 NP ;loucester i 1 sandy loam. 1 i A-4 1 1 I i i I I 1 5-141Gravelly sandy ISM, SW -SM !A-1, A-2,1 5-30 160-75 140-75 120-50 110-40 1 --- 1 NP i i loam, sandy I ! A-4 ! I 1 1 ! ! ! i I loam, fine sandyl I I 1 loam. I 1 ! 1 ! I 1 ! ! 114-601Very gravelly iSM, SW-SM,1A-1, A-2 115-40 140-70 120-60 110-40 1 5-25 1 --- 1 NP I i loamy coarse i GM, GW-GMI I I 1 1 I I 1 i i sand, gravelly i 1 1 loamy sand, I i gravelly sandy 1 I ! loam. 1 i ! Is ! 1 I 1 1 I ! 1 Tx B, GxC, GxD ---- 1 0-5 lVery atony ISM, SW -SM 1A-1, A-2,115-35 160-90 155-90 125-75 110-45 1 --- 1 NP Gloucester ] I fine sandy loam.i ! A-4 ! ! ! ! ! ! { 1 5-14,1Gravelly sandy lSM, SW -SM IA -1, A-2,1 5-30 160-75 140-75 120-50 110-40 I --- 1 NP 1 1 loam, sandy I 1 A-4 1 i 1 I It 1 i i i loam, fine sandy! 1 Is I I ! i ! ! ! 1 loam. 1 It 1 ! 1 1 I 1 I 114-60!Very gravelly iSM, SW-SM,IA-1, A-2 115-40 140-70 120-60 110-40 1 5-25 1 --- 1 NP ! i loamy coarse ! GM, GW-GMI ! ! ! { ! { ! ! ! sand, gravelly 1 ! 1 ! ! ! ! { ! I 1 loamy sand, i ! I ! ! ! ! ! ! i 1 gravelly sandy I ! ! ! 1 I ! i loam. lazz"`-i"+w - t �: 0-11 Milt loam 1ML, CL -ML 1A-4 I 0 1 100 195-100185-100160-90 I <30 1 NP -9 aladi11-681SIlt loam, very lML, CL -ML 1A-4 1 0 1 100 195-100180-100150-90 1 <39 1 NP -10 i i fine sandy loam,l I ! i ! 1 i i 1 ! I very fine sand. 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 ! 1 168-72ILoamy fine sand, 1ML, CL-ML,1A-4, A-2 1 0 1 100 195-100150-1001 5-90 1 <30 1 NP -10 I { silt loam, sand.! SM, SP -SM! 1 1 1 1 1 ! ! { Hda: Hadley ----------1 0-11ISilt loam--------1ML, CL -ML 'A-4 1 0 1 100 195-100185-100160-90 1 <30 1 NP -9 111-681SIlt loam, very 1ML, CL -ML IA -4 1 0 1 100 -195-100,180-100150-90 1 <39 ! 'NP -10 I I fine sandy loam,] { { i I i I I I I I very fine sand. I I I I I I I I I 168-721Loomy fine sand, IML, CL-ML,IA-4, A-2 1 0 1 100 195-100150-1001 5-90 1 <30 1 NP -10 1 silt loam, sand.! SM, SP -SMI I 11 111 I i i 1 ! Winooski --------i 0-17iSilt loam --------IML, SM IA -4 i 0 1 100 195-100190-100140-90 1 --- i NP 117-601SIlt loam, very iML, SM IA -4 1 0 1 100 195-100190-100140-90 1 --- 1 NP i i fine sandy loam,' 1 1 i 1 1 ! ! 1 I I loamy very fine 1 i I sand. I ! { 1 I ! I I ! ! I 1 Urban land. ! i HfB, HfC---------I 0-221Very fine sandy 1ML, SM 1A-4 1 0 180-100175-100165-100!40-90 1 <25 1 NP -4 Haven ! 1 loam. ! 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 122-60!Stratified loamy ISP, SW, 1A-1, A-3,1 0-20 1130-90 1125-85 110-60 ! 1-25 1 --- ! NP i I fine sand to 1 GP, SM I A-2 I I i i ! I ! 1 I. gravel. I I 1 It I I ! I 11 11 See footnote at end of table. 162 TABLE 14. --ENGINEERING INDEX PROPERTIES --Continued Sod survey Soil name and {Depth) USDA texture i Class ca on ; rag- Percentage passing map symbol = = Imenta 1 sieve number-- {Liquid I Plaa- ! i { Unified i AASHTO { ) 3 { 1 limit { tacit I 1 iinchea! 4 { 10 ! 40 200 i { i d y i to { e 0-171Silt loam --------IML SM 1looski�: =. `117-601Silt loam, very IML, SM I { fine sandy loam,{ { loamy very fine I { 1 sand. ! WtA, WtB, WtC----i 0-7 !Fine sandy loam SM, ML, Woodbridge i ! I SM -SC i 7-25iFine sandy.loam, 1SM, ML, { I loam, gravelly 1 SM -SC i I fine sandy loam.{ 125-601Fine sandy loam, 1SM, ML, { loam, gravelly I SM -SC I 1 fine sandy loam.{ WvB, WvC--------- 1 0-7 !Stony fine 1SM ML Woodbridge 1 1 sandy loam. I SM -SCS 17-25{Fine sandy loam, ISM, ML, { I loam, gravelly I SM -SC { 1 fine sandy loam.) 125-60!Fine sandy loam, 1SM, ML, { ! loam, gravelly ! SM -SC fine sandy loam.) : 1 I WxB, WxC, WxD ---- 1 0-7 !Very atony ISM ML Woodbridge 1 1 fine sandy loam.! SM -SCS ! 7-251Fine sandy loam, 1SM, ML, ! { loam, gravelly 1 SM -SC ! 1 fine sandy loam.) 125-60!Fine sandy loam, 1SM, ML, I I loam, gravelly 1 SM -SC ! 1 fine sandy loam.) I I ! 1 i I i i i !A-4 1 0 1 100 195-100190-100140-90 1A-4 1 0 1 100 195-100190-100140-90 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 { 1 1 1 I { { { { I !A-2, A-4 1 0-10 185-95 170-90 160-85 _130-65 A-2, A-4 1 0-15 175-90 165-90 150-85 25-65 { 1 { { 1 { 1 1 1 { 1 1 !A-2, A-4 1 5-15 170-90 160-85 150-75 120-60 IA -2, A-4 1 5-20 185-95 170-90 160-85 130-65 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IA -2, A-4 1 5-15 175-95 165-90 150-85 125-60 ; IA -2, A-4 1 5-15 170-90 160-90 150-75 125-60 1 1 1 !A-2, A-4 110-25 185-95 170-90 160-85 130-65 1 ! 1 1 I 1A-2, A-4 1 5-15 175-95 165-90 150-85 125-60 1 I I ! ! i 1A-2, A-4 1 5-15 170-90 ;60-90 150-75 125-60 ! a See description of the map unit for composition and behavior characteristics of the map unit. n ex _ 1 --- I NP i NP I { <30 1 NP -10 <30 { NP -10 { <30 { NP -10 { 1 <30 1 NP -10 <30 1 NP -10 i i <30 1 NP -10 i i <30 1 NP -10 { <30 I NP -10 <30 1 NP -10 ! LL s v LL 0 t_ 8 Ul F Lou LL `L _ �a v� �9 PF/ LU w �Qw M a E v J d N Z LL b7 �- � Q��Q Lo a4 +— }— w N WV N� aLY w tY� Z V�) O 2 N Nt NORTHAMPTON AIRPORT, INC. ••• d/b/a/ CITY AVIATION P.O. BOX 221 NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 413 584-1860 T January 24, 1989 JAIL 2 7 1989 Conservation Commission City Hall 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, OFFICE 0. NN N a AND DE ELGi7 W LNr :1 This letter is to inform you that if by 03/02/89 Northampton Airport has not received its letter of compliance for the River Bank Project we will initiate a lawsuit for harassment and neglect naming the City of Northampton and each member of the conservation commitee as individuals and a group. Yours truly, Richard Giusto 4;'*', 1P/RG -r-4c ijis / a Z _o A, e100 0W d,/ 124,6 A- J',:!/e- /`i -r1& /7 P5 01.- f'/1 hod Pl-1s4�`f�rPe, 4- C-fo/ .iad"G 00'.-oei00L, Ala /!o ��% City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 686.6950 • community and Economic Development • Conservation• Historic Preservation • Planning Board Zoning Board of Appeals TO: The files Order of Conditions 246-178 and 246-134 FROM: Wayne Feiden and David Gengler RE: Delivery of Conservation Commission Letters On this date we hand delivered two Conservation Commission letters to staff at the Northampton Airport who accepted it on behalf of Richard Giusto, President, Northampton Airport, Inc. One letter dated January 9, 1989 refers to problems with issuing a Certificate of Compliance under Order of Conditions 246-178. One letter dated January 10, 1989 refers to problems with issuing a Certificate of Compliance under Order of Conditions 246-134. w00- Wayne,'Feiden, Planner avid Gengler,hair Northampton Planning Dept. Northampton Co ervation Commission City of Northampton, Massachusetts q Office of Planning and Development I City Hail . 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060. (413) 5866950 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation • Historic Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals Richard Giusto Northampton Airport, Inc. P.O. Box 221 Northampton, MA .01060 Dear Mr. Giusto: January 10, 1989 At their meeting on January 9, 1989 the Northampton Conservation Commission reviewed the file of the Airport's riverbank restoration project (Order of Conditions #246-134). You requested a Certificate of Compliance on this projec-'"in 1987. As a result of that request the Commission visited the site on June 11, 1987. At that time the Commission felt that although much of the project had been completed, some additional steps needed to be taken before hit was in Compliance with the P permit and with the regulations. These steps were outlined in -a June 25, 1987 letter to you. `The Commission is concerned that they have not heard from you since then. If this work has been completed, please write to us and °request a new site visit. If the work has not been com 1 t d 't pee i must be completed this ing. If it is not completed the Commission will take orcement action against the airport. you have any questions, please ming Department. Wayne in the contact Wayne Feiden in the Commission's staff, planner. in0erel David G ngl Chair Conservation Commission U City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 5a6.6950 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation. Historic Preservation • Planning Boards Zoning Board of Appeals Richard Giusto Northampton Airport, Inc. P.O. Box 221 Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. Giusto: June 25, 1987 In response to your request for a Certificate Of Compliance relative to your Project #246-134, the Conservation Commission inspected the site on June 11th at 5:30 pm. Though the Commission requested you to be there, you did not attend. At the site inspection the Commission found that the shrubs that had been planted appeared to have taken and were growing nicely. However, in order to issue a Certifiacte Of Compliance the follwoing must still be complied with: o re-establish plantings where a roadway appears to have been created, (vehicular access is prohibited from this area), o the plantings do not appear to have been planted throughout the entire 100' Buffer Zone as specified in Condition #10 of the Order of Conditions, o the area should be reseeded, where necessary, with SCS control mix, as specified in Condition #10 of the Order of Conditions, o we recommend that all of the additional plantings be planted in the fall, no later than September 30th. When the above have been completed, the Commission will be happy to re -consider your request for a Certificate Of Compliance. Yours, CEJ nathan Roche, Chairman Northampton Conservation Commission Form 3 Commonwealth z �- � • n Ir U DEQE Fie No. 246— ITo be provided by DEQE) Oty/TownNn-rthamntnn APpiicnt Notice of Intent Under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 and Application for a Department of the Army Permit Port 1: General Information 1. Location: Street Address Off of givpr,ank prive behind the Airport Lot Number 2. Project: Type clearing/ Description The applicant has cleared the site of grading trees and brush up to the River and intends to regrade the bank of the River so that it slopes more gradually to the water for possible future access and passive recreational use. All disturbed areas will be stabilized and seeded or used for plantirfX.of crops. 3. Registry: County--. Hamnchi roC2386 urrent Book &page 155 Certificate (If Registered Land)_ VA 4. Applicant City Aviation - Tel. 584-1860 Address P.O. Box 221, Northampton, MA 3. Property owner Northampton Airport Inc. Tel. 584-1860 Address Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA S. Representative Almer Huntley, Jr. & Assoc. Inc., Ste ven son Tel 584-7444 125 Pleasant St., Northampton, MA 01060 7. Have the Conservation Commission and the DEQE Regional Office each been sent, by certified mail or hand delivery, 2 copies of completed Notice of Intent, with supporting plans and documents? Yes OX No 0 3-1 8'7 8. Mave ad obtainable permits, variances and approvals required by local by-law been obtained? loft Yes E) No O Obtained: Applied For. Not Applied For: B. Is any portion of the site subjectto a Wetlands Restriction Order pursuant to G.L. c.131, 940A or ML a. 130, 9105? Yes O No 10. Lbt all pians and supporting documents submitted with this No*m of Intent Identifying Number/Letter Title, Date 1 Federal Insuranrp Rare Man 2 Topographic plan of site 1"=200' City of Northampton 31965) _ Soils Data 4 Typical cross sections of Prop. grading 5 Locus Man 11. Check those resource areas within which work is proposed: tai O Buffer Zone (b) Inland: JZI Bank* Land Subject to Flooding, ` Q Bordering Vegetated Wetland • M Bordering O Land Under Water Body 3 Waterway• O Isolated - (c) Coastal: O Land Under the Ocean • O !Designated Port Area* O Coastal Beach • O Coastal Dune O Barrier Beach O Coastal Bank O Rocky Intertidai Shore • O Salt Marsh • O Land Under Salt Pond • O Land Containing Shellfish • O Fish Run • ' Ukely to involve U.S. Army Corps of Engi-,Pers concurrent jurisdiction. See General instructions for Completing Notice of Intent. 1%ft 3-2 Part 11: Site Description Indicate which of the following information has been provided (on a plan !n tions) to clearly, completely and accurately describe existing site conditionnarrative description or calcufa- Identifying Number/Letter (of plan, narrative Or calculations) Natural Features: 3 Soils T- Vegetation Topography 1-2 Open water bodies (including ponds and lakes) Flowing water bodies (including streams and rivers) Public and private surface water and ground water supplies on or within 100 feet of site 1-2 Maximum annual ground water elevations with dates and location of test Other Boundaries of resource areas checked under part I, item 11 above Man-made Features: Structures (such as buildings, piers, towers and headwalls) Drainage and flood control facilities at the site and immediately off the site, including Culverts and open channels (with inverts), dams and dikes Subsurface sewage disposal systems Underground utilities 2 Roadways and parking areas Property boundaries, easements and rights-of-way 4 -Other Regrading _ Part ill: Work Description typical cross sections Indicate which of the following information has been Provid Vons) to clearly, completely and accurately describe work ed (on a plan, in narrative description or calcula checked in Part I, item 11 above.- Proposed within each of the resource areas Identifying Number/Letter (of plan, narrative or calculations) Planview and Cross Section of: Structures such as buildings, piers, towers and headwalls) Drainage and flood control facilities, including culverts and open channels (with inverts). dams and dikes Subsurface sewage disposal systems & underground utilities Filling, dredging and excavating, indicating volume and composition of material Compensatory storage areas, where required in accordance with Part III, Section 10:57 (4) of the regulations 4 Other regrading typical cross sections Point Source Discharge Description of characteristics of discharge from point source (both closed and open channel), when point of discharge falls within resource area checked under Part I, item 1 1 above, as supported by standard engineering calculations, data and plans, including but not limited to the following: 3-3 I . Delineation of the drainage area contributing to the point of discharge; 2- Pre, and post -development peak run-off from the drat 10 -year and 100 -year frequency storm; nage area' at the point of discharge, for at least the 3. Pre- and post -development rate of infiltration contributing to the resource area checked under Part i, Item 11 above; 4. Estimated water quality characteristics of pre- and post-devebpment run-off at the point of discharge, Part IV: Mitigating Measures 1 • Clearly, completely and accurately describe, with reference to supportin necessary: 9 plans and calculations where (a) All measures and designs proposed to meet therf source area specified in Part 11 or part III of the regulatiioonsa standards set forth under each re. (b) why the presumptions set forth under each resource area specified in Part 11 or P tions do not apply. art 111 of the re [a. O Coastal Resource Area Type: 9t Inland Bank The stability of the bank will be improved by: 1- Removing trees that have or may fall into the river 2. Regrading to a more stable slope 3. Planting protective ground cover to reduce. erosion The carring capaci- y of the river should be uneffected and possibly minutely increased due to improvement of the cross section. O Coastal #iesourceArea Type: IS Inland Bordering vegetated wetland Generally the river banks in this area are nearly vertical with exposed silty sand slopes . As can be seen from the topographic map (Exhibit 2), there exists a small depression below the 115 contour within the disturbed area. This area may have contained wetland vegetation although given it's height above the water table; it is doughtful that it is a significant area as defined by the act. The flat contours of the surrounding field would yield very small flow which might be detained by this area. However, since this area is flooded by most severe storms, any flood and storm drainage protection that may be provided by this area would not exist. 3-4 Identifying number or letter of support documents Identifying number or letter Of support documents or O coastal Resource Area Type: Identifying number or letter D WandBordering land subject to flooding Ofauppondocuments (b) Regrading of the *site will move existing material from lower to higher elevations within the flood plain resulting in zero net change to 100 year flood storage 1 4 volumes, but possibly incrementally.'increasing flood storage capacities for more frequent storms. 2. Clearly, completely and accurately describe, with reference to supporting plans and calculations where necessary: (a) all measures and designs to regulate work within the Buffer Zone so as to insure that said work does not alter an area specified in Part I, Section 10.02(1) (a) of these regulations; or (b) if work in the Buffer Zone will alter such an area, all measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards established for the adjacent resource area specified in Part 11 or Part III of these regulations. 3-5 91 Past V: Additional Information for a Department of the Arany Permit 1. COE Application No. 2. - (to be provided by COE) (Name of waterway) 3. Names and addresses of property owners adjoining your property: -. 4. D=xnent other project alternatives U.S.. other locations and/or construction methods, pailmdarty those. that would eliminate the discharge of dredged or fila material into waters or wetlands). 8. SIA" x 11' drawings in planview and cross-section, showing the resource area and the proposed actty- tty within the resource area. Drawings must be to scale and should be clear enough for photocopying. Cerzication is mquired *om be Dmsion of Water Pokition Control before te Federal permit can be swed Massamusetts 02108. VVvre te ad* will take Place v%itm te area urxier te Massochusetts approved Coastal Zore Management •• _ _•• r. •ea >. 1hat his • saes-• i complies v& and wit be coi-ducted _ is consistent with th- _•• • _• torogram. Information provided will be used in evaluating the applicaoon for a permit and is made a f. e r of pubic. record through ssuarlce of a pubic notice. Dsclosa use of this information is voluntary. however f necessary ir*xmatian is not provided. the application carrot be processed nor can a permit be sued. I hereby certify under e ' s and penalties of perjury that the foregoing Notice of Intent and accompanying plans, d e s orcin and complete, to the best of my knowledge. , Signature of A Date .5/Ll /8 r Signatur of Applicant's RepresentitNe Date FORM 100 (TEST) -tac.pt►on to EKG form 43" approved by BQUSACE. 6 May 1964'•. REDp 1 MAY $2 'This document contains a joint Department of the Army and State of Massachusetts appliontion for a permit to obtain permission to perform activities is United States voters. The Office of Management and Budget rOMBI has approved these questions required by the US Army Corps of Engineers. OMB .`:umber 0704-0036 and expiration dote of 30 September 1963 applies". This t statement Bill be set in 6 point type. 3-6 A i' i Northampton Conservation Commission June 22, 1987 - Paae 4 After some discussion, it was moved, seconded and voted unanimously to recommend to the DPW that a concrete post -gate with chain and lock be placed at the point of vehicular access at the back of Drozdal Funeral Home's parking area. It was noted that a key must be given to the farmer who is leasing property from the City. o The Chairman read a copy of a letter from a young boy to the Mayor, as well as the Mayor's response, regarding the water tower on Turkey Hill Road. Emily Lane - Certificate of Compliance It was moved, seconded and voted unanimously to issue the Certificate of Compliance. The Commission members signed the Certificate. Meadowcrest Farms - Definitive Subdivision Plan/A. MacPhail The Commission reviewed the submitted Definitive Subdivision Plan for Meadowcrest Farms located off of Florence Street, Leeds. It was decided to request a joint site inspection with the Planning Board. Maple Rid''e - Wetlands -Violation Complaint L. Smith .reported that DEQE received a letter of complaint and ---forwarded a -copy to the Conservation Commission regarding the installation of a culvert. After some discussion, it was decided that the developer should be called and requested to install said culvert. other Business, It was reported that Western Mass Bus Lines located in Tndustrial Park will be notifying the Commission that they wish to dredge the brook in the near future. o It was noted that there was no response to the Commission's letter and no representative from the Airport present at the site inspection. There was some discussion regarding the condition and location of the plantings. The Commission felt that although the situation could be better, if the plantings are undisturbed for a few years, they could come back. It was noted that a letter from Huntley in 8/85 certified that all conditions were completed except for trees. It was also noted that the full 100' buffer does not appear to be planted and that it is evident that a vehicle has been :Northampton Conservation Commission June 22, 1987 - Page 5 traveling over the property. It was moved, seconded and voted unanimously to send a letter to the Airport owners, advising them that in order to issue a Certificate of Compliance, the following must be complied with: o re-establish plantings where a roadway appears to have been created o remind that there should be no vehicular access o plantings do not appear throughout the entire 100' buffer, as specified in Condition #10 in the Order of Conditions o recommend a fall planting (with a 9/30 deadline) o reseeding with SCS control mix (as per Condition #10) o Land Swap - Route 9 with JFK L. Smith explained the proposed land swap between land adiacent to JFK with land owned by Smith School on Route 9. It was noted that the developer would like to bore under the state hiahwav to the westerly side in order to connect to the sewer. After some discussion, it was moved, seconded and voted unanimously to send a letter to the Committee involved with the land swamp, informing them of the Commission's support and interest in the property as a linkage for a trail system from the Fitzgerald Lake conservation area to Look Park and as an ecological study area for the schools. It was also decided to point out to the Committee that a portion of the property may be subiect to Wetlands concerns. Land'Use Plan L. Smith distributed material entitled "Policies, Goals and Objectives", a part of the 5 -year plan. It was decided that the remaining material would be mailed out and the Commission will review the plan at a later meeting. Job Evaluation The Chairman distributed a job evaluation written for Larry Smith. The Commission chose to discuss this at the next meeting. o Jonathan Roche announced his decision to step down as Chairman of the Conservation Commission effective the next meeting, as he will be running for City Council. R. Carnes has agreed to take over as Chairman. It was moved, seconded and voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 10:10 p.m. u01991wMo0 uotZEnaasuo0 uozdmpgaaox uEUMTpg0 `agoo?j upg�E f s (.siJ 9 O ti 1 � sznoX 'gzTT NZ uo not Sutaas oz paEMaoj Sutxooq TEsodoad anof ssnost•sxuEZ aBEaoZs autTosES aoETdaa pup anouiaa oZ p osTp upo am am -EZ stgZ 4E sdpgaad 'uotZtppE u2 •xupq aanta age ZE 8uIZ99m aq TTTM aM •suot�tpuo0 Io aapa0 pansst aqZ .Io suotstnoad aqZ gZTtK aouptTduioo ut auo sEM t ., aqZ zoadsut o� •tu•d P �. 3EgZ aansua oZ xaoM OZ Pawn aap not of M£o5��E L86T TT aunt °uoouaaZgv Svpsangy aoj �pu9ZZp g q ZtStn alts p paTnpagos spq uoissiUM100 aqy •Xupq aantg �noiPoauuo0 age go uo. aoZsaa NZ ButnTonut t7£I-9t7Z# Zoafoad anod oz ant�ETaa aouptTduio0 go uotZEotJTZaa0 E ansst �snui uotsstunuo0 uoi�Enaasuo0 aq� `(pagoEzzE aas) L86T `TI SEW 90 a9ZZBT ano ut not _Z ono paZutod am sy L 86 T "£ atnr :utumfuag •aW 39 ozstno •aW apaQ 090TO VW °uoZdumgZaoH TZZ XoH •0•d 'ouI `ZaodaTV uoZdumgZaoH utumfuag TTassng ozstno papgotg 4lf9ddy )o pifog BUIUoZ •pjtog Buluutld • Uo1l*AJaBtJd OPOIBIH •UogtAJRBUOO • lUYWdoleAea olujoU093 pug 14junui Ioo • 0969.989 (C &W • 0901.0 dW `uo;dws4lJON '"JIS UIsW OI.Z • IIgH 1413 ;uewdOIGAea pue Buluueld 10 001110 sliesn4aesseW °u0ldw941J0N 10 AIi3 City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586.6950 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation • Hiatoric Preaervation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeala May 11, 1987 Northampton Airport, Inc. Richard Guisto Russell Benjamin P.O. Box 221 Northampton, Massachusetts Re: Removal and Installation of Gasoline Tanks Certificate of Compliance (Project #246-134) Gentlemen: Relative to your inquiry as to the necessity for a Wetlands permit regarding the removal and installation of gasoline storage tanks, it is our judgment that one is required. Enclosed please find a copy of the abbreviated Notice of Intent form and general instructions. Relative to Project #246-134, in June, 1985 the Conservation Commission issued an Order of Conditions requiring the restoration of the riverbank on your property. The work (plantings) were to have been completed in the spring of 1986. When a project is completed, the Commission must issue a Certificate of Compliance. To date you have not requested such a Certificate. Please notify this Office as to the status of the project, so that we might schedule a site inspection towards issuing the required Certificate. If you have any questions regarding these issues, please call either myself (home phone, 586-4364) or Larry Smith (586-6950, ext. 263). Sincerely, Jonathan Roche, Chairman) Northampton Conservation Commission o� R'EIVED JUL 2-.61985 United states soil 4 Whalley Street �( Department of Conservation Agriculture Service Hadley, MA 0103 5 Tel. 586-5440 July 11, 1985 Mr. Russell Benjamin 'and Mr' Richard Giusto' City Aviation .Company, Northampton Airport Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Sirs.: `'Russell Benjam'.in of the City Aviation Company contacted the Soil Conservation Service; (SCS) on July 1, 1985, asking for seeding recommendations for a stream- bank,erosion problem on your land on Riverbank Road on the Connecticut River in Northampton. The conservation commission had issued an order of conditions on June 4,',1985, to restore the bank to its original 1:1 slope, to,riprap the bank 3 feet above and'below the normal water line,(or by SCS'or Army Corps of Engineers' directions) and seed down the remaining area, including shrubs and/or trees, within the 100 foot buffer strip according to SCS recommendations. I called Larry Smith of the Northampton Planning Department and we arranged to meet at 2 p.m. on July 2 with Dick Giusto at the site. I informed both parties that engineering recommendations for streambank erosion on the Connecticut River was out of our jurisdiction and they should contact the Army Corps of,Engineers. , At the site, the bank had been restored,to a slightly steeper than 2:1 slope. Rock riprap had been placed below the water level up to about 7 feet above the water level, about 2 feet thick. Six to ten inch stone was used. The Corps of Engineers should be consulted as to the adequacy of the rock size being used, minimum length of bank needing riprapping, whether the riprap needs to be keyed into the bank and at the toe of the slope and whether a filter fabric is needed behind the riprap to reduce the potential for piping of the fill material. Some trees on the west side of the stabilized bank had recently fallen over and taken large clumps of soil with it. These trees should be removed and others leaning should be cut with their stumps being left to help hold the bank in place. Bank height is approximately 15 feet above water level, 7 feet is riprapped and 8 feet by 32 feet in length needs to be seeded, as well as the rest of the bare soil area. The 25 feet beyond the 100 foot buffer zone should be seeded also, in order to prevent erosion from starting at the top of the slope. The entire area is approximately 19,000 square feet or 0.44 acres. A fescue/redtop mix would be suitable for this area because the fescues make a good mat which would provide a more resistant cover where water floods and recedes. The redtop is quick to come up therefore providing early cover. The So# Conservation Service SCS -AS -1 ,`/TV✓ll_ Is an agency of the 10-78 Department of Agrkwltwe City, Aviation Co; 2 We do..not usually recommend seeding between June 15 and August 15, but since soil moisture conditions are good -and immediate protection would reduce the threat of a washout, we do advise that the area, be seeded immediately. Mulching helps preserve' soil moisture. The attached Job Sheet MA -108 "Stabilization Seeding" explains the seeding procedure. 'A temporary berm built across the contour at the top of the slope would help the seeding get established by diverting water away from the area. ` Seed.inq should- be established first and shrubs planted in the fall.' The seeding has ' to be netted close to the ground which. you could not d61f the seedlings were planted. Red stem dogwood (Cornus sto,lonifera) or silky dogwood (Cornus amomum) are very good shrubs,fo:r streambank stabilization, and are available from local nurseries. See description on attached Conservation Plant Sheet MA -04 "Native Dogwoods:" Establish by planting container -grown or bare -root seedlings 1 to 2 years old. On lower stream- ;',p�' baitiks,''plant .seedlings 2 feet ap4rt,,;on upper streambanks they; may be'spaced farther Apart. If there are any further questions regarding non -engineering measures on this site, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, Lisa Neffing U ; Soil Conservationist Enclosures cc: Larry Smith, Northampton Planning Department Multi-flora rose, bayberry, coral berry, or purple-osier w Ilow spaced4�x 4� to 6' x 6'. 10'_20 Normal annual high water line If-". 4rw"P 7 ine7 e -osier w, �"'—spaced 3' x S to 4'x 41 (approximately 65-120 shrubs per. 1,000 sq. tt.) lDaGwoun Pale-osier wi#ew spaced —21 x 2' (approxifQately 240 Normal water shrubs per I,000,sq. ft.) line Single row of silky dogwood or red-osier dogwood spaced 2' a- part in-the row. Riprop (On sections where riprapping _is not required, the silky dogwood would be planted just above the nor - mal waterline) 1 . Form 9' DEOE File No. 246— (To be provided by DEQQ aty/Towm Northampton Applicant Enforcement Order Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 To Northampton Airport, Inc. (Richard Giusto), Old Ferry Rd., Northampton MA 0106( Dateof Issuance Verbal Notice given on 5/15/85, written No ire hand d 1'v ed 5/17/85 Property lot/parcel number, address Parcel 53 of Sheet 25 of the Northampton Asspss is Mapc Extent and type of activity: Alteration of an area subject to the Wetlands Protection Act namely the bulldozing, filling and regrading of land, as well as the cutting an'd possibly bulldozing) of trees and -.brush on the bank of the Connecticut River, withi the 100 foot buffer zone of the bank of the Connecticut.River, and within the 100 year floodplain of the Connecticut River The Northampton Conservation Commission has determined that the activity described above is in violation of the Wetlands Protection Act, G.L c. 131, §40, and the Regulations promulgated pur- suant thereto 31 0ICMR 10.00, because: El Said activity has been/is being conducted iithout a valid Order of Conditions. 0 Said activity has been/is being conducted i4violation of an Order of Conditions issued to dates( File number , Condition number(s) 0 Other (specify) The Northampton Conservation Commi ssi nn hereby orders the following: ® The property owner, his agents, permittees and all others shall immediately cease and desist from further activity affecting the wetland portion of this property. ® Wetland alterations resulting from said activity shall be corrected and the site returned to its original con- dition. r'� U Completed application forms and plans as required by the Act and Regulations shall be filed with the NQrthamntnn rnncarvatinn r.,..migginn onorbefore 5/22/RS (date), and no further work shall be performed until a public hearing has been held and an Order of Conditions has been issued to regulate said work. Application forms are available at: _Northampton Of f ice o f Planning & Development, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, MA $% The property owner shall take. every reasonable step to prevent further violations of the act. 11 Other(specify) This Enforcement Order constitutes written confirmation of the verbal Vi2llation Notice given to Richard Giusto by Lawrence B. Smith, Senior Planner of the City of Northampton acting as the representative of the Northampton Conservation Commission, on May 15, 1985. Failure to comply with this Order may constitute grounds for legal action. Massachusetts General laws Chap- ter 131, Section 40 provides: Whoever violates any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months or both. Each day or portion thereof of continuing violation shall constitute a separate offense. Questions regarding this Enforcement Order should be directed to: _Northampton Conservation Commissio Lawrence B. Smith, Senior Planner Issued by__ Northampton Conservation Commission City Hall, Northampton, MA (596-69 Signature(s) 9-2 (Signature of delivery person or certified mail number) ALMER HUNTLEY, JR. & ASSOCIATES, INC. ALMER HUNTLEY, JR., PE., RLS SURVEYORS . ENGINEERS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS DOUGLAS W. THOMPSON, RLS P.O. Box 568 / 125 PLEASANT ST. / NORTHAMPTON, MASS. 01061 WILLIAM R. GARRITY, LA (413) 584.7444 JOHN G. RAYMOND, PE m COQ( Ul-CT/CU7- IEY/ST/AlG W16ETAT/D.0 7 F/ VER Z�- K � � FX/5T/AUG I/�ZETi9 DSI,/ � TDP SI.DPE K K X K K K X X X x X e- 6 X 6 OtFSEF AOW X x x X x x x x x x x l NAtI VF DDG W0,0D OR SlWlLAR T-YPC x JA K K x K X i( x K X " D/SSTI/,P9Z Z? � fZ� TD �E- SEC ; Z-1 xia71VF n1)1,w1nnS v _ lingkIV191- WgFZ-2 LEVEL -Tez= TrIl RZX11y RXZ?RJo-510-? PZA1'.1,r1N6 2187-f1,wPTDu 191"FRO'PT - A/D S69LE - City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hail • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586.6950 • Community and Economic Dmkn ment • Conservation Historic Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals Richard Giusto Northampton Airport, Inc. P.O. Box 221 Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Mr. Giusto: June 25, 1987 In response to your request for a Certificate Of Compliance relative to your Project #246-134, the Conservation Commission inspected the site on June 11th at 5:30 pm. Though the Commission requested you to be there, you did not attend. At the site inspection the Commission found that the shrubs that had been planted appeared to have taken and were growing nicely. However, in order to issue a Certifiacte Of Compliance the follwoing must still be complied with: o re-establish plantings where a roadway appears to have been created, (vehicular access is prohibited from this area), o the plantings do not appear to have been planted throughout the entire 100' Buffer Zone as specified in Condition #10 of the Order of Conditions, o the area should be reseeded, where necessary, with SCS control mix, as specified in Condition #10 of the Order of Conditions, o we recommend that all of the additional plantings be planted in the fall, no later than September 30th. When the above have been completed, the Commission will be happy to re -consider your request for a Certificate Of Compliance. Yours, nathan Roche, Chairman Northampton Conservation Commission �� United States Soil Department of Conservation Agriculture Service Karen Simon Chairperson Northampton Conservation Commission City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Ms. Simon: 4 Whalley Street Hadley, MA 01035 Tel. 413-586-5440 August 30, 1485 The purpose of this letter is to clarify a point that I made in my July 11, 1985, recommendations for the City Aviation Company's streambank erosion problem. On page 2, second paragraph, I said "Seeding should be established first and shrubs planted in the fall." The term "fall" is used loosely here to mean late summer, i.e. August 15 -September 15. We usually recommend planting in the spring for a slightly lower mortaility rate, but, like the seeding, in the interest of stabilizing the bank we recommended planting this season. Again, it is best to plant after a rain to take advantage of the moisture conditions, and mulching helps preserve the moisture. I regret any inconvenience that my omission may have caused the City Aviation Company or the commission. I hope that the September 1 deadline may be extended to allow the City Aviation Company more time to purchase their shrubs. Sincerely, LISA A. NEFFINV Soil Conservat cc: R. Giusto and R. Benjattni.n, City Aviation Co. L. Smith, Northampton Planning Board ooThe Soil Conservation Service SCS -AS -1 is an agency of the 10-79 `Department of Agriculture ON United States Soil r' Department of Conservation Agriculture Service Mr. Richard Giusto and Mr. Russell Benjamin City Aviation Company Northampton Airport Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Dick and Russ: 4 Whalley Street Hadley, MA 01035 Tel. 413-586-5440 RECEIVED SEP t 6 1985 September 13, 1985 This letter is a followup to 'fly July 11, 1985, and August 30 1985 recommendatioris regarding the stabilization of your streambank. Setting planting dates is not an exact science. Guidelines are general depending on weather conditions and type of seedling used. Container grown seedlings can be planted in the late summer --August 15 - September 15, as stated in my previous letter. This gives the roots a chance to grow and establish the plant before the winter. Spring is generally better for moisture conditions. Container grown seedlings can be planted any time between the time the ground thaws and May 1. Bare root seedlings can be planted in the fall after dormancy, i.e., the first frost, but it is better to plant them in the spring. In the spring they should. be planted before there is any sign of sprouting, otherwise they will not survive. If they are received that way from the nursery, return them. If the soil does not adhere to the roots when removing the seedling from its container, it is considered a bare root seedling and should be planted as such. The decision on when to plant should be based on availability of stock, probability of survival, and on the advice of your nursery. Container grown seedlings are the safest and can be planted in the late summer or early spring. Bare root seedlings can be planted after frost or early spring before they sprout. If you have any further questions, feel free to call. Sincerely, LISA A. NEFFIN R Soil Conservati nist cc : Karen Simon, Conservation Commission 0 The Sod Conservation Service SCS -AS -1 is an agency of the 10-79 Department of Agriculture City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation . Historic Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals Mr. Robert J. Desista, Chief Processing Section Regulatory Branch, Operations Division Army Corps of Engineers 424 Trapelo "Road Waltham, Massachusetts 02254 Re: Notice of Intent/City Aviation -Northampton Airport Dear Mr. Desista: June 4, 1985 Enclosed please find a copy of a Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act: Enforcement Order, Notice of Intent and Order of Conditions,all relative to the un- authorized bulldozing of the banks of the Connecticut river by City Aviation of the Northampton Airport. At the Northampton Conservation Commission's Public Hearing held on this Notice of Intent the Applicant made it .very clear that they would not be contacting the Army Corps of Engineers relative. to a"404 Permit for this operation, so the Commission has taken it upon themselves to -forward these materials to you. As you can see by the enclosed Order of Conditions the Commission has ordered that the area essentially be restored to its original condition. Any action that your agency would take on this violation, or any recommendations or comments that you might have would be greatly appreciated. Yours, Lawrence B. Smith, Planner on behalf of the Northampton Conservation Commission u ALMER HUNTLEY, JR. & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS P.O. Box 568 / 125 PLEASANT ST. / NORTHAMPTON, MASS. 01061 )413) 584-7444 August 8, 1985 Conservation Commission City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 ALMER HUNTLEY, JR., PE., RIS DOUGLAS W. THOMPSON, RLS WILLIAM R. GARRITY, LA JOHN G. RAYMOND, PE 230-072-3 Re: City Airport File No.: 246-134 Dear Members: On August 6, 1985, Steve Mason and Charles Clines of our staff visited the referenced project site and noted the following: 1. Rip rap was in place. 2. Slope and buffer was seeded and meshed. 3. Grass was growing. 4. Recent rain had had very little effect on erosion as netting and grass were protecting the surface. 5. Fallen trees existing at time of Order of Conditions have been removed. 6. New trees have not been planted as planting during hot dry summer months is not desirable and we recommend establishing ground cover first in accord- ance with letter from SCS dated July 11, 1985. The owners have accomplished considerable in a short time frame and have attempted to comply with your "Order" within modifications recommended by SCS. We recommend no further activity fully established and that the applicant of their findings. AH/dm be taken on the bank until the ground cover is Commission review the site and advise the Very truly yours, ALMER HUNTLEY, JR. & ASSOCIATES, INC. mer Huntley, Jr., P.E ., WE President \` i City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation . Historic Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE The Northampton Conservation Commission will hold a Public Hearing on Tuesday evening, May 28, 1985 at 8:30 PM in the Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Office Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, MA as fequired by M.G.L. Chapter 131, Section 40, The Wetlands Protection Act, on the Notice of Intent filed by Northampton Airport, Inc. (Old Ferry Rd., Northampton MA) regarding their alteration of an area subject to the Wetlands Protection Act, namely the bulldozing, filling and regrading of land, as well as the cutting (and possibly bulldozing) of trees and brush on the bank of the Connecticut River, within the 100 -foot buffer zone of the bank of the Connecticut River, and within the 100 -year floodplain of the Connecticut River.. The area is generally identified as being off of the northerlN side of Riverbank Road, and is more specifically identified as Parcel 53 of Sheet 25 of the Northampton Assessor's Maps. Copies of the Notice of Intent and plans are available for public in- spection during regular business hours at the Northampton Office of Planning and Development, City Hall, 210 rain Street, Northampton, Mass. C. Mason Maronn, Chairman Northampton Conservation Commission T-) be published: May 23, 1985 To be paid for by: Northampton Airport, Inc. Richard Giusto Old Ferry Road Northampton, MA ALMER HUNTLEY, JR. & ASSOCIATES, INC. ALMER HUNTLEY JR.. PE RIs SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS P.O. Box 568 / 125 PLEASANT ST. / NORTHAMPTON, MASS. 01061 DOUGLAS W. THOMPSON, RIS (413) 584-7444 WILLIAM R. GARRITY, LA JOHN G. RAYMOND, PE August 12, 1985 City of Northampton Conservation Commission City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Re: City Airport File No.: 246-134 Dear Members: On August 9, 1985, Charles Clines, P.E. of our staff and the undersigned visited the referenced project site and noted the following: 1. The slope has been restored to as close to a 1/1 slope as possible using the material on site and is more than five (5) feet above the rip rap in compliance with Condition Number 7 of the Order of Conditions. 2. Rip rap stone, sized to withstand higher than normal river velocities, has been installed in the disturbed area three (3) feet above and below the average water line as required by Condition Number 8. In our opinion, the rip rap has been installed properly. We are noting sediment deposits occurring in this area rather than an erosion process taking place. 3. Fallen trees in the disturbed area have been removed in compliance with Condition Number 9. Trees outside of the disturbed area which have fallen on their own are not considered to be the applicants responsi- bility to remove. 4. The restored slope and buffer zone have been seeded and meshed to comply with Condition Number 10 and grass is growing. No signs of significant erosion was noted to spite the recent heavy rains. 5. The planting of new trees has been delayed until the fall based on S.G.S. recommendations. In our opinion, the land owners have complied with the Order of Conditions, except for the planting of trees, which will be completed this fall. We recommend no further activity be taken on the bank until the ground cover is fully established and that the Commission review the site and advise the applicant of their findings. We would like to note that this site is now probably one of the most stable portions of the river bank in the area. Adjacent stretches of the river bank upstream and downstream are undermined by wave and current action, and in the near future, there will be substantial collapsing of embankments into the river along with the tree growth on the embankments. AH/ e t If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Very truly yours, A HUNTLEY, JR. & ASSOCIA S, INC. Almer Huntley, Jr., P. President HUNTLEY ' No. 0419 ALMER HUNTLEY, JR., & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS z S. RUSSELL SYLVA :n Comissionernar JOHN J. FNGGINS9 _ Regional Environmental Engineer • X36 �icui �G�7GeeG �7�► � �Gl 0,vay 53.27 June 7, 1985 the �? Wetlands pr to , ti receipt of . following application filed in accordance ' Hands Protection Act, General haws Chaoter 131, Section g0.. C'She with DIAL` - .. (.Th� Act ) . .Av'.t'o -221 North- ..ton • •• MA 01WN.ER(s) of IANDz' Northampton 'Airport, Inc. CITY/T ,VNt : Northampton- . . ICC'ATION: Riverbank Dr:' This project has-been given the following 1,7etlands the Act, File Number in accordance with The following information is missing and must be fon.;arded. coctiplete filing in accordance with the to this office fora Act and the Regulations 310 CMR -10.00, GI -2: () T-0 (2) copies of a completed Notice of intent {Form 3 of Section I0. or Abbreviated Notice of Intent (Form 4 of Section 10_99), whichever is) applicable. () TWO (2) copies of plans, Supporting calculations and other doctzrentation necessary to completely describe the proposed work and mitigating measures_ i ) T,o (2) copies of clans shawiL^g compliance with Title 5 of the State Environmental Code, 310 02 15.00, if applicable, Le., whenever a sub- surface sewage disposal system is involved. (See part 1, Section 15.02 (5)' of the Regulations.) () TWO (2) copies of an 81-. x 11" section of the USGS area contain ning sufficient information for the Conservation Comaissi e and thepartx<ent to locate the site o= the cork_ () Plans should delineate all site areas subject to protect - 10:02 (1) and (2) on under 310 CARR (X) Pians and supporting doc�nentation should indicate har,7 the Proposed work - meets the requirements under 310 aR 10.54 - 10.57 for those areas subject to protection above that will be altered by the proposed work_ APPLICATION ® ADULT r+uMet„ FOR COMPLAINT ❑ JUVEN - •ca I ` Court rt of Massachusetts ARREST HEARING] SUMMONS ❑ WARRANT District Court Department ! The within named complainant requests that a complaint issu named defendant, charging said defendant with the e against the within OURT DIVISION N / orthampton Gistritt Court offense(s) listed below. DATE OF APP�IJION DATE OF OFFENSE PLACE OF OFFENSE , "S ,Of Street —/ r, �7 NorthamptorhiC , MA 01060 NAME, ADSRESS AND ZIP COD OF COMPLAINANT %3 NO. OFFENSE G.L. Ch. and Se ort ya;7to ^, ',assaChusetts r) P NAME, ADDRESS AND ZIP CODE OF DEFENDANT r-'itV__AV13t1i1 ICI+�3>"Ci .:;IIISLO P.O. Fox 22 3. ortha-,pto;,, - assc1cl:usettsfl..'::?f,r) a. COURT USE A hearing upon this complaint appllcatlOYl DATE OF HEARING ONLY—* will be held at the above court address on f '_ -;'`�� TIME OF HEARING ' COURT USE AT - - 4l� i 4 ONLY CASE PARTICULARS - BE SPECIFIC NAME OF VICTIM DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY VALUE OF PROPERTY NO. Owner of property, Goods stolen, what TYPE OF CONTROLLED person assaulted, etc. Over or under destroyed, etc. $100. SUBSTANCE. WEAPON Marijuana, gun, etc. g 1 2 3 �OTLHER REMARKS: OCCUPATION OF BIRTH SOCIAL EMPLOYER/SCHOOL X SIGNATURE OF COMPLAINANT Complete data below if knnwn MOTHER'S NAME (MAIDEN) • DC -CR -2 (1184) NAME I CLERK -MAGISTRATE OFFCE FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY APPLICATION FOR SHOWCAUSE ORRIMINAL COMPLAINT (Please Circle one o4 Date Filed: July 5, 1985 Accepted by: COMPLAINANT: Northampton Conservation CommissionDEFENDANT:city Aviation (Richard Giusto: (Name) (Name) ADDRESS: City Hall, 210 Main St. ADDRESS: P.O. Box 221 Northampton, MA 01060 TEL. NO. 586-6950 X263 Northampton, MA 01060 TEL . NO. 584-1860 ATTORNEY: Atty Patrick Gleason, ATTORNEY: City Solicitor WHEN CRIME COMMITTED: July 3, 1985 WHERE CRIME COMMITTE0: Off of the northerly side of Riverbank Road (Parcel 53 of Sheet of the Northampton Assessor's Maps) REPORTED TO POLICE: BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF CRIME: Defendent is in violation of Chapter 131, Section 40 M.G.I PROTECTION OF FLOOD PLAINS, SEACOASTS AND OTHER WETLANDS May 17, 1985 - Defendent is issued an ENFORCEMENT ORDER, under the provisions of Chapter 131 Section 40, M.G.L. for altering an area subject to the Wetl"ands Protection Act, namely the bulldozing, filling and regrading of land, as well as the cutting (and possibly bulldozing) of trees and brush on the bank of the Connecticut River, within the 100 foot buffer zone of the bank of the Connecticut River, and within the 100 -year floodplain of the Connecticut River, without an Order Of Conditions. June 4, 1985 - Northampton Conservation Commission issues an ORDER OF CONDITIONS, under the provisions of Chapter 131, Section 40, ordering that the defendent restore the area by June 24, 1985. June 24, 1985- Northampton Conservation Commission issues another ENFORCEMENT ORDER as the required restoration was not completed by June 24, 1985, and orders that the Defendent complete the required restoration by 12:00 Noon July 3, 1985 or the City will file a Complaint with the Hampshire County Clerk of Courts July 3, 1985 - Defendent has still not completed all required res oration work. DATED: July 5, 1985 SIGNED: Lawrence B. Smith, Senior Planner on behalf of the Northampton Conservation Commissi C. Mason Marron Northampton Conservation Commission Member Form 9 From DEQE F1W No. 246- 134 ITo be provfdb by DEQE) City/Town Northampton APOicantC i t �Aviation Massachusetts WeEands Protection Order • tection Act, G.L. c.131, §40 sauing Aut�ty To Cit Aviation Richard Gi s o Nor h r R Date of Issuance J 24 P.O. Box 22.1, Northampton, MA 01060 ha u a Property lot/parcei number, address N ortham,,t-on Ai Extent and type of activity:. The Northam tonConservation Commission as above is in violation of the Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131h§40, and the Regulations Promulgatined that the activity ed described pur- suant thereto 3101CINR 10.00, because: g fl Said activity has been/is being conducted without a valid Order of Conditions. I® Said act1vity*= /is being conducted in violation of an Order of Conditions issued to cityA Richard Giusto)*ion File number' dated June Condition number(s) /�1 ?. 0 Other (specify) The hereby orders the following: 0 The property owner, his agents, permittees and all others shall immediately cease and desist from furt activity affecting the wetland portion of this property. her 0 Wetland alterations resulting from said activity shall be corrected and the site returned original con. ned to its dition. 9-1 ton 0 Completed application forms and plans as required by the Act and Regulations shall be filed with the on or before and no further work shall be performed until a public hearing has been held and an Order o (date) has been issued to regulate said work. Application forms are available at: N6fth W1Q 0 f—fictions Planning & Development, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, MA £ 0 The property owner shall take. every reasonable step to prevent further viola ® Others tions of the act. ( pecify) Should Condition #12(1), and all other related Conditions, not be fully.•complied with by 12:00 P.M. (noon) of July 3, 1985 Northam ,Conservation Commission will file a Criminal Complaint with �theeHampshireton County Clerk of Courts. Failure to comply with this Order may constitute grounds for legal action. Massachusetts General Laws Chap. ter 131, Section 40 provides: Whoever violates any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months or both. Each day or portion thereof of continuing violation shall constitute a separate offense. Questions regarding this Enforcement Order should be directed to: Lawrence B Smith P Issued by Northam tNorthampton, Conservation Commission City mpton, MA Main 0tX263) Signature(s) C_, �y -?'�� A ------------------------- 7.cc: Almer Huntley, Jr. & Assoc. 9-2 P 620 675 668 (Signature of delivery person or certified mail number) L Form 9' DEOE File No. (To be provided by DEOE) city/Town Northampton Applicant Enforcement Order Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 From Ne-vrt- se—ration Commission ssuing Authority To Northam ton Air ort Inc. Richard Giust d 06C Date of Issuance Verbal Notice given on 5/15/85 written Not rp hand, ALLiXered 85 Property lot/parcel number, address Parc e i 5-3 o f Sh P P r 25'()f rhe u mirth mntnn ARA PScny g Maps Extent and t ypeof activity: Alteration of an area subject to the Wetlands Protection Act namely the bulldozing, filling and regrading of land, as well as the cutting {dna' possibly.bulldozing) of trees and -.brush on the bank of the Connecticut River, withi the 100 foot buffer zone of the bank of the Connecticut. River, and within the 100 year floodplain of the Connecticut River The Northampton Conservation Commission has determined that the activity described above is in violation of the Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40, and the Regulations promulgated pur- suant thereto 31 OICMR 10.00, because: ® Said activity has been/is being conducted lithout a valid Order of Conditions. O Said activity has been/is being conducted Wviolation of an Order of Conditions issued to dated File number , Condition number(s) O Other (specify) The hereby orders the following: ® The property owner, his agents, permittees and all others shall immediately cease and desist from further activity affecting the wetland portion of this property. El Wetland alterations resulting from said activity shall be corrected and the site returned to its original con- dition. 9-1 EX Completed application forms and plans as required by the Act and Regulations shall be filed with the r; r,,, ro,T,,,,; on or before 5 / ? /R 5 and no further work shall be performed until a public hearing has been held and an Order (dations has been issued to regulate said work. Application forms are available at: and an Or r Office o £ Planning & Development, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, MA The property owner shall take. every reasonable step to prevent further violations of the act. 13 Other(spectfy) This Enforcement Order constitutes written confirmation of the verbal Vi�tion Notice given to Richard Giusto by Lawrence B. Smith, Senior Planner of the City of Northampton acting as the representative of the Northampton Conservation Commission, on May 15, 1985. Failure to comply with this Order may constitute grounds for legal action. Massachusetts General Laws Chap. ter 131. Section 40 provides: Whoever violates any provision of this section shalt be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months or both. Each day or portion thereof of continuing violation shall constitute a separate offense. Questions regarding this Enforcement Order should be directed to: Northampton CAn Gpr.» r ion ommissio LawIssued by Northam ton Conservation Commission City Hall, Northampton,nce B. Smith, oMA (596er Cit 1596-69: Signature(s) or certifled mail number) f cd eL1,tyr-c%1 -�a 9-2 City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall * 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 * (413) 586-6950 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation . Historic Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals Clerk of Courts Northampton District Court Courthouse Main Street Northampton, Massachusetts 01060 Re: Complaint #SC 2090 Clerk of Courts: August 15, 1985 At their meeting on August 12, 1985 the Northampton Conservation Commission voted to withdraw its Application For Criminal Complaint filed by the Commission against City Aviation (Richard Giusto), P.O. Box 221, Northampton, MA on July 5, 1985. A Hearin: (SC #2090) was scheduled for August 12, 1985, but was continued until August 19, 1985. The Commission has determined that City Aviation has substantially complied, albeit well past the June 24, 1985 and July 3, 1985 deadlines, with the applicable provisions of his Order Of Contitions (DEQE#246-134). The Commission does, however, reserve the right to file a new Application For Criminal Complaint should City Aviation not comply with the remaining applicable provisions of Order Of Conditions (DEQE#246-134), including the planting of trees and shrubs by September 1, 1985 in accordance with Conditions #12. cc: City Aviation Almer Huntley, Jr. & Assoc. Resp e +fully yours, La rence B. Smith, Senior Planner on behalf of the Northampton Conservation Commission Regulatory Branch NEDOD—R34 '11� DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NEW ENGLAND DIVISION, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 424 TRAPELO ROAD WALTHAM, MASSACHUSETTS 02254-9149 Mr. Lawrence Smith Conservation Commission, Planner City Hall, 210 Main Street Northampton, Massachusetts 01060 Dear Mr. Smith: August 3, 1985 RECF'VED AUs 6 N65 This is in response to your letter dated June 4, 1985 requesting any recommendations or comments that the Corps may have concerning the Northampton Airport work, which involved fill on the banks of and into the waters of the Connecticut River in Northampton. Under Section 10 of the River and Harbor Act of 1899, Corps authorization is required for all work beyond mean high water in navigable waters of the United States, such as the Connecticut River. In addition, under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, Corps authorization is required for activities involving the discharge of dredged or fill material in all waters of the United States; including not only navigable waters but inland rivers, lakes and streams and their adjacent wetlands. As the Corps is granted jurisdiction over such activities Corps permits are required before any such filling can be legally under taken. According to the Northampton Airport Notice of Intent dated May 22, 1985, and the Order of Conditions signed on June 3, 1985, all construction areas and "filled" areas were ordered by the Northampton Conservation Commission (NCC) to be restored back to their original conditions and elevations as of June 24, 1985. If restoration has been completed and all of the unauthorized work has been removed then it would not be necessary for the Corps to take any further action. In addition, the proposed rip rapbank stabilization below the ordinary high water line, is permitted by a nationwide permit Section 330.5 (13), and this work can proceed immediately. Questions regarding an engineering appraisal of the riprap slope protection will be addressed by our Planning Division in a separate letter. -2 - It would be greatly appreciated if the commission would verbally, or in writing contact our office as to the current status of the restoration plan and if in fact it has been completed to the commissions satisfaction. If you have any further questions on this matter please contact Terry English of our Enforcement Section at 1-800-362-4367. Sincerely, ��� Richard A. Roach Chief, Enforcement Section Regulatory Branch Operations Division Copy Furnished Northampton Airport, Inc. Old Ferry Road Northampton, Massachusetts 01060 J6� DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NEW ENGLAND DIVISION, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 424 TRAPELO ROAD WALTHAM, MASSACHUSETTS 02254 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF August 1, 1985 Planning Division Plan Formulation Branch Mr. Lawrence smith RECEIVED AUG - 2 1985 City Planner City Hall Northampton, Massachusetts 01060 Dear Mr. Smith: Through our Enforcement Section of Regulatory Branch, you have requested an engineering appraisal of riverbank slope protection along the Connecticut River at the Northampton Airport site. Although no adequate plans for this work have been provided, engineers of my staff made a visual inspection of the area in your company during a boat trip on July 10, 1985. From some distance away it appeared that the stone was being hand placed on the graded embankment. Although the stone size may be adequate to withstand higher than normal river velocities, it does not appear that any gravel bedding material was placed under the riprap. Without this filter layer earth materials will tend to wash out through the rock layer during high flow periods. This will most likely result in displacement and undermining of the rock layer with eventual destruction of the protection stone and riverbank slope. I hope the foregoing provides sufficient information for your current needs. I would emphasize that this letter should not be used as ground for removal of the bank stabilization material as the visual inspection was brief and adequate plans were not available for review. A separate letter will be sent from our Regulatory Branch responding to the issues you raised concerning the Corps of Engineers regulatory jurisdiction over the filling that occurred in the waterway. If you have further questions, please contact William Swaine of my staff at (617) 647-8532. Sincerely, Zoning Board of Appeals City of Northampton Hearing No.: ZBA-2006-0003 Date: August 29, 2005 APPLICATION TYPE: SUBMISSION DATE: Commercial Finding Wed Jui 27, 2005 Applicant's Name: NAME: NORTHAMPTON Aeronautics, INC ADDRESS: 160 Old Ferry Road TOWN: STATE: ZIP CODE: NORTHAMPTON MA 01060 PHONE NO.: FAX NO.: (413) 584-7980 0 GIS # EMAIL ADDRESS: Site Information: Owner's Name: NAME: Seven Bravo Two, LLC ADDRESS: PO Box 699 TDWN• °--Westf 1 Lw STATE: MA ZIP CODE: 010,86 PHONE NO.: (413) 584-7980 Q FAX NO.: EMAIL ADDRESS: `Nark Location.: MAILING DATE: HEARING CONTINUED DATE: SITE ZONING: 152 CROSS PATH RD Tue Jul 26, 2005 Sat Aug 20, 2005 SC TOWN: Sara Northrup SECTION OF BYLAW: NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 Section 7.6 GIS # MAP: BLOCK: LOT: ACTION TAKEN: 9308 25 1 015 I 001 Grant Reason for filing: Replace three existing non -conforming signs with two new, smaller signs and relocate the third sign. HARDSHIP: FINDINGS: The Zoning Board of Appeals granted the Finding for replacement of the non -conforming signs based upon the information contained in the application. The Board found that the change in the signs, reduction in size and relocation will not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming signs to the neighborhood, and determined that based on the application, the change, extension or alteration will not make the sign any more nonconforming than it now is (i.e. higher, taller, bigger, closer, etc.) COULD NOT DEROGATE BECAUSE: FILING DEADLINE: MAILING DATE: HEARING CONTINUED DATE: DECISION DRAFT BY: APPEAL DATE: Tue Jul 26, 2005 Sat Aug 20, 2005 votes to Thu Sep 08, 2005 Sara Northrup REFERRALS IN DATE: HEARING DEADLINE DATE: HEARING CLOSE DATE: FINAL SIGNING BY: APPEAL DEADLINE: SatAug 13, 2005 Fri Sep 30, 2005 Thu Aug 25, 2005 Thu Sep 08, 2005 Mon Sep 19, 2005 FIRST ADVERTISING DATE: HEARING DATE: VOTING DATE: DECISION DATE: Thu Aug 11, 2005 Thu Aug 25, 2005 Thu Aug 25, 2005 Tue Aug 30, 2005 SECOND ADVERTISING DATE: HEARING TIME: VOTING DEADLINE: DECISION DEADLINE: Thu Aug 18, 2005 6:05 PM Thu Nov 03, 2005 Fri Nov 04, 2005 MEMBERS PRESENT: VOTE: Elizabeth Wroblicka votes to Grant David Bloomberg votes to Grant Sara Northrup votes to Grant Bob Riddle votes to Grant MOTION MADE BY: SECONDED BY: VOTE COUNT: DECISION: Elizabeth Wroblicka I Bob Riddle 1 4 1 Granted MINUTES OF MEETING: Available in the Office of Planning & Development. GeoTMS® 1998 Des Lauriers & Associates, Inc. IIM Zoning Board of Appeals City of Northampton Hearing No.: ZBA-2006-0003 Date: August 29, 2005 1, Carolyn Misch, as agent to the Zoning Board of Appeals certify that this is a true and accurate decision of the Board and that this decision was riled in the Clerk's office on the date below and the notice of the decision was mailed to abutters. August 30, 2005 .G- Caro yn Misch NOTICE OF APPEAL An appeal from the deicsion of the Zoning Board may be made by any person aggrieved and pursuant to MGL Chapt 40A, Section 17 as amended, within (20) days [30 days for a residential Finding] after the date of the riling of this decision with the City Clerk. The date of Ming is listed above. Such appeal may be made to the Hampshire Superior Court with a certified copy of the appeal sent to the City Clerk of Northampton. GeoTMS® 1998 Des Lauriers & Associates, Inc. 07/27/05 10:01am P. 002 • MEMORANDUM TO: Keith Wilson, Chair, Planning Board FR: Ned Huntley, P.E., City Engineer -Department of Public Works DA: July 25, 2005 RE: File: Northampton Airport, 152 Cross Path Road — new curb cut Map ID: 25-1, 15,1.5,17,19,71,53 and 25-1 CC; file The Departruent of public Works has reviewed the above referenced appacation for the following Items; Traffic: x Volume & .Impact on City Street x Roadway Capacity Adequacy of City Road Construction Site Distances x Parking x Driveway Openings utilities: Sanitary Sewer Water Drainage Into City Stormwater System Capacity of Stormwater Line Northampton Stormwater Permit NPDES Phase tl Compliance _._ Other: The Department of Public Works has the following comments: x No Concerns, project will not have an impact on any items reviewed -- however, applicant must file for and receive a new curb cut/driveway permit from the DPW_ Traffic Study is required Roadway does not have adequate capacity to handle the additional traffic Roadway is not adequately constructed to handle proposed increase in traffic Site Distances are not adequate for proposed project Parking spaces do not meet minimum requirements Parking spaces are too close to driveway opening Driveway openings are not adequate for proposed use Sanitary Sewer line is not adequately sized for proposed use Sewer line connection is not properly shown Water line is not adequately sized for proposed use Water line connection is not properly shown City stormwater system is not adequate to handle increase in drainage Stormwater system does not meet minimum requirements for reduction of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Northampton Stormwater Management Permit has not been approved or conditions for approved permit have not been met Other Comments: