Board Hears Environmental Details Of Pine Oaks Village Project

by William F. Galvin
Conservation Administrator Amy Usowski Speaks to conservation issues related to Pine Oaks Village IV project. WILLIAM F. GALVIN PHOTO Conservation Administrator Amy Usowski Speaks to conservation issues related to Pine Oaks Village IV project. WILLIAM F. GALVIN PHOTO

 HARWICH – Steps must be taken to assure groundwater and the Herring River watershed do not suffer degradation from the proposed 242-unit Pine Oaks Village VI housing development proposed in North Harwich.
 That was the message from residents and town officials at the most recent board of appeals session on the controversial project Sept. 17.
 The Herring River watershed is considered an impaired water body, and the town is responsible for reducing overall nitrogen contributed to it, including from the proposed project’s wastewater system. Groundwater flow from the project area is forecast to move south and southwest toward the watershed and Sand Pond. Sand Pond has already been classified as containing a medium level of organic matter with lower levels of oxygen, according to Jeffrey Hirshberger, a senior hydrologist with TRC, the engineering company conducting a peer review on health related issues associated with the proposal.
TRC has recommended a hydrogeologic study be conducted  to determine whether treatment of wastewater effluent discharge will have an adverse impact downgradient on drinking water sources as well as nitrogen- and phosphorus-sensitive water resources. 
The Pine Oaks Village, Mid-Cape Church Homes, Inc. project would be constructed in five phases over an estimated 10-year period. A wastewater treatment plant would be constructed in two phases with the initial phase generating just under 10,000 gallons of effluent per day so as not to trigger a groundwater discharge permit, and will instead operate as a Title 5 innovative alternative septic system. In phase two the project’s wastewater treatment plant would be constructed under a state groundwater discharge permit.
As part of a groundwater discharge permit, the project applicant will be required by the state Department of Environmental Protection to assess the potential for adverse impacts to downgradient water supplies, according to Jeffrey Hershberger, a senior hydrologist with TRC.
The completed development is projected to generate 47,000 gallons of effluent per day. Hershberger said the plant will be to the south of the town’s zone of contribution to drinking water wells, and there should be no impacts to town water. 
Joseph Henderson, a senior engineer with Horsley Witten Group, said that the applicant plans to use advanced treatment of waterwater, including innovative alternative treatment that could increase nutrient reduction by 80 percent. Hershberger said the DEP would push for the IA treatment. 
 The initial stormwater plans called for a design that would address a 25-year storm. Conservation Administrator Amy Usowski said storms have been bringing more and more rain, and she encouraged the design to be changed to address 50 year storms. Henderson said the applicant has agreed to a 50-year stormwater design.
 There are four wetland resources in and around the 31.24-acre parcel where Pine Oaks Village is proposed adjacent to Queen Anne Road and Main Street in North Harwich. There are isolated vegetated wetlands, a vernal pool and a riverfront area. Usowski said the applicant should file a notice of intent with DEP and the conservation commission for work in the buffer zone. 
Waivers are being sought from the 100-foot buffer to a bordering vegetated wetland for work proposed 72 and 80 feet from the resource. Two of the wetlands are considered “isolated” because of their size and would not be subject to review under the Wetlands Protection Act. Isolated wetlands would be reviewable under the town’s wetlands protection bylaw, but town wetlands bylaw review is not allowed for comprehensive permit requests, according to Usowski.
 The project is not located within a mapped priority or estimated habitat by the state Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, but Usowski said it could be a habitat for endangered, threatened, or rare species and the applicant is required to determine if the project may have an impact on those species.  
 The town’s affordable and attainable housing needs are well documented, and the proposed project is consistent with the town’s 2025 Housing Production Plan, 2025 final draft local comprehensive plan, and the Cape Cod Commission’s regional policy plan housing goals and objectives, said Town Planner and Community Development Director Christine Flynn.
North Harwich resident Sherri Stockdale took issue with that position, saying that the Pine Oaks Village IV plan does not meet the criteria in the housing production plan, which states housing should be spread throughout the town. She also took issue with the first phase of the wastewater treatment plan, which she said is only 100 gallons from requiring a groundwater recharge permit.
“There’s not a wastewater system that can protect the Herring River,” Stockdale said. 
Teresa Johnsom cited the town’s mandatory water ban under the current drought conditions, saying the project will consume 10,936,787 gallons a year from the Monomoy Lens. She asked if the aquifer can handle that on top of the current demand. she inquired.
Paula Miles related how rainwater from an altered landscape can become a destructive force. Water coming off the roof-tops of five townhouses and five lodging houses, construction and parking lots could create a sluice of “disruptive water.”  
“Water should be best left where it lands,” said Miles. “It should not be a nuisance to be drained away. It will reduce water being charged to the Herring River.”
“We continue to tax our limited resources,” said Susan Shaw. “Ecosystems need to be cared for and protected. This proposed project is an excess.”
  The appeals board continued the hearing to Wednesday, Sept. 24 at  8 p.m. in the town hall hearing room. Appeals Board Chair Brian Sullivan said there will be no public testimony or presentations from the proponents; it will be an opportunity for the board members to discuss the case among themselves. The hearing, after six sessions, will have to be closed by Oct. 15, under the comprehensive permit provisions. The board will then have 40 days to make a decision.





%> "