YMCA asks to cut approved tree plantings from nine to six; Planning Board denies amendment, directs more screening near pavilion

Julie Bianco, CEO of the Hampshire Regional YMCA, asked the Northampton Planning Board to amend a previously approved site plan so the YMCA could plant six new trees in different locations instead of the nine trees shown on the original Berkshire Design plan. "We are looking to amend the tree planting from the 9 approved trees to 6 in different locations," Bianco said, adding that the YMCA currently has "53 trees currently on our small property."

The YMCA told the board it proposed the change for safety, security and to avoid shading planned solar panels. Bianco said the YMCA's tree consultant recommended different species and locations: three London plane trees along the playground fence, two honey locusts beside the upper parking lot and one sweet gum to replace an oak removed before 2016. "If we plant the trees as they originally proposed, we don't have a clear view to the playground or the playing fields or the parking lot from our cameras," Bianco said. She also cited concerns that the originally proposed species would not be suitable in some locations and that large trees could block future solar installations.

Neighbors and abutters told the board they want more screening near the Airnasium and pavilion. "I think it looks very barren," said Betsy Yount of 94 Massasoit Street, who said she faces the Airnasium from her patio. Tamara Kupfer of 117 Massachusetts Wayand Street asked the YMCA to consider smaller or additional shade trees along the playground and field: "I just want to reiterate, like, I think there's a need for shade in that area," Kupfer said. Several speakers said arborvitae plantings already on site provide some screening but do not substitute for the shade trees shown on the original plan.

Planning staff clarified the legal and procedural context: Sarah LaValley explained that the trees in question were not required under the city's significant-tree ordinance because the trees had been removed more than a year before the YMCA's site-plan application; rather, the trees had been included as part of the site-plan approval and were reviewed under the site-plan criteria in Section 11.6. "So no relief under the significant tree ordinance is being requested. It's an amendment to the site plan that the planning board had approved," LaValley said. Board members pressed the YMCA on whether the trees represented mitigation for recent removals (three trees were removed when the Airnasium was built) and whether payment to the city's tree fund would be appropriate if the YMCA reduced its on-site plantings. Bianco said the original quote for nine trees was about $8,900 and that the YMCA could consider contributing a cash balance to the tree fund if necessary.

After public comment and further discussion of locations, species and sight lines for security cameras and solar access, a member of the board moved to deny the YMCA's proposed amendment and to require the YMCA to meet the tree-count and screening intent of the original approval. The motion directed the YMCA to proceed with nine replacement trees, with at least three placed near the Airnasium/pavilion to provide screening; the specific species and exact placement were to be worked out with planning staff. The motion was seconded and carried with at least one abstention recorded.

What changed and why it matters: Neighbors sought preservation of the visual and noise screening that the original design promised; the YMCA cited camera sight lines, solar access and limited planting room as reasons for relocating or reducing trees. The board's direction preserves the approved tree-count and requires the applicant to coordinate species and placement with staff so the planting meets both neighborhood screening and the YMCA's operational concerns.

Next steps: The YMCA must revise planting plans to meet the board's directive and work with staff on species and placement; staff noted the city's option to accept payment into the municipal tree fund if on-site mitigation is infeasible.