By BOB MARTIN
Eagle Times Staff
CLAREMONT, N.H. — The Claremont Planning Board discussed a DOT letter regarding the Ascutney Bridge project, and after hearing from City Planner deForest Bearse, the consensus was to support the views of the Conservation Commission views with ecological concerns in mind.
“DOT is looking for the city’s preferred method of mitigation in the event of adverse impacts to stream resources as a result of this project,” City Planner deForest Bearse said during an Aug. 12 meeting. “We had talked about what would be an appropriate response by the planning board, and in my opinion it is to support the Conservation Commission’s letter.”
Bearse drafted the Conservation Commission letter herself. She explained that a natural resources inventory was completed in 2013, and the summary of that was the identification of 10 ecologically significant areas within the city. She said there are three ecologically significant areas in the immediate area of the Ascutney Bridge. These include Connecticut River North, Sugar River West and the Connecticut River South.
“I have identified those areas and why they are significant,” she said. “So that the state knows what resources are critical in those areas and what to watch out for. That’s more of an FYI to the state.”
Another area of priority is the preservation and protection of the sycamore and flood plain forest. This is because it is a very rare habitat that functions beautifully every spring runoff. Whenever there are torrential rains it does its job, and she said they are lucky to have this in the city.
“It is paramount that that be protected,” she said.
The commission is concerned about access to natural resources, noting that people who fish at the confluence of Sugar and Connecticut Rivers, park on Old Bridge Road and go under the bridge to get to the site. The state is asking to consider better access, and the preferred action is to have funds for a conservation plan.
“That’s what they’re asking,” she said. “It’s way too early at this stage in the game to know what is going to transpire with this project. If we have to make a request now, this is what the Conservation Commission is most concerned about.”
The commission expressed their concern in those areas being protected, and the preferred mitigation method at this time is to put money in a fund for the completion of a conservation plan that is scheduled to follow the completion of the update of the natural resources inventory.
“My recommendation is that the planning board simply support what the Conservation Commission is asking for,” she said.
Bearse said this is so early in the stages of the project that they may change their mind, and there could be more specific requests as the project develops. She doesn’t know the details of the project or how big it would be, but the hope is it would be simply for paving since closing the bridge is a major task. This leaves the door open and gives them a seat at the table, she said.
The planning board voted unanimously to approve the signature and supporting of the letter.
