Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utility Petitions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Northampton council denies National Grid pole petition after neighbors and DPW cite loss of last street tree
Summary
Councilors denied petition 25.302 to install a pole at Glenwood/39 Day Ave after DPW said the proposed pole would require removing the only public shade oak on Glenwood and residents urged alternatives; developer offered $10,000 escrow for street trees but council preferred alternative designs.
Northampton’s City Council on Sept. 4 voted to deny petition 25.302, a request by National Grid and Verizon to install a joint utility pole at the corner of Glenwood Avenue and 39 Day Avenue, citing concerns that the proposed location would require removal of the neighborhood’s last public shade oak.
Donald Escalha, director of public works, told the council the pole as submitted “will require the removal of the tree” and that the tree warden had found the oak to be in good condition. Escalha said National Grid had identified alternatives that could deliver service to the new seven-unit development without removing the tree and recommended that the council vote no so National Grid could resubmit a plan that preserves the tree.
Neighbors urged the council to block the petition. Nancy Mihavic, who lives on Day Avenue and described herself as an abutter, asked that the item be removed from the consent agenda and said the development had already required the utility to look for “another way of getting electricity to the site.” Sydney Greenlee said the street was “very bare of any shade trees” and that removing the last tree would harm the neighborhood’s environment and character.
Danny, the project manager for the development at 39 Day Ave, described engineering constraints and said alternatives such as undergrounding or placing a pole across the street were possible but would take longer and additional petitions. He offered a municipal-side remediation proposal, saying he “could put $10,000 in an escrow account” for planting up to 10 replacement trees on private properties if the council were willing to move the petition forward contingent on that work.
Multiple councilors said they preferred the DPW recommendation. Councilor Moulton said the vote was not a rejection of the development, but a vote to support DPW’s analysis and to avoid taking down the oak when reasonable options exist. Councilor Elkins and Councilor Rothenberg also said they would vote no because the mitigation proposals presented were not guaranteed and would rely on private easements rather than an assured public-park replacement.
After discussion the council took a roll-call vote and denied the petition; the chair announced the petition was denied. The denial returns the matter to National Grid for redesign and possible resubmission that avoids the tree removal the DPW identified as avoidable.
