Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ipswich conservation commission questions stormwater plan for 68 Essex Road over tree loss and long-term maintenance
Summary
The commission continued review of a stormwater management permit for 68 Essex Road after hearing that the project would disturb about 35,000 sq ft and remove up to 14 mature trees; commissioners pressed the applicant on homeowner maintenance of catch basins and infiltration systems and the availability of additional low-impact measures.
The Ipswich Conservation Commission on May 6 reviewed a stormwater management permit application for 68 Essex Road and continued the matter to its May 20 meeting after raising questions about tree removal and long-term upkeep.
H.L. Graham & Associates’ Larry Graham described a plan for a new single-family dwelling, driveway and a mix of surface and subsurface drainage measures, including rain gardens at the rear of the lot, infiltration chambers and catch basins. He said the submitted Stormwater Management Report (April 22, 2026) documents pre- and post-development peak flows and volumes and that site disturbance would total approximately 35,000 square feet.
“Stormwater management features include proposed rain gardens to take roof water run-off in the back of the house,” Graham said. He also noted the plan would remove up to 14 large mature trees ranging from about 20 to 34 inches DBH.
Chair Jennifer Hughes questioned whether the proposed catch basins and subsurface infiltration systems would be too burdensome for a homeowner to maintain and whether additional low-impact development options had been considered. “Catch basins and infiltration systems are a lot for a homeowner to maintain,” Hughes said, and asked whether more LID measures could be used.
Graham responded that the rain gardens are LID measures and that the location of the septic leach field limited some options for placement of additional features.
Agent Mary Lester told the commission she would expect a revised operations and maintenance (O&M) plan; Graham agreed to revise the O&M plan as requested. The application also notes the applicant will file with the Historical Commission to remove the existing house prior to new construction and that a planting plan has not yet been prepared.
Because the commission requested additional detail about low-impact alternatives, long-term maintenance responsibilities and a revised O&M plan, Commissioner James (Jim) Stone moved to continue the matter to the May 20, 2026 meeting; Commissioner Karin Hawkinson seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
What happens next: The applicant will submit a revised O&M plan and a planting plan for the commission’s review at the May 20 meeting. No public comment was recorded on May 6.
