Conservation commission clears most repaving at 568–580 Pleasant St., flags small riverfront corner

The Howard Conservation Commission on Dec. 18 voted unanimously to issue a negative determination of applicability for a Request for Determination (RDA) from the applicant for 568–580 Pleasant Street (Norwood 2024‑23), allowing most of an existing parking lot to be repaved.

Dan Campbell, representing Level Design Group on behalf of the applicant, told the commission the site was approved under site‑plan review in 2015 and that the current work would pave a former gravel area and repave the rear portion of the lot. Campbell said a small portion of the repaving would fall within the 200‑foot riverfront zone but asked the commission for a negative determination to proceed with the planned work.

Tom Schultz, a wetland scientist with Goddard Consulting, presented field data from three on‑site points (about 38 feet, 70 feet and 120 feet from the parking area) and said the sampled locations did not meet two of the three Massachusetts wetland delineation criteria (dominance of wetland vegetation and wetland hydrology). “It was my opinion and still is my opinion that there's not any wetland resource areas there,” Schultz said, summarizing his findings and the supporting soil and vegetation data sheets.

Carly, the conservation agent, reported she and the consultant visited the site and took auger samples; she noted dark, organic soils and some sedges and sensitive fern, and flagged that winter conditions can make herbaceous indicators harder to observe. She also pointed to the DEP wetlands GIS layer, which mapped a wetland off‑site, and asked for the commission to review stormwater calculations and an alternatives analysis required by the commission’s bylaws before final sign‑off.

Applicants said they had submitted a stormwater analysis to the planning board and that the change in impervious surface was small: the plan increases impervious area by 803 square feet overall but reduces pavement in the lot’s center and adds landscaping, including three large deciduous trees, 10 smaller evergreens and required shrubs. Campbell said the applicant would not place fill in resource areas, would not alter the existing subsurface drainage system, and planned erosion controls such as sediment sacks in three catch basins (and the option of a sediment waddle behind the site wall).

After questions from commissioners about the timing and sufficiency of the delineation, the commission considered three options: a negative determination allowing the applicant to proceed as proposed; a positive determination that would require the applicant to exclude the small riverfront triangle from paving; or a continuance to allow commission review of the stormwater calculations and any alternatives analysis. The applicant said the mapped triangle in the riverfront area is about 300 square feet and that, if required by a positive determination, they would exclude that portion from paving.

Commissioner Catherine Walsh moved to close the public hearing and issue a negative determination of applicability; Kelsey Quinlan seconded. Conservation Commission members Steven Washburn, Catherine Walsh, Anil Persaud and Kelsey Quinlan each voted in favor. The motion passed 4–0.

Next steps: with the negative determination in hand, the applicant may proceed with permitting and the planned repaving work except for any areas the commission later determines to require additional review. The planning board previously approved the project’s site plan and reviewed the stormwater documentation; the conservation agent requested the commission be provided the stormwater calculations for its records and oversight.