Flooding on Mainline Drive in 2013. (THE WESTFIELD NEWS)
WESTFIELD – Abutters of the proposed ALDI Market are concerned about its impact on flooding.
During the first Conservation Commission public hearing Oct. 27 for the planned ALDI Market at 231 East Main St. in Westgate Plaza, concerns were raised about the impact the new building would have on the area, which is in the 100-year flood zone between the Westfield River and Little River.
Rob Levesque of R. Levesque Assoc. presented the plan for flood storage to compensate for the added impervious surface from the building project, which will go to an existing field on the other side of the Little River. He said there would be a net surplus of flood storage volume in the field, which is also owned by Brixmore, SPE, owner of Westgate Plaza.
Commissioner Thomas Sharp asked Levesque about comments received in the Department of Environmental Protection’s (DEP) review of the plan. “It seemed to me that he challenged us locally as to whether this compensatory storage is in the right area. Will flooding be worse at Job Lot even though you’ve met the requirement. Are you satisfied in a flood event that neighboring properties will not be adversely affected by this project,” Sharp asked.
“I’m satisfied that we’ve met the requirement. Based on what I’ve seen, we’re providing storage for a theoretical 100-year flood event,” Levesque said.
Levesque said the DEP wants planners to compensate in the same reach of the river, and at the same elevation, but not necessarily in specific proximity. He said he has had 10 storage areas off site in his projects. “Essentially, the East Main Street corridor is compensatory storage,” he said.
Commissioner Carl Grobe said he imagined both the Westfield and the Little River flooding in a flood event, with a massive inflow from both rivers, while the compensatory storage is upriver on the Little River. “I’m picturing floodwaters pooling where both rivers join rather than up river where the compensatory storage is,” he said.
Levesque said that is accurate, that as the flood waters are rising one way, they’re also rising the other way. He said the key point is that they have the same elevation and a hydraulic connection to the field to compensate for the loss of flood storage.
During public participation, neighboring businesses raised similar concerns, based on recent history with flooding in the area.
Eric Forish of Forish Construction, at 21 Mainline Drive, talked about the last flood event in the area in 2011. He said he had to evacuate his employees at 10 a.m., and then evacuate his equipment. The riverbank crested at the northwest end of the property at seven feet, then across Mainline Drive towards the proposed site of Aldi’s. “It was the scariest thing I ever experienced,” he said, adding that it was not a 100 year flood event.
Forish said he did not recommend the project because the building will be an impediment to the floodplain.
David Small, owner of Architects of Packaging, Inc. on 11 Mainline Drive, directly in front of the river, also expressed concerns.
“My main concern is there will be a wall in front of my building. Eric like myself has experienced these floods first hand,” he said, adding that he’s gone through two floods on the property, in 2007 and 2012.
“They’re a major deal. It would be great to have an ALDI here, but it affects us greatly at this end of Mainline,” Small said, showing photos of six inches of water in his building from the 2007 flooding, which he said rose to 12 inches in 2012.
“Our concern is that by ALDI going across the street, that will in fact impede the flow and keep the water back towards our buildings here. It is a horrendous thing to deal with, to keep things going for our customers, and to keep products. None of us up here are taking this lightly. It can really screw us up,” Small said.
Ruth Aborjaily, who owns three abutting properties at 227 East Main St., 6 Mainline Dr., and 10 Mainline Dr. said she was also concerned about the water crossing Mainline Drive and hitting the ALDI building.
“I’m now very afraid that the water is going to come back from ALDI and try to find the Westfield River,” Aborjaily said, adding that what is now a grassy area is going to be a building at a lower elevation than the one at 10 Mainline Drive.
“Where is this water going to go if it’s overflowing from the Little River. This is what happened without ALDI’s being there. It’s not about compensatory storage, it’s about what happens when you put in blocks acting like a dam. Where is the water from the Little River going to go,” she added.
Aborjaily said she believes the proposal needs to have a hydrological analysis, to prove that the ALDI’s building will not cause further flooding.
Levesque said the project met the requirements from a compensatory storage standpoint, and he had never before been required to analyze the floodplain. “We’re not disputing that it floods. We’re providing the comp storage required, comparable to other buildings that we’ve built,” he said.
Commissioner James Murphy, chairman pro temp for the discussion, said he believed the review of the project by an engineer that understands hydrology was an idea that had merit.
Levesque said he would do a little bit of research about what type of modeling can realistically be done to understand exactly what the introduction of the building would do.
The Commission continued the hearing until the next meeting on Nov. 10, and asked Levesque and the owner to address DEP comments in writing, and the Conservation Commission bylaw which speaks to flow patterns and flood retention characteristics, and to prepare a flood evacuation plan. A site visit will also be scheduled.
“We need some time to digest all of this,” said Conservation Coordinator Meredith Borenstein.
