HomeMy WebLinkAboutEric Schwaab comment letter 20250828Tom Lee, Chair August 28, 2025
Conservation Commission
230 South Street
Hyannis, MA 02601
RE: 268 Stevens Street Pump Station – Town of Barnstable, Massachusetts
Wetlands Protection Act Notice of Intent
Dear Mr. Lee,
On behalf of the residents of the Town of Barnstable, Village of Hyannis, please accept the following
comments regarding the Notice of Intent (NOI) for the proposed sewer pump station at 268 Stevens
Street, submitted by the Department of Public Works (DPW) and Apex Companies, LLC (Apex),
under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (M.G.L. Chapter 131, Section 40), the
Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Regulations (310 CMR 10.00), and the Barnstable Code,
Chapter 237, Wetland Protection Regulations.
These comments specifically address documents submitted by Apex Companies, including:
• Appendix D: Wetlands Delineation Documentation
• Appendix F: Dewatering and Discharge Plan
• Appendix G: Monitoring Plan
• Appendix H: SWPPP
Project Location
The project proposes construction of a new submersible sewer pump station partially within a
Town -owned easement at 268 Stevens Street and partially within the Mitchells Way right-of-way.
While the site is currently a disturbed upland, it is situated in an area with a notoriously high water
table, and prior unpermitted dewatering has already caused measurable impacts to surrounding
upgradient wetlands.
Despite this known sensitivity, the application fails to demonstrate that no practicable and less
environmentally damaging alternative exists. This is a core requirement under the Wetlands
Protection Act, particularly for “limited projects” or projects proposing alterations to resource areas
presumed significant. The lack of an adequate alternatives analysis is a fundamental flaw in this
NOI.
Dewatering Radius, Volumes and Impacts
Although the permanent pump station infrastructure is outside resource areas, construction will
require extensive dewatering.
• The previous unpermitted dewatering operation at this site demonstrated a zone of
influence extending 1,220 feet, with impacts still visible today.
• The current plan acknowledges a radius of influence of 850 feet but offers no evidence that
such drawdowns will not affect wetlands.
• The report dismisses these impacts as “temporary,” yet provides no data, no recovery
timeline, and no mitigation plan should groundwater or vegetation fail to rebound.
Recommendation: Dewatering should be restricted to the immediate project area (no more than
50 feet from excavation) and discharge volumes must be capped to avoid repeating prior impacts at
45 Mitchells Way, which lies within the buffer zone of Aunt Betty’s Pond.
Discharge Water Quality Testing
As stated, the NOI does not quantify the volume of water expected to be discharged. By
comparison, the previous unpermitted dewatering displaced an estimated 10 million gallons of
groundwater, with observable ecological damage persisting.
The application also omits any discussion of water quality parameters. Discharge to Aunt Betty’s
Pond raises significant concerns regarding:
• Nutrient loading (nitrogen, phosphorus)
• Emerging contaminants such as PFAS
• Turbidity and sedimentation
Recommendation: The Commission should require Apex to provide clear discharge volume
estimates, water quality sampling protocols (before, during, and after discharge), and enforceable
limits for nutrients and PFAS prior to approval.
Resource Area Impacts
The wetlands delineation submitted (Appendix D) is based on a hand-drawn sketch, with no
detailed topography or recognition of upland wetlands. This is inadequate for regulatory review.
Bordering Vegetated Wetlands (BVW): 310 CMR 10.55 requires preservation of hydrologic regime
and vegetation. Drawdown of four inches from an unspecified location, as proposed, could
devastate sensitive wetlands such as those at 32 Pleasant Hill Lane, already impaired by earlier
unpermitted dewatering. The NOI fails to identify where monitoring points will be located which is a
critical omission.
Land Under Water (LUW): 310 CMR 10.56 states that any discharge into Aunt Betty’s Pond
constitutes alteration of LUW. Apex proposes treatment through an 8,000-gallon sedimentation
tank, but this system does not address nutrients or PFAS.
Furthermore, while the applicant asserts that no permanent impacts will occur, this is
unsupported by evidence. The permanent alteration of groundwater hydrology through repeated
drawdowns cannot be dismissed as temporary. In addition, the cumulative impact of prior and
proposed projects in this location has not been addressed.
Environmental Protection Measures
The NOI lists standard erosion controls, stockpile management, and staff gauges, but several
deficiencies remain:
• Monitoring Locations: Not identified. Placement is critical to detecting early impacts,
especially at Crooked Pond, Aunt Betty’s Pond, and the impaired wetlands at 32 Pleasant
Hill Lane.
• Recovery Criteria: “Temporary” impacts are not defined. A fluctuation of four inches may
be tolerable in one system but catastrophic in another.
• Contingency Plans: While shutdown procedures are mentioned, the plan lacks
enforceable triggers tied to specific wetland conditions or water quality results.
Stormwater Management
The applicant seeks a waiver from the Stormwater Report requirement, claiming no new impervious
area will be created. However, the dewatering system itself constitutes a stormwater discharge
into resource areas and should be evaluated under the Massachusetts Stormwater Management
Standards. A waiver is not appropriate given the sensitivity of Aunt Betty’s Pond and Stewarts Creek
watershed.
Summary and Recommendations
The Stevens Street Pump Station NOI contains serious deficiencies that must be addressed before
approval:
1. Failure to evaluate practicable alternatives, as required by law.
2. Lack of quantified discharge volumes and water quality standards for nutrient and PFAS
contamination.
3. Inadequate wetlands delineation and omission of critical monitoring locations.
4. Unsupported claims of “temporary” impacts, despite past evidence of long-term
damage.
5. Improper request for stormwater waiver, given the scale of discharge into sensitive water
bodies.
We respectfully urge the Conservation Commission to deny this NOI unless and until the
applicant provides a full alternatives analysis, quantified discharge volumes, water quality
standards, and enforceable monitoring protocols that protect the wetlands, ponds, and
hydrology of this vulnerable area.
Respectfully submitted,
Eric Schwaab
157 Melbourne Road
Hyannis, MA 02601
On behalf of concerned residents of the Town of Barnstable
Delivered 8/28/2025 to the Conservation Commission and the following:
Kimberly.Cavanaugh@town.barnstable.ma.us
cynthia.lovell@town.barnstable.ma.us
mark.ells@town.barnstable.ma.us
Daniel.Santos@town.barnstable.ma.us
edwin.hoopes@town.barnstable.ma.us
Philip.Beaudoin@town.barnstable.ma.us