Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater And Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Arlington conservation panel continues 26 Dudley hearing after technical questions on stormwater and mitigation
Summary
The Arlington Conservation Commission continued a June 25 hearing on a redevelopment at 26 Dudley Street after detailed discussion of stormwater design, TSS treatment, and a proposed 3,200 ft² off‑site mitigation corridor; the commission asked for town‑engineer review and will revisit the project on July 9.
The Arlington Conservation Commission on June 25 continued a public hearing for a Notice of Intent for 26 Dudley Street after commissioners sought additional peer review of stormwater calculations and clarification of mitigation and maintenance conditions.
Consultants from LEC and the project team described revisions to the site plan: a 400 square‑foot net decrease in impervious cover, designated snow‑storage areas (designed to hold about 3 inches of snow before off‑site removal), and an enlarged infiltration system intended to collect roughly two‑thirds of the parking‑lot runoff (about 3,000 square feet). Rich Kirby of LEC outlined a proposed off‑site mitigation corridor of roughly 3,200 square feet adjacent to Milbrook, with removal of invasive shrubs and replacement plantings at a 2:1 ratio.
The most technical exchanges focused on stormwater treatment. Project engineer Fred Russell said the planned chain of best‑management practices — street sweeping, hooded catch basins and an infiltration basin — produces an estimated 87% total suspended solids (TSS) removal. "It's basically totaling a TSS removal of 87%," Russell said. Commissioners pressed on the assumptions for parking‑lot sweeping (vacuum versus mechanical), enforcement of sweeping frequency, and whether the town engineer had completed a peer review.
Applicants said they have contracted sweeper services in the past and currently sweep quarterly, but do not retain sweeping receipts; commissioners suggested making sweeping frequency and proof of service a special condition in the operations and maintenance plan. Engineers also reviewed test‑pit logs: the test pit bottom was recorded at elevation 63.4 and the bottom of the proposed infiltration chamber at elevation 65.4 — roughly two feet of separation to avoid estimated seasonal high groundwater.
Commissioners asked the project team to confirm that the revised stormwater submittal was delivered to and reviewed by the town engineer before the commission takes final action. The applicant agreed to provide an updated planting list (seedlings vs. saplings), monitoring and protection measures for plantings, and any documentation of maintenance contracts the commission requires.
The commission voted unanimously to continue the hearing to July 9 to allow time for the town‑engineer peer review and to receive the clarified O&M/planting details. The hearing will resume on July 9.
