Conservation commission approves RDA for two Stoneridge Drive lots with conditions after tree removal and stop‑work concerns

The Northampton Conservation Commission on April 24 issued a determination of applicability for proposed driveway and house construction at 17 and 39 Stoneridge Drive, confirming the accuracy of wetland boundary delineation and approving work with conditions after commissioners raised concerns about at least one tree cut within the 100‑foot buffer and outstanding permitting.

The commission found the mapped resource area to be subject to Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act protections and checked Positive Determination Box 1 (resource area present). For work within or near buffer zones, the commission issued a Negative Determination (Box 2) indicating the proposed work would not impact the resource areas provided conditions are met. The conditions authorize staff to verify in‑field limits and negotiate restoration or mitigation for any confirmed unauthorized clearing.

Applicant Charles Perry of Sunwood Builders said the two lots were purchased with an existing wetland, that Ward Smith performed the wetland delineation, and that Harold Eaton surveyors located the flags and mapped a 100‑foot buffer. Perry said the silt fence was placed “a few feet beyond the 100‑foot buffer.”

Commission site-visit reports and comments from staff and commissioners indicated a discrepancy between the plan drawing and the field condition. Commissioner Mason said he observed a stump from a large pine tree within the buffer zone, and others noted the plan as drawn appeared to show some proposed limits of work within the 100‑foot buffer. Sarah (conservation staff) recommended verification — a revised plan and confirmation of where the silt fence and limit of work actually lie — and said some permitting for the common driveway and stormwater has not yet been applied for to the planning board and DPW.

Commissioners agreed to authorize staff to confirm field conditions, require a revised plan that accurately depicts the silt fence and limit of work, and, if appropriate, negotiate restoration or mitigation (for example, tree planting or compensation to the city’s tree mitigation fund) for damage within the buffer. The commission also noted the site is under a stop‑work order related to common‑driveway construction without planning-board approval; staff said no work should be occurring while that order is in effect.

The motion to issue the determination (Positive Box 1 and Negative Box 2 with conditions) carried by roll call; commissioners voting in favor included Downey, Melissa, David, Elizabeth, Mason, Paul and Kevin. The determination includes staff authority to confirm limits of work and to negotiate appropriate restoration before the commission considers any further related filings.