Horsely Witten Prepared a report on impact of Waste Water Treatment Plant on sensitive receptors, the impact of the excavation on the AUL and area wells. Environmental consequences due to the loss of the forest and the loss of a million cubic yards of earth in the Zone II Aquifer will impact the water quality, "Of course the quality of water infiltrated through the ground in a healthy, vegetated forest will be better than that infiltrated under nearly any development scenario." Horsely Witten Report 2/13/18pg
MEPA Response to Environmental Concerns. The letter states that this project will require a mandatory Environmental Impact Report. (EIR). Here’s the determination and attached are all the public comments:
188.8.131.52/EEA/emepa/mepacerts/2018/sc/enf/15796%20ENF%20The%20Preserve%20at%20Abbyville%20and%20Abbycille%20Commons%20Norfolk%20commentsf.pdf Town of Plymouth Earth Removal Bylaws - Look at the requirements for vegetative buffers and property lines, among other common sense regulations for gravel pits. ABBYVILLE IS A GRAVEL OPERATION AND NEEDS STRICT GUIDELINES AND REASONABLE SAFEGUARDS FOR SURROUNDING AREAS Please see 205-18 Natural Features Conservation Requirements and EARTH REMOVAL REGUALTION(205:35) in particular section F, where laws state: "A minimum of six inches of topsoil shall be placed on areas designated to be restored to a natural state (side slopes, open space and areas that are not to be otherwise improved). This minimum depth of topsoil shall be increased to 12 inches in the Aquifer Protection District Zone II." (Abbyville is in a ZONE II) "Excavation or depositing of excavated material shall not be made within 50 feet of any lot line and no excavation depth of greater than 15 feet shall be made within 100 feet of any lot line." Abbyville proposes a 60' drop with a 2:1 slope within 4' of property line of private home on 51 Lawrence Street and adjacent homes. "... excavation shall not occur within 200 feet of the project’s property lines which shall include a 100 foot vegetated natural buffer." (Abbyville proposes excavation within 4' of property line with ZERO vegetated natural buffer. The dust and noise associated with this excavation poses a significant health and safety risk to the neighborhood. PLEASE READ THE PLYMOUTH BYLAWS WHICH SHOULD SERVE AS A COMMON SENSE GUIDE TO NORFOLK TO PROTECT RESIDENTS FROM THE ABBYVILLE GRAVEL MINING OPERATION WILL TAKE PLACE FOR OVER 7 YEARS: www.plymouth-ma.gov/sites/plymouthma/files/uploads/zoning_bylaw_complete_amended_10-21-17_0.pdf
ANRAD Filing for Lawrence Street with Conservation Commission to delineate Wetlands: anrad_lawrence_street_filing__2_.pdf Exhibit A SITE PLAN from Request for Quotations from ZBA For Licensed Site Professional (LSP) To Evaluate the status of the remediation and risk assessment activities at the AUL. Also to evaluate the risks presented by existing soil contamination and any other hazardous materials/waste on the Site to the natural environment and to public health. lsp_rfq_exhibit_a.pdf
Discussions with the Zoning Board have not yet touched upon the environmental impact of removing nearly 1 Million Cubic Yards of earth in a Zone II Water Supply Protection Area which encompasses most of the property. The above document is case law which has pertinent statements, some of which are quoted below:
"Massachusetts citizens have not only begun to question the environmental devastation wrought by traditional large scale sand and gravel mining, but they have also come to see noise, vibrations, dust and increased runoff as forms of "pollution" against which they have a legal right to protection." (pg167)
"The developer who first removes the deposit for sale as part of his site preparation (which as will be seen is permitted without regulation by some local laws) may in fact be damaging the septic carrying capacity of the site." (pg168)
"As more is learned of the part played by sand and gravel deposits in purifying water supply and aiding aquifer recharge, the regulatory power will support further protection of local water supplies. (177)
Requested Waivers: The 40b statute allows Zoning Boards to deny specific waivers where the proposed development presents unacceptable public safety, health or environmental risks. The Applicant has requested 21 pages of waivers, 67 WAIVERS, including waivers from following bylaws: 1. Earth Removal Bylaw 2. Wetlands Protection Bylaw 3. Aquifer, Water Supply and Wellhead Protection Districts All requested waivers can be found here:
Geology of the Site: public.dep.state.ma.us/fileviewer/Scanned.aspx?id=300240 "5.0 GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE SITE The Mill River and the parallel Tail Race (on the B&M property) drain the surface runoff from the surrounding low hills. The hills are rhyolite and shale bedrock overlain by glacial till and stratified drift. The unconsolidated overburden depth exceeds 70 feet on the surrounding hills. Bedrock was encountered at 10 feet below grade adjacent to the Tail Race in MW-3A, installed in May 1986. The bedrock was reported to be Rhyolite-Quartz Alkali Feldspar mineral, some plagioclase and mafic minerals, with tightly-closed, 1/8-inch, silt-filled fractures."
Dangers of Silica: osha.oregon.gov/OSHAPubs/3301.pdf Much has been written about the dangers of silica dust from earth removal operations. Silica, found in soil, rhyolite, granite and other earth minerals, is a carcinogen. Based on the fact that the Applicant will be making a constant plume of dust, what justifies putting the townspeople, it's drinking water supplies and the environment at risk?
Health Concerns for Outdoor Silica Recommendations: www.ewg.org/research/sandstorm/health-concerns-silica-outdoor-air#.WjNwrd-nHIU "EWG calculates that a truly health-based value for silica exposure in outdoor air should be no higher than 0.3 µg/m3, and it may need to be lower. To date only Vermont and New York have met this threshold. Both states have, in fact, set even more stringent silica exposure guidelines of 0.12 µg/m3 and 0.06 µg/m3, respectively. In setting those limits for silica in ambient air, New York and Vermont used a different method than California or Texas. Both started from occupational exposure limits and applied an adjustment factor of 100 (10 x 10). This combined factor of 100 takes into account the inherent toxicity of silica and the variable vulnerabilities of the population."