##VIDEO ID:UoToaDMX45w## hello and welcome to the amaris Conservation Commission meeting the date is August 28 2024 the time is 7:04 we have all members present tonight except Rachel and staff are David suck and Aaron jock um let's see we have a packed agenda tonight so um I have nothing to report for my report and I'll hand it over to Dave go ahead Dave sure can everybody hear me okay y yes um yeah I'll be very brief because I know it is a packed agenda um a couple of quick updates for the commission um one is that I was out of the office today but I know uh the work to um address the flooding issues down at the Fort River Farm um Conservation Area slash um uh Community Gardens has been ongoing early uh late last week and early this week and I think drainage has been put in there I I I was down there Monday I think of this week um but uh it looks really great I think it will it will address the issues of flooding in the parking lot the parking lot is regraded so water will will uh sheet flow off the parking lot and uh uh the the uh the work also dealt with a u drainage pipe coming from an adjacent property so I think that'll look really good when it's done and I didn't get down there today because I was out of town but uh I think it's nearing completion and it should really show some great results for both the parking lot and also the gardeners there um trails at Hickory Ridge are coming along really nicely uh we are not ready for ribbon cutting or anything like that but um we are I would say for the loop trail and the north south Trail I would say we're probably you know 85% done on both of those um we still have uh things to order and and install like benches and kiosks and new signage and also to address the uh parking um uh parking plan as per um uh the site plan review with the planning board so that's coming along nicely Ain and I will be working with a with a consultant we have on U on on staff if you will to um uh finish the the connect between the loop trail to the west and the north south Trail uh likely in September early October that's the U Mass Trails grant that we got and that includes rehabbing one of the main bridges over the Fort River so that's coming along nicely um let's see other quick updates we are still waiting for word on the puffer spawn grants that we put in uh you may recall some months ago eron and I worked to put in a grant two one grant for Dam and Dyke uh improvements up at buffer spond so we're keeping our fingers crossed on that we we feel like they're really they were really good applications so I think eron and I are going to be semi crushed if we don't get it it's such a great project and uh you know it's it's very much in need up there at puffers and then lastly this is the last week of um usting at puffers Pond as you know it's been a challenging year yet again with high E coli levels um where I think it's been reported in the paper um I'm kind of putting together kind of a a think tank group uh just looking at uh how can we address the uh the high eoli levels in puffers Pond uh we reached out uh in the past and and recently to some folks at UMass to help us and we're going to do some uh Upstream testing of of the kushman brook to see if we can identify any Upstream uh sources of that contamination and uh as I've said before and in the paper and and in various um media reports I think it's a combination of a lot of factors up at buffers Bond it's it's 25 years of accumulated sediments it's Ducks it's geese there may be some under underperforming uh bailing septic systems Upstream U there maybe some dog waste there there's a lot of uh Street runoff there's a lot of ways that eoli can get into buffer spond and it's not going to be an easy fix but um we're going to we're going to really kind of double our efforts redouble our efforts to try to address that because we just can't go through another summer of of this many advisories on high ecoli levels so so I think I'll stop there um happy to take any quick questions um before I know you launch into your very uh full agenda thanks save I actually have a question so your stop date for testing is that I I don't know how do you determine that I'm just noting that today was movein day for UMass and there might be some interest in swimming at Puffer and just um if you know considering that maybe the swimming season is more prolonged than it used to be if there's um any interest in continue testing for the I don't know through September or something like that yeah I will look at the longterm or maybe the 10-day forecast Michelle it's a good point I'll look at the 10day forecast um typically we kind of go by the state guidelines which are kind of Memorial Day to Labor Day um but you know it's it's not a huge expense to to go for a little bit longer but I'll I'll take a look at um I'll take a look at um the the 10day forecast I will say frankly I was quite surprised that um we did not pass this this week but but that was based really on the um not on the test itself but uh or or this week but it was based on the the five day average or excuse me the five week average um so so the pond is actually much better than it was two weeks ago or four weeks ago or six weeks ago it's just if the the I think it's the five-week average uh is above the state limit then we have to issue the advisories and and essentially close it to swimming um but with colder temperatures at night um you know the pond is cooling that's always good um because bacteria uh like warmer temperatures to uh uh do their thing so I I think the levels will continue to go down in puffers in September but we can take a look at the 10-day forecast go ahead Jason yeah I was Dave I was just gonna ask about that you know you mentioned trying to work with UMass and that this really isn't uh acceptable to have this many closures and warnings over the summer so are you if you're going to stop testing then I'm just curious if you would be into continuing testing throughout um if you're going to be working to try to figure out where this ecoi is coming from I would assume you would want to continue testing are you looking to UMass to pick up that testing is that one of the ways in which you'll be working with UMass um I say UMass often with some optimism and and again it it's we've we've had some good conversations with some of the faculty at UMass to be perfectly honest it's just it's hard to get traction with UMass faculty on something like this it's just um it's just a very small issue if you will um from the big picture of what UMass is focused on so it's it's I've not gotten a lot of traction I think um I I've already kind of assumed that we will pick up the tab I I doubt very very frankly that they will pick up the cost because there is a cost to testing every week or doing extensive testing so um it's anywhere you know it can range from $50 and up per sample so you know the doing extensive sampling can really run into the hundreds if not thousands of dollars um I would not we are not going to test you know October November December We're Not Gonna you know we're not going to do anything like that um so um we'll I think I think most of this is going to fall to amers to be perfectly honest I I have had some good conversations with you Mass faculty but it's just I think they would what I've heard is if they if this were part of a larger study of say climate change and how that's affecting swimming areas in Western Massachusetts or in Massachusetts that would be of interest but looking at one six and a half seven acre pond in am is just it doesn't have the the gravitas that a larger study I will say that you know last week I think there were were approaching a hundred lakes and ponds in Massachusetts that failed the state the um you know failed to meet the state standard so we're not alone like wyola has failed much of the summer um it's it's it's a Statewide issue so we feel it in we feel it in ammer but it is across the state yeah just out of curiosity then is this something that is going to be rolled into the ms4 program and as a potential for I mean UMass has a rather robust civil engineering department don't they I would think that somebody would potentially be interested not necessarily the six or seven acres of puffer's pond but the entire Watershed and how um green infrastructure implementation can help to reduce bacteria and swing ponds in Western Massachusetts sounds like an awfully nice siiz project for somebody to dig their teeth into if we can get some traction and if anyone knows anyone who who may want to do that that you know we're we're all the years we're open to that I will say you know the Fort River also has extremely high um bacteria levels so we're also looking at the Fort River and we're working with the Fort River Watershed Association on on that effort as well so it's the kushman brook it's the Fort River you know we haven't even tested below puffer pond because there's not really that much swimming that goes on below puffer spond in the mill there's some waiting and I imagine a little bit of swimming but between puffer spond and Lake Warner I'm sure the levels of eoli are likely very high as well but the Fort River is is uh under under some stress so uh I think we got to roll up our sleeves and do more testing and see if we can come up with a comprehensive solution uh to but but we do you know U we do need to also at the bigger picture of puffer bond is filling in it needs to be dredged it's it's a it's a shallow water body for much of those seven seven seven plus acres um it is not no longer 10 feet deep 12 feet deep 14 feet deep many parts of the pond are now 3 feet deep and 3 to four feet of sediment and uh it's very you know in the summer months it it heats up very quickly so yeah so we're we're rolling up our sleeves I want to try not to have repeat of 23 24 Summers and see if we can begin to address some things before the 25 season thanks Dave um I'd love to revisit this in the quote quieter months of winter so maybe we can come back to the to the issue and the planning and I have ideas but um onward with the agenda for now um okay Landy subcommittee Alex I don't see your face um but if you're there and you want to yep there you are do you w to take a couple minutes to us update yes I want to start uh with the agricultural policy that we sent out earlier and thank Rachel for her comments we have looked them over we've integrated them and I know she's not here but uh she may look at the recording and that we thanked her for this meeting this conservation committee meeting we have available in the folder our dog policy and we also have going with it a memo and draft um with some ideas on administrative ideas on how to tackle the dog issue and the committee worked on those ideas with Dave and Aaron present went through a ranking process and what you see is the result of several meetings work so if you care to comment on both uh Aaron I think has a date to suggest when we would like to have comments back and again those two things are in the folder on the subcommittee for this meeting thanks Alex I think Erin on their original agenda you had 94 but uh that's fast approaching so I would suggest at least um two to three weeks on this one similar to the previous point and just for Commissioners this is kind of a big one so it it's a big issue with a fairly short policy that we um spend a lot of time to make succinct and clear um so we would definitely appreciate any sort of input and thoughts Commissioners have on this one um yeah do we want to decide on a date right here let's see by I prefer to have it a little shorter than than for the a policy just because um as time goes on people will get forgetful okay when's our next is the is the fourth our next meeting I wanted I would prefer to have the comments come in before the next subcommittee meeting before the next subcommittee which is the second yeah no uh it wouldn't be that meeting that's pretty close it would be the meeting after that excuse me I think we went through this at our meeting okay well the next subcommittee meeting might be the 16th after the second so maybe we could just decide on the 11th which is two weeks from now and that's the date of our next uh concom meeting which is also before our next subcommittee meeting so seems to fit the bill any comments on that September 11th okay let's set that one all right so any inputs much appreciated um fairly uh relevant to the work on the subcommittee um so any comments appreciated okay anything else Alex or no that's it we will we will be presenting you with a policy issue ready for your review with each commission meeting trying to get it all done by the end of this calendar year thanks to the extension that was granted so it'll roll right along great thanks Alex okay uh we have 10 minutes um shall we do some other business emergency certification yeah um so the emergency certification um was issued basically the the um Plum Springs is a conservation area that's owned by the town of ammer there are several ponds Beaver Pond impoundments that are located Upstream of Middle Street on the property um we've gotten um some grants over the years from MSPCA for the pond levelers to try to control the water level because the water levels in those ponds can get really really high and threaten um Middle Street if they were to um breach one of the pond levelers was not functioning properly and water was um getting really really impounded up there so we needed to repair the the pond leveler so um basically bring the water level down about I think it was just about six inches so um that emergency CT was issued since the last meeting just to repair that thanks sarin yeah um any questions from Commissioners on this one okay seeing none um we're looking for a motion to ratify the emergency certification for repair of the pond level Plum Springs construction area so I have motion and Jason on the second um Jason hi Bruce hi Andre hi Alex hi Laura hi and okay okay um let's do request for minor administrative change to order of conditions starting with ammer college okay um so in your packets I put some information from Bucky Sparkle um there was a very minor change to the amoris college order of conditions this was for the Recently approved um uh energy upgrade area they had a change to the proprietary BMP that was proposed it was the um uh it's like the equivalent of like a deep sump catch Bas in but it's a proprietary unit and the unit that they had originally specked I don't know if it wasn't available they needed to replace it with an with an alternate they sent along all of the details on the um substituted unit and updated their onm plan to um reflect the change so it's basically just switching from one unit same company manufacturer to another so um I don't have any objection to the minor adjustment in the plan but it needs to be reviewed and approved by you folks thanks Saron any questions from Commissioners brr um I believe that sparkle said that the new one is even more efficient than the old one by several percentage points yes strong capacity to clean and remove um TSS and and phosphorus I believe great okay um well unless there's any further comments we're looking for a motion to approve the minor administrative change to order of conditions D EP number 089 0739 so so moved I think that was Alex Alex on the motion Jason on the second Jason hi Bruce hi Andre hi Alex hi Laura hi and am I great um Hickory Ridge yes um there was a um very minor what I would describe as fairly negligible change to the pole locations um for the Hickory Ridge solar facility um relocating a couple poles for the um the poles that are on the interior of the site um connecting to the um eversource or National Grid poles that are at the road so um there was a figure in your packet that basically showed where the adjusted locations were proposed um again pretty negligible but I wanted to make sure that you were aware it any commissioner comments or questions okay seeing none we're looking to for a motion to approve the minor administrative change order of conditions D number 089 0728 I'll make that motion to approve minor administrative change order of conditions to EP 089 0728 I second on the motion Jason on the second Jason hi Bruce hi Andre hi Alex hi Laura hi and okay last one main yes so um also a figure in your packets on this one um so there was an order of conditions issued for M Lane um you might remember it was a um a rather large um uh gym workout area that was constructed um on a single family home property there was previously a driveway which had been approved um outside of the 50 Foot to go around the structure for like landscaping and vehicle access um the landowner no longer wants to install that driveway in the location between the 50 Foot and the um the building so but instead they're going to be installing a deck um just a pretty narrow deck running along the edge of the structure but it's outside of the 50 Foot um so decks sheds patios pools anything that's um um accessory to a residential structure considered to be minor activities under the Wetland protection act and under our local regulations so they wouldn't have even needed a regulatory approval for this but um seeing as they have an open order of conditions and it's a change to the permit um they did notify us um in writing to let us know that um there was this minor change to their plan design thanks Saron any questions comments from Commissioners okay um hello I have a question I'm sorry go ahead Bruce um can you go well Aaron can you go back to the slide of course the uh Hickory Ridge number and the mid lane number are the same thank you make make that correction right now thank you yeah thanks Bruce all right with um no further questions or comments looking for a motion I move to approve the minor administrative change to order of conditions the EP 89- 0686 second I think was that Andre on the second yep Bruce on the motion Andre on the second Bruce hi Jason Hi Andre hi Laura hi I'm and I Alex you there yeah I'm here invasive I mean I'm sorry I all right unanimous okay all right um one more minute so maybe we'll just uh mention that the Wildflower Drive enforcement compliance update is uh pending rolling over what do you want do you have a one minute summary for us thereon yeah I did uh at the last meeting the commission basically set a deadline of them submitting their notice of intent by today I reached out to the consultant and the landowner um and the consultant the Wetland consultant basically let me know that they're still waiting on the surveyor to get out there so they're they're trying to move it along but they it's kind of out of their control um to get the plan put together so I know it's frustrating um but that's that's the information that was conveyed to me and I did um integrate the information from the Consultants into your folder than sarin could you just remind us what the potential timeline is for having that get in gear I mean after the violation occurred I think the original deadline from the enforcement order was the end of April so you know does the surveyor have a expected date of availability I guess no okay um no I I don't even have a contact person for the surveyor um it's been really the communication's been really difficult and I've been trying I think the now the the land owner has um goded engineering so so Steve Ribery who he's been doing quite a bit of work um for others in town lately he's been trying to help this land owner so I think that that's at least somewhat encouraging that he has um um you know retained a a wetland person to help him um and I'll continue to um encourage them to move as quickly as they can and urge them to file as quickly as they can but just feeling like they're they're they're trying to get the plan put together they're just not um you know they're held up by other things outside their control at this point okay I guess I'll just trust that you keep an eye on that and some good it's good to know Steve River's on the job too um I guess knowing who their prospective surveyor is would probably be helpful as well Bruce I I went by there the other day and didn't look like anything had happened for quite a long time so at least it's stable stasis for now okay thanks aarin okay moving on to our hearings um all right General procedure for fairness to all applicants each hearing has 20 dedicated minutes on the agenda five minutes from staff five minutes from the presenter five minutes for public comment or two per person five minutes for conservation sta uh Commissioners um the commission requires all submitted and revised materials to be submitted by Wednesday the week prior to meeting at Clos of business and for all presenters and members of the public please state your name address of the project Pro who you're representing as well as preferred pronouns and from all members of the public just clearly state your name and address and preferred pronouns okay so first up is Karen environmental Consulting LLC on behalf of LSS forx LLC and WD Coal's Inc for the construction of a battery storage system Associated Access Road improvements and storm water management within the buffer zone to bordering vegetated Wetlands on Montee Road andout Route 6 3 m 2A lot 18 and Aon I'll let you bring in any folks here for this one yes so just beare with me while I promote folks and if I'm missing anyone please raise your hand but I think I see everyone okay I see Sam Scott welcome and I see an attendee hand up Dana steel Erin yes and Jeff and I see there was there was a Colin too right um yeah and now there's a Kayla does that sound right guys it's a big team Kayla there should be a Colin which is Colin and then Tim also who is listed as Dana steel I'm here there you go there you are okay welcome everybody okay eron do you want to give us the update please before you start y so Kayla I need the last name I need the last name do want me to spell it or is there a way to edit how I've presented it it just says Kayla on the screen so I mean if if you can edit it and you know how to do that that would probably be easiest for Bruce but if you don't know how to immediately do that maybe just tell Bruce because he's our minute taker okay um do you mind if I just spell it out for you Bruce that's fine okay it's spelled k e r i a z as in zebra e as in elephant S as in Sam Terry Asis okay thank you hi this is Colin my last name is Canon C an n o n thank you how about Jeff's uh Jeffrey Mel m a c l thank you thank you all right I think we're good then okay y thanks Ru go ahead Ain so after our last meeting um there had been a number of comments um suggestions and noted revisions that were needed to the plan Set uh the applicant did get all of those materials To Us by last Wednesday um we did have a site visit last Thursday um several Conservation Commission members attended um um attendance was really great we had a big group um and basically walked to the site um part of what I did was um looking at the um mitigation areas on the west side of the site uh which I took a lot of photos of and um sort of did a quick quick run through with Scott um and then I think the other group looked at the areas that were further east um I also looked at the um Wetland polygon which had been previously delet lated on the site and I just wanted to have a look at that and see if there was soils and dominant Wetland vegetation um based on sort of my observations in the field I asked Jeff to add a small polygon you know and add the air the small polygon to the plan but basically note that um you know we we're not there's no indication that there's that there's um Wetland soils there and dominant Wetland vegetation but I did ask that that area be protected during construction with erosion controls and like some kind of construction fencing to keep it from getting damaged because my suspicion is that that it was um a more well established Wetland prior to the eversource work taking place and that when the eversource transmission line work took place that the area was damaged and so I think it's sort of just starting to reestablish itself so I I don't think we could necessarily call it a um uh a fully established Wetland but I want to just leave it um so that it stays in its current condition and not get damaged while this is being constructed um I also drafted an order of conditions for the board um there were some additional comments that were received which haven't been Incorporated yet but um there's a draft in the folder for us to start thinking about that thanks sarin um when you say draft in the folder are you you're speaking of the order of conditions that we're hoping to move forward tonight right the comments okay yeah and I um I did get some feedback from the applicant they didn't really have a whole lot of time to review the order of conditions so um you know whether they want to proceed on voting on that order of conditions or give it more time for them to review it um I will yield to them to make that decision and to you guys but it's there for consideration okay thanks sarin um go ahead from Karen environmental who would like to take the floor here great yeah thanks Michelle um uh thank you for the great sight walk we had last week and thanks to it was well attended we really appreciate that um spe specifically um we've made some minor modifications to the materials that were submitted on August um 21st a week ago uh and with some of the comments that we had received we identified the polygon that uh Aaron had mentioned and it is noted on sheet three of uh J.R Russo's site plan uh in addition um we had a some conversation during the field visit which um identified some modifications that could be made to the plan that was submitted uh for the invasive plantings plan so we can have Scott smers tonight talk a little bit about that um specifically what we proposed in as an update in the invasive uh plant management and mitigation plan was to do a onetime a year mow for the meadow type area um and it would be a 1.37 acre area that has been identified uh also in um Tim civil plan which would allow Scott to Scott smyers and Oxbow Associates to do some treatment of that area and we think it would take the proposed 32 person hour um 32 person hours of work in the invasive plantings plan would allow was to accomplish more with that um uh and attack those polygons in a way that would um hasten the uh the removal of the invasives um in addition we submitted a storm water and O andm plan last week um that I that had done a number of the things that the commission had requested us to do it identified the additional topography it added the burm up on the uphill side of the driveway it demonstrated our uh adherence to the TSS and phosphorus removals with the proprietary separator um it called out the cut and fill number for the unsuit bles that would uh be removed and the locations of where uh a better structural soil could be added it uh pointed out the infiltration trench and its compliance with d best management practices and indicated how that would be accomplished through the vegetation and onm plan that Tim at J.R Russo also provided um we've added to the onm plan the ongoing maintenance as well of the TSS and other storm water features um we've also got on the call um Kayla kitzies and uh Colin camon who can talk about any questions that uh the commission may have around the best technical specifications the battery re energy storage system technical specifications um and we've submitted uh some updated plans regarding um the fire safety protocol and at that site walk uh last week we also had uh the commissioner um and the fire safety so commissioner Olstead or excuse me Chief Olstead um and fire safety officer Chris bascome were able meet us on site and review the materials um they're comfortable with access um and the two things they requested from us were uh a 12 foot RightWay vegetation management so that they could ensure that trucks could get across that access and also um that we plow the snow in the event of any snow events during the winter so those two things um have been added to our um operations and maintenance plan and would be included with Hazard mitigation analysis that we received a draft back from today our thirdparty provider spark um who is providing the hazard mitigation analysis in line with the fire safety application that we are uh submitting um we have all of our consult on the on the um meeting tonight so if there are specific questions with respect ECT to any of the updates we've made to the plans we're happy to dive into to that um we're optimistic that we've comprehensively addressed the commission's questions and utilize best management practices for the work in the jurisdictional areas um so let me give the commission and our professionals the opportunity here to to engage a little more and and answer any questions thank you Jeff I appreciate you all being here tonight to answer those questions um I know that several Commissioners were on the site so I'd like to hear from them but uh any Commissioners that want to have some questions or comments please raise your hand okay well Alex I might pick on you because I know that you were there go ahead and please uh let us know I wanna first of all I want to thank everybody for uh the site visit and was informative and I appreciate uh uh that the invasive species polygons were mapped and as I recall the polygons were created to address our question about how big an issue is there and um as we were on site it we had a discussion about the fact that there are invasive species growing outside of the those polygons uh so the polygons don't necessarily represent all invasive species but rather an indication of where they are particularly dense and um I noticed that in the plan and and frankly I um I've been reading through the august 19 and the August 11 correspondence and and then the order of conditions that Aaron has drafted and trying to put it all together but what I see is that originally The Proposal was to control invasive species on the entire lot and what we seem to be now is to control invasive species up to 90% within polygons and that seems to me to be a little bit going backwards from the original proposal and to 90% I'm not of control would be great but um to leave 10% bearing seeds um is counterproductive so I wonder if we couldn't work towards a more effective control that is not just limited to the polygons that were outlined to answer our question about how bad is it and to talk instead of a percentage to um in order to um avoid having to crawl around and look for things that are three feet three Ines tall to try and make sure that nothing gets to seed bearing um age um and I'd also like to see the I eron I looked through the conditions that you drafted and I had a hard time um sort of seeing where their mitigative proposal was included I'm sure it's there but it just didn't seem to be highlighted um and I'd like to see the conditions go to to whoever is um on the site for example if your company is sold or goes out of business and somebody else takes it up that the responsibility goes to um um uh the remainder and maybe that's in Aaron's order of conditions that she's drafted I just didn't have time to track it down so those are my my highlighted comments thanks Alex um so for that last one I just I want to put that aside and just make sure that that's addressed Aaron um sort of the longevity of that but um in in regards to the polygons maybe Scott you could speak to the target areas versus the performance standards and um yeah maybe clarify that please think as I tried to we tried to discuss at at the meeting but the intent is still to get rid of the invasives and you know west of the Brook on the parcel not just in the polygons you know we just map the densest ones just because it was taking it was quite an effort to just make that map and there would have been a lot more to map the smaller and smaller ones the diminishing returns yeah but the intent the intent is to get rid of all the invasives on the site uh we took your uh recommendation I think or idea we had discussed on the site talk about mowing brush hogging and then mowing in the future uh and and develop that more so I think that really will take care of a lot of the invasives over time because now we have not only the invasive monitoring and control with Selective use of herbicides but also mowing what is it 1 point3 Acres somewhere around there um and then and then treating those areas with her besides too so then you picture the Buckthorn gets mowed it sprouts back up it's a small cluster leaves we can hit that the next year uh and then they can mow it again after that it soaks in so it should should be more effective over time the combination of the Mowing and the selective treatment uh and and since it's a long-term management you know we we we can see get as much done as we can the first year uh have the first mowing occur and then we still have plenty of hours to use the second year the third year the fourth year and we should require less and less hours but still be able to uh you know the the the applicant the owner the project manager can budget that accordingly so we think it's a reasonable project that or schedule and and methods that that will achieve the goals that the Conservation Commission is looking for and and uh and be predictable for us as the applicant the applicant's team so if I could just you didn't address the 90% well we want to get it to night I think I I I was on I tried to get the point we get to 90% uh you know less than 10% invasives and we will report that every year to the Conservation Commission right and with a report you know well just like anything else Wildlife rare species but also invasive plants you know that if the 10% is scattered in very small amounts around the perimeter of the site maybe that's more difficult to to manage uh takes more time more effort if it's all clustered in one area that's easy to take care of but it'll depend on uh you know the the scenario in the field and we'll be reporting to the Conservation Commission and if the commission says okay well we don't think it's 10% we think it's 15% how'd you come up with 10% let's go take a look you know then we'll de deal with it one year at a time it's my idea just 10% is a pretty good compared to what's out there now that would be quite an achievement um but but I think we will you know ultimately try to get to 0% I think that's not completely not impossible thanks Scott so how are you measuring the percent are you doing transects for the site or like what is the standardized measurement from year to year well we'll start out with we we got the polygons that we have there now right so that's one start but when we do the treatment this year or whenever it's approved and we we can proceed um you know we'll get more more details at that point on treatment areas between the polygons and so we'll have a more complete version and then we can compare that to how it looks in the future yeah but you know the way to do it most accurately is with transects or plots but I think with a project like this it's it's it's more of an estimate and then double-checking it with someone from like Aaron here from the Conservation Commission saying this is this is what I think we're at with this whole area I mean you you could try to do it with drones or things like that you know that sort of thing but I think GPS and estimating and eyeballing it is probably the be best way to go okay I guess I do have concerns about that since we're setting a pretty solid number of 10% and sort of a Perpetual uh performance standard around that and then there's going to be your report and then us eyeballing it and to say 10% without some way to measure me it um makes me a little uneasy I guess I was thinking of a more standardized measurement so just like running some transacts through the site and getting a sitewide evaluation that could be the same every year I mean I I appreciate what you're doing I think it might actually be more time intensive than what I was thinking of um so I'm trying to think of a way to get a okay so it sounds like to me that you're going to go out and measure the 10% based on the polygons and you're going to go look at the polygon and you're going to say are they 10% invasive are they not every single year um I guess that sounds like a lot of more work than I was anticipating but I see yeah the the whole site and then the polygons represent part of the site right you know so I wouldn't necessarily be going in each polygon and measuring 10% of that polygon 10% of that just okay we got rid of everything in in let let's say six of the polygons that's good but over in this corner it's not as good so let's look more carefully at what we had to look at before and to be honest with you know my experience with these sorts of things you know you it's obvious when you make a good dent in the invasive plants after a couple of years you're really lowering it down and then oftentimes I will present something to the Conservation Commission and say uh you know I think we're at that threshold whatever the threshold is that we agreed on uh I think we're at it or close to it and a lot of times by that time they're just so sick of it they just say okay it's fine you know it's good they've been out there they've seen you made a lot of progress on it it's never going to be perfect you know but this is yeah this has got a few different species on it so I'm just saying you how just telling you how it works in the real world sometimes I know you're trying to come up with something predictable and we could do transex we can do whatever you want you know I'm I'm I'm fine with fine with that sure okay well the one more thing I'll say before I give the floor to Dave and Aaron um I want this to be an Adaptive invasive plan because one of the things that I know was brought up was the potential introduction of not weed onto the site from the construction vehicles and just the general disturbance so I know that you've um very well outlined the the worst of invasives the most prevalent ones there but I just want to be clear that when we talk about 10% in invasive species that it goes beyond the current Target species so that if you're targeting those but then there is a not weed Invasion then we're moving on towards towards that so in that case it's you know adaptive to the current problem and that's probably going to change and morph as time goes on so I just I don't want to limit us to what's currently there and what's currently the problem because I'm sure you'll do a very good job in controlling those but once you do that something else will have the opportunity to pop up so um that's just one point I wanted to make okay go ahead Dave yeah thanks Michelle can you hear me okay yeah yeah um I have not been as involved in this application as as many others on the call but but I have been at most of the meetings where um this team has presented and I guess I just wanted to put this a little bit in context that um from my from my perspective you know the applicant and the Consulting team they put together has come a tremendously long way from the first presentation on this project on the mitigation plan um I I just want to caution the commission a little bit on on kind of consistency and is is this the the level of of um of scrutiny Andor Andor detail that we give every proposal that comes before the commission I think 90% reduction in invasives is is an is is is a lofty goal for any applicant and I think we just need to be U uh realistic uh in in what uh they are proposing to be done out there and I guess I'm just putting that forth I I think they have put forth a an excellent plan with an excellent mitigation approach and I just I I I would like to see the applicant you know move as quickly through our processes as possible I think where they where they started from and where they are today is light years ahead of of where they were some months ago so those were my my only comments thanks thanks Dave I agree this is a good plan I guess just to be clear we're not looking for a 90% reduction invasives we're just looking to maintain a 10% prevalence of invasives so I don't actually know what the what the prevalence is now but we're just looking to maintain or get to a 10% so I mean when I'm talking about having some standardized way to do it like the point at which you guys stop and are then relinquished from doing this any further is at 10% so for you to say that and for us to agree it would be good to just know how we're both going to measure it so if you guys can just say something and we can go out there and say yep I did it I see it I agree rather than some subjectiveness I think that would get us to the to the end point much quicker in a less subjective way that's just my point on that go ahead Laura yeah I was going to actually I'm looking back at the notes from the last time that load star was in front of us and I really support what Dave said I think in in terms of what we outlined uh them to address I think they've actually gone above and beyond um so uh which actually is um not which is not uh typical necessarily um in the course of our commission meeting so um invasive spe species plan storm water management redesign of the system um I'm going back and looking at all these notes so I was not on site um however in in terms of what's been submitted I think um you know I'm going to vote in favor of of moving this project along thanks Laura Alex yeah I um I want to comment on on Dave's um advice to the commission as director of conservation this project has moved along because Commissioners took an interest to do their job from what it was originally proposed it only moved because Commissioners looked at it hard provided comments and feedback and did our job if we had not done that it would be a very different story and we have a a project which is right at the 50 Foot Mark we have a project which is inside the 75 foot Mark we have a project that sets precedent which we've talked about in the past and invasive species control was their idea not ours so while I appreciate your councel to the commission I would appreciate it if you would let us do our job thanks Alex Laura yeah well I think we should take this discussion offline and move with the hearing because I I don't yeah I think everyone's doing their best I think we're just responding to the fact that the applicant has provided thorough materials um and uh everyone there's no argument that everyone's putting in time here um but there is a lot longer history you know anyways let's let's keep the discussion going sorry Andre yeah I'd like to uh Echo uh Dave's mentioned earlier about the uh the amount of effort put in by everybody um the applicants as well as the Commissioners as uh Alex is stating um the way that everything is uh set right now I'm ready to uh to vote for uh uh to vote for approval but um I do think that it's important to have um to have your work meaning the applicant's work be measurable um so I'm sure that there's something easy that can be done so that we can um you know if you say look we took care 90% of uh the invasives we can look at it it's it's exactly what uh what Michelle was saying we can look and measure it and we would both you guys and the commission would agree yeah that's right that's according to the standards that we set up and I think that's a pretty easy solution um and if you don't believe so I'd like to hear back from you folks but um yeah I'm ready to I'm ready to move if we can find a way to measure it thanks Andre and and just to clarify again we're not looking for 90% reduction we're looking for 10% prevalence so the difference is whatever is there reducing it by 90% that's not what we're doing we're looking at the entire site and we're saying only 10% is covered by invasives and I think that's how it's worded right now in all of the documentation so if I'm wrong Scott please let me know but um go ahead and respond to those commissioner comments yeah thanks I just want to I don't know why I didn't say this earlier but I think what we should do with the 10% is just uh you maybe you could put a condition that says something like that the 10% threshold will be informed by GPS mapping of the invasive plants so in other words when it we map the invasive plants as a during like a monitoring visit before we get ready for the you know the we don't necessar like right now we we know where they are then we treat it in Year One the next year we go out then we map what's left over right and we can give that as part of our report for that year and that'll give us a okay then we can divide that by the area of the entire lot and then we get what percentage are we at right we just do that over and over again until we get to 10% so we can just use GPS mapping sometimes it'll be a little bit confusing because it might be a larger area smaller areas but we can do all the calculation some times it might be a lot of pinpoints and maybe we can decide at that point if we want to uh how we want to count those but I don't know if any I'm sure you've all looked at or a lot of you looked at Mel soil charts when you're evaluating Wetlands they have these right at the beginning of it you know percent cover of the redoximorphic features it's like this scatter plot and the square but the same sort of thing it says 5% 10% you know we're going to have we're going to result in something like that so I suggest GPS mapping and providing that to the Conservation Commission to give you something quantifiable to make your judgments on that sound good great yeah that sounds good go ahead Jason yeah can you clarify as far as the 10% threshold then is the intention to reduce the invasive species until there's only 10% remaining and then stop or you know so if you do this in year two and you get to 10% are you done or what is the time threshold to reach this 10% or is it just consistently ongoing for 20 years maintaining that 20 maintaining that 10% so as written once they reach 10% they're basically done with their mitigation treatment well I thought it was until it then if if it goes above 10% then we got to come back if we're still in that time period okay so what is the time period just to remind us 20 years okay it's actually 30 years okay I mean that is um great so yeah so so if we're having a 30-year plan I mean where you're effectively getting to and then maintaining 10% I think we have plenty of time then you know to work out the finer points and the finer details of exactly how we're measuring that year-over-year yeah I mean probably best uh resolved in the beginning but um if we need to revisit it because people aren't seeing the same thing or you know there's better ways to do it I think that's fine to bring back to the Commission in year two or three um go ahead Alex I'd like to see us stay away from uh disagreeing as we go into the future and think about 30 years is a long time I will not be on the commission for most of that 30 years nor will anybody here Dave Zac won't be with us over that entire period And I would like to see us develop something that is pretty clear and I I I not sure we have a plan in front of us that does that um I would like to see something that's so easy to understand that if there was a commission with all new people and there was nobody with any memory the written document would speak for itself and keep us away from arguing um so that we don't have to roll up our sleeves and spend a lot of energy on this project year after year after year but that it becomes pretty clear that they've either done what they're supposed to do or they're not and I'm not quite sure we're there I'm going to agree with you Alex and I'm sort of partial to having some kind of um agreed measurable way to to do this since it's going to be 30 years just so we can get this straight off the bat it sounds like Scott that you have sort of a model that you could present um and we could all look at and agree upon and then that could be the point at which we're agreeing for 30 years to come so we don't all have that in front of us right now but I think something visual measurable um objective would be really helpful because that 10% um for the next 30 Years is going to be a lot of money and a lot of effort on everybody's end and to be clear about what's going on is probably in everyone's best interest go ahead Bruce um I think it's important that whatever the mechanism is take into account the possibility that sometime maybe sooner than later that the um herbicides will be banned and it'll require some other technique to get to whatever the POS the 10% or whatever the percentage is yeah well that I guess is in sort of their wheelhouse to determine how they treat it and not part of our order of conditions right I mean if it is I would like to allow the flexibility for them to treat it as they need to go ahead Laura um and this is more of a question for eron I think um actually I guess to the commission as a whole too but are we suggesting that we're not going to issue the order of conditions tonight and instead ask them to come back again with a plan for measuring the invasives is there not an alternative where we can um it sounded as though Scott had some ideas right now but you know Aon is a scenario we where we can where we can offer or to approve that the O order of conditions with you know the expectation that there'll be um uh quantitative plan for measuring invasive in the future submitted I mean I I think that the idea of including a condition that with the monitoring report um for the mitigation plan that the um area of the invasives be mapped is really the most accurate that we can get um if we can locate them and approximate their area based on the entire parcel size that's going to be a pretty accurate measurement of the the area of the infestation so I think that that's a a solid suggestion and I think that that could be easily added um I mean like I would like a methodology I'm just going to say that because pinpoints on a map we're talking about like what how many Acres of this like how are we going to add up this and say it's the amount of total coverage on a site we just we just need and it's totally available and Scott I'm sure you have a great idea to do this but we just need that and we just need to agree upon it and I'm I I think this is important enough that we don't have to like fiddle around with it and say is this a polygon is it a point how much area is this is this one plant is it a cluster I don't I don't even want to deal with that I just want to say this was a methodology this is how it adds up and it's 10% or it's not 10% so there's so many ways to do this and we just need something in front of us so that we can all agree on it to move forward and it's such a longterm process that I think it's worth even just going another two weeks if we have to to approve this to have something in front of us that's quantitative go ahead Bruce no okay Alex yeah there on hold kind of a different subject and I'll turn my camera on um there was discussion about the fact that ever Source has a RightWay and I'm sorry I'm having trouble turning my camera Alex we can't hear you yeah you're showing muted right now and before you you didn't I think what you did with your camera has uh muted you okay you're gonna get take a time out um so I have no doubt that Scott could come to us with a methodology like we've been requesting and so I'd be willing to move forward with this if there's some mechanism that we could somehow post post uh motion approve that but I just think we need something um that's quantitative enough for any commission to look at a map to look at the numbers and it's just not fuzzy um so andon if this is much more specific than we normally give towards like post motion um approvals but if you have a suggestion for how to for how to do that so that it would be contingent upon maybe some circulation of the methodology to the commission but the but the methodology couldn't just be to uh before each Year's uh treatment that uh Oxbo would map the uh invasive the remaining invasive plant clusters with GPS and provide that map to uh the Conservation Commission with calculations of the areas of each of the patches of invasive plants with photographs you know I mean I think that would be the method which is I think already described in our report but you could clarify it to your satisfaction as a condition uh you know a simple condition I think okay so just to give some context this if we take the current map that you have you're currently saying that the entire polygons that you have right now are in infestations and so adding that area wise up over the entire parcel equals the amount of invasive coverage on the site and that those will progressively shrink ideally with treatment and we're adding up the areas of polygons within the entire parcel so you're mapping okay and so but you're not mapping individual plants so you're really mapping clusters so we're we're focusing on invasive cluster like target areas yeah and we're missing we're we're obviously based on our field walk last week we're missing some small a lot of the smaller patches so we could go and map all those too but you know we're going to treat all those in this first year and it doesn't really matter if the 10% is the whole site not just 90% less so yeah I mean I'm comfortable with that kind of polygon mapping as long as we have some definitions around what your invasives are that you're targeting like I understand there was maybe some loose dri plans out there that weren't put in um just at what point you know one plant of knotweed might not get mapped in year two but in year three it might be a cluster so right yeah um well we we'll describe all that and it'll be reviewed by the commission each time you know okay so to so then to describe it quantitatively you're going to map the polygon clusters of invasive plants and focusing on your Target and clustered areas but you're going to be noting like point locations which could then be visited by conservation commissioner Aon yep okay Commissioners does that sound okay is a path forward for some kind of quantitative mapping which will be in place for 30 years unless Revisited as otherwise by another commission Alex still muted Alex Arin you had your hand up do you want to say something while we I think the commission should make a decision if you're going to close the hearing tonight um maybe get a read from the applicants where things stand with issuance of the order um if they want more of an opportunity un to review the order before it's issued and then we should make a decision to move on to the next hearing because we've spent over 45 minutes on this hearing and we have five more hearings tonight and um if we can't come to a re resolution tonight I think we need to continue um but if if the you know we could either close the public hearing and then resolve the methodology wording um to incorporate that as a condition that we could then review and approve at the next meeting to actually issue the order or you could continue request methodology to written methodology to be submitted to us but I think we just need to one way or another be fair to the remaining folks who are on the call waiting for their hearing Alex are you with us again I think I have a microphone can you hear me yeah okay I wanted to ask a question about how we calculate how we work in the eversource right away when we were in the field we had a discussion about the fact that they maintain the vegetation in the right way and it wasn't quite clear if if this project could work inside the right away um and so I asked well they've calculated the area in the lot to be 47,3 191 Square ft I think that that's what that number represents and is that with or without the ever Source right away if it includes the right away maybe we should take the right away out if you cannot uh work on it can anyone answer that yeah so the proposed area of work uh is approximately 5,000 square ft the polygons that were mapped by by uh by Scott uh are 47391 that is correct so there is a one to um 60.6 uh ratio of area proposed work to mitigation area if we include the entire six acres it's one to 245 um what Scott's plan has proposed is to start with treatment of invasives within the 47 , 391 square feet and successively with each year using 32 human hours hopefully successfully treat the 47,000 square feet but also look Beyond with those hours and if in one year treating the 47391 square feet he's only done that in four six eight hours he has additional time to spend outside looking for migration of invasives outside of those polygons so the entire six acres has been proposed as the area but with some CA limit of human hours that would get spent um at 32 human hours so I think that's a dynamic that's important to understand and what is proposed in that plan is that we are not just looking at the polygons as the treatment area but as the starting point with the most dense populations and then moving beyond the polygons as time permits um specifically Alex your comments in the field were very good we incorporated this mowing area because we think the 32 hours will go further with the 1.37 Acres of mow area and so those polygons will not only be able to treat the polygons but also look for further migration on the six acres yeah I thought the mowing was great great that was a great addition thank you for that yeah I just I'm still concerned about the eversource right away and because I think what you said is you can't work in there right away so yeah I forgot to address that point so they have a non-exclusive easement in that area so we have the right to do work there but we can't control their use of the easement so if they want to spray they can spray if we want to spray We can spray as long as we're not interfering with their use so you know we can't interfere with the towers we can't interfere with their roadways um but if we are you know cutting spraying mechanically removing whatever we need to do or Scott's team needs to do that can be done it just can't interfere with their work and as we saw they're out there doing some spraying already um and I don't think that's you know the treatment we're targeting we're looking for really you know mechanical removal or or or cut and limited spray but um we can coexist in that space But it is a non-exclusive area for us to work okay and uh chair there is a whole another part of this plan that involves planting and we haven't even talked about that and it's fairly fuzzy in the way it's produced so way it's represented so I I favor them providing a document that is a little clearer so that a different board would have no problem understanding what's supposed to be happening out there in year 10 15 20 and so on okay um before I forget can we please add language that there shouldn't be any mowing if there's not weed infestation so that would have to be something that's monitored and adjusted for um I definitely don't want to go down that road um yes we haven't gone to the planting I generally consider that to be a beneficial thing I'm not sure I had more questions upon that um I personally am in favor of moving this forward on the condition that we maybe Scott can provide us some more language um after the meeting about just the methodology in the quantitative um in a more quantitative way about how we're going to measure and assess that 10% each year over the years um and then after that um if there's any public comment please raise your hand and I just want to see a show of hands from the Commissioners who is in favor of moving this forward tonight with some further clarification of the invasive management plan I can't see you Alex but I'm seeing a majority of hands so I'm seeing that we can go to our order of conditions Erin I am acknowledging that Rachel submitted some comments that we haven't discussed but hopefully were reviewed and she's not here to represent tonight but I did not have a chance to review that I have not Incorporated Rachel's comments yet I just simply did not have time to do it um in my draft order so would it make sense for us to close the public hearing and refine the order of conditions and then issue at the next meeting issue the order I think so yes okay so I mean it's as simple as us just making a motion to just close the public hearing and then we can refine the order of conditions the the final detail of that um at the next meeting okay and not seeing any public comment period And so um let's move to close public hearing for Aaron environmental go ahead I'll move to close the public hearing issue order of conditions the number 08 9- 0731 with standard Bo plate conditions with the addition of um clarification for the invasive species quantification methodology to come after the fact under both the Maryland Massachusetts Wetlands protection act and wetlands protection town of Amber General bylaws article 3.31 in regulations with the noted additional conditions I second that okay so did you just motion for us to issue the order of conditions or okay is that what you had just suggested Aon I thought we were just closing the public meeting yeah um that I think Jason might have misunderstood but that's okay so so the motion is there so if we're not going to pass it tonight then we could just vote that down and make another motion to or he could withdraw his motion and we there on the table to issue an order of conditions tonight um are there any commissioner comments to F following that um initially we had proposed to just close the public hearing I will withdraw my motion and I will move to close the public hearing and okay so now there's a new motion on the table to close public hearing I'll second it on a second Jason on the motion Jason when do we have discussion about this is that now or later okay yes I can open it for discussion I I'm a little conf what does it actually mean to close the hearing while something gets decided and the Order of conditions gets modified um we're not going to meet until the next meeting so we will have a new order of conditions to review for the next meeting will we have opportunity to comment on it change it or is it a done deal yeah we would so it's just the hearing is closed so there's no more public comment on it so you the board then without the applicant without without the public would then um they could the board can modify it the board can add conditions the board can change conditions at the next meeting before they issue the order but uh the hearing is closed so that means there's no more sort of public testimony on the hearing um but certainly between now and that meeting I could work with Jeff's team to you know make sure that they're they're comfortable with the order um that comes to for a vote Ju Just Just to be clear what I understood the conversation just was we were just about ready to vote on an order of conditions but we did not incorporate Rachel's feedback so in like the the goal of the next meeting then is to have basically everything we discussed today including Rachel's items and then to approve this what what I want to avoid is another massive discussion recounting everything we just said tonight um so that's that's my understanding of of what we determined tonight am I correct correct right we'd roll in Rachel's comments and the other conditions that have been discussed tonight okay so we have a motion I think we have a second um I'm gonna take roll Bruce hi Andre hi Alex hi Laura hi Jason I and I'm an i okay thank you every everyone for being here tonight um sorry we didn't get closed out but it looks like we're very very close so thanks Scott for feeling questions tonight thank you very much have a good night thank you every by bye Jeff you guys have put together a really good package there thank you thank you thank you yep okay next up hearing to EB I'm opening this this hearing is now called to order this hearing is being held as required by the provisions of chapter 131 section 40 of the general laws of the Commonwealth and act relative to the protection of the wetlands as most recently amended in article 3.31 Wetlands protection under the town of emeris General violence this is a amended notice of intent for EBT environmental Consultants Inc on behalf of am mhad development Corp for proposed directional drilling associated with the installation of a water line bordering vegetated Wetland at 23 and 28 green leaves map 13d lot 79 and 80 Erin update please yes so the commission issued this order of conditions I want to say back in 2022 um it was for the um installation of a waterline connection between two buildings at the green leaves uh retirement community they did some exploration um of the proposed waterline location and determined that the there's a sewer line that would run right beside it which is a rather old sewer line and the DPW was concerned that installation of the water line could damage the sewer line and so they asked um green leaves to come up with an alternative location for the water line so rather than trenching the entire line between the two buildings and the wet they've come up with a plan to do directional drilling basically directly between the two buildings which means that they um use a a directional underground drill um it's like 14 feet below the Wetland to install um a pipe which would connect the water between the two buildings all of the spoils from the drillings um would go into a dumpster and be taken off site so there wouldn't be any um stockpiling or dewatering or anything like that done on site to deal with it all other factors of the plan would remain the same with the exception of no trench just underground drilling based on my comments it's a significant reduction in the amount of impact the amount of surface excavation for the install um and Glenn Koski is on the is on and I'm going to promote him to panelist so that he can have an opportunity if he has anything to add but I am pretty sure he's um also attending two hearings tonight so I'm not sure how much he'll be able to talk but I'm going to attempt to promote him to talk oh and somebody else is raising their hand so I'm going to allow them to talk as well can you hear me yes uh this is Zack Les from existing grade the uh design engineer for this project um so I can kind of speak to what's going on here and answer any questions the commission may have uh again as as you had stated Erin um the original intent in and why this project was before the commission uh back at the beginning of the year was for a parking lot for 28 green leaves it was a previously approved uh project a while ago and we were back before the commission to rep permit it uh with all the storm water management such and part of that was the installation of a new water line it was going to be running along the south side of the project kind of up a existing access way um and as it stated the DPW had concerns with trenching along an existing sewer line that would have you know potentially compromised that line so the intent would be to do directional drilling underneath the wetlands it'd be about approximately 500 feet um the owner has been working with JS Ray who this kind of their specialty and doing these types of installations uh be an 8 in water line that would get drilled under underneath the wetlands so there'd be no immediate surface impact to those Wetlands there's kind of two Pits on each side of the wetlands where they're able to start the drill and then they're able to pop it out on the other side without having any sort of surface disturbance and those pits can kind of act as a sump for any sort of the spoils in and um you know drilling fluid which is mainly water they pump that out and remove it from the site so there's there's more or less no impact to the wetlands for the installation of this line but it does mitigate the concerns that the DPW had in regards to that sewer line thanks Zach um uh okay I'll take commissioner comments Bruce go ahead a name and address for the phone mun okay oh sorry you say it again go ahead Suzanne yes I'm here I thought you were asking if I was here I am here but do was going to talk the name your name and address please Suzanne munchin I work at 27 Green leavs Drive ammer Mass thank you you're welcome thanks okay any commissioner questions or comments okay seeing none I mean I understand this is less impact than we initially permitted it for so so that's great seems fairly straightforward so um if there's any public comment please raise your hand seeing none looking for a motion I move to close the public hearing and issue the amended order of conditions DP D number 089-099-6182 lands protection town of ammer General bylaws BRS article 3.31 in regulations closed BR comma with the noted additional conditions second second have Alex on the motion Jason on the second Bruce hi Alex hi Jason I Andre I Laura hi I okay um thank you Zachary and Susan all right thank you very much for your time good thank you okay um next up is notice of intent for S swca on behalf of University of Massachusetts for an after the fact notice of intent application for the construction of a pavilion and Associated site work on Orchard Hill residential area52 Orchard Hill Drive the project includes work within the 100 foot buffer to bordering vegetated wetlands and within the amoris jurisdictional Waterway I see Meredith and Jason welcome um anyone else you're on mute Erin anybody else needs to be added as a panelist I've tried to add everybody um that I recognize but I'm not sure if everybody want add it in or not no Meredith I can handle that thank you very much okay okay why don't you give us our five minute update please yes so um I've met with UMass on several occasions since the last hearing um they have revised the um road crossing to be larger a larger sized pipe um for the access road into the Pavilion site um and I've you know requested that they submit to us um like an onm plan in association with that because there are some downg gradient storm water structures and they have storm water structures that are associated with the Pavilion so they did provide the onm plan in association with that as requested um as far as I'm concerned they've submitted to me what I was looking for um in terms of revisions and documentation on the project so I'm prepared to recommend the commission to um issue the order of conditions tonight um so I'll yield the rest of my time to Jason and Meredith yeah thank you very much good to see you again commission we uh it's been uh a month and a half or so since we last met with you uh thank you again for having us um we have uh for the design and as Erin mentioned uh met multiple times in regard to like the design itself but last time we met we actually had a lot of conversation that was um regarding like the Swip and the site management um and we wanted to address some of those issues with you because that was a you know a lot of our conversation we had Tech issues last time I don't if you recall but we were not able to present with um the new Zoom update that had happened so we weren't able to present so most of our time was spent in regard to the site management and the Swip issues so we wanted to address that so one of the big features is uh in addition to merid of presenting on the behalf of the University in regard to the notice attendant itself we also have sbca as hired as a third party for the Swift management SL investigations that we have so that's good because we've we've made great improvements on the site um the contractor has you know been challenged with the regard to the fact there was a large site there's a large cross slope and we were all I think all of us discussed that all last time we were all in agreement that was a difficult site for them to manage theyve made great improvements so so um in addition to not only presenting the noi we have Meredith also presenting the noi um excuse me the Swip updates in regard to inspections and stuff I think she can speak to that so for site and soil Management in regard to like the overall site and then what we really have to get to is we really haven't really talked about the crossing itself which Erin represented you know that we've discussed with her multiple times I don't think this group has really ever saw that so we're really looking forward to getting into that so uh Meredith you know please take it away thank you good to see you all again thanks I'll try to be fast I know we're well into the meeting time let me see if I can I just put together a little PowerPoint um Can folks see my screen just PowerPoint okay thanks yeah so I just wanted to um recap what's been done as far as the Swip and just let everyone know that um a lot of people have been working very hard on this project and these are all the um people that have been involved and you know I'm s swca Meredith Bornstein Wetlands consultant um obviously Jason is here from UMass and they're from and Kim Dori grusi is also um managing this project from the UMass facilities Department um architect of record or Sig Miller hon studio um Terry oops hey I can't click on that um Terry wo is the mass environmental health and safety person um that's been involved in this project Niche engineering they're not here tonight um but they did do the crossing design in the um stormw water calculations um that we'll talk about in a second with the Culvert design um Stimson studios are the are Landscape Architects who did the design of the whole project um the landscaping and suffk is um the site contractor they're on site right now and they've been doing the Swip inspections and sbca has been doing third-party um Swip inspections as well um and then Otto is a licensed site professional and geot Technical engineer um I just want people to know that early in the design phase the project team hired licens sitech professionals um as part of their due diligence on how to manage soils at the site so Otto is a licens site professional also Al referred to as an LSP um they had several recommendations that were implemented during the initial phase of construction um and all that work was completed and consistent with the applicable regulatory requirements um as part of the soil management at the site so they also filed a Swip oops um and the Swip was filed with the EPA it was stored on site they were doing inspections um they needed a little more help with getting the site under control because it was such a big area exposed all at once and we did get some really severe weather um at the beginning of the summer um this is just a map showing the general area um I just wanted to orient folks to Orchard Hill part of Campus Eastman Lane um is on the North side um and Orchard Hill living areas over here on the um South Side there are wetlands in the woods um over on the east side the pear Trail as we refer to it is an existing kind of walkway um and there are associated stormwater basins um affiliated with that it was actually an electrical duct Bank project that filed a notice of intent for back in 2015 and we did have an order for those basins um so um just to orient folks to this site so um let's see I just want to update you so we had a lot of discussion on the Swip this area is the electrical duck bank that was um so the utilities at the site tied into the existing electrical duct bank and this is area in the buffer zone a photo oops from July and then a photo from August um 19th and it's establishing really well um and actually it's so well vegetated probably the erosion controls can come out at some point after we file certificate of compliance but just to show folks that that area is doing well this was another area that they had trouble with um photo on the left from July photo on the right um from August 19th and you can see it's the vegetation is coming in nicely and um I will say the site is stable overall let's see this is in some photos of the North Slope if you remember the folks who did the site visit it was a big area that was exposed um they after we met in July 10th they um installed a bunch of different erosion and sedimentation controls such as check dams Stone check dams earthern check dams um temporary basins they have since um oh and erosion control blanket which I'll talk more about that in a second um and then this is new loom and this has all been Hydra seated so as of yes shoot sorry you guys um yes yesterday the site has been this is a photo on the right from yesterday and um vegetation is coming in on that North Slope and it's looking really well they did Hydro seed but they still have work to do in there are temporary basins um throughout the site still um and so yes the erosion control blankets we right after the meeting we had on July 10th the contractor was out there installing erosion control blankets Unfortunately they used photo degradable rather than compl completely biodegradable um blankets and we got the word from the commission and you know UMass doesn't like um photodegradable blankets anyways either so they have subsequently removed all the photodegradable blanket from the site and it didn't need um the photo on the right is the same area um adjacent to the pear Trail it didn't need another blanket the vegetation coming in very nicely over there so just so folks are aware um about the blankets that were used this is just a photo um from July and August of the Basin where turbid water had left and entered into the buffer zone which is an existing stormw Basin so luckily the Basin was there nothing has entered Wetland resources and um this area the photo on the right um the water was completely kind of gone by then but um you know it continues to hold water and these need to be maintained as part of the close out of this project and I just want to show so now we'll get into the design um of the crossing I flagged a small bordering vegetated Wetland on the um Northwest side of the existing parking lot underneath the solar panels and um and a little stream channel leaving that um BBW so we have designed The Crossing um this is just a zoomed in version of um that area so you can see the Wetland flags on the plan a little stream leaving and then entering there's a culvert here this is the driveway um running North and South um it's going to be porous pavement with um adjacent reinforced Turf um The Crossing will be about 33 feet long it's it will be an eliptical pipe um it's 14 in wide and 23 in tall I hope I'm saying that right um and it does actually meet the 1.2 times bful with stream channel um requirement because the channel is about one foot wide um oh and so as part of this plan we're going to formalize the area and we are going to install um Wetland plantings on either side of the stream um we're not touching the Wetland um and we're leaving that as is um and we're going to um install River Rock to make sure there's no erosion because the solar panels also um drip down and um erode that area a little bit so we're going to install rounded Stone to formalize the channel and ferns adjacent to it on both sides of the crossing and um I think this will be a nice way to formalize the area and um preserve it in perpetu perpetuity so um iops yeah that's all I have I don't know if Jason has other stuff he wants to share um I know that was a lot and I was trying to go quickly so time yeah um I'm gonna take commissioner comments now thanks Jason go ahead Bruce I was at the site visit the the July 8th photo show so I really appreciate seeing the the progress that's been made visually in each of those problematic areas that we visited that day thank you Bruce Jason Meredith you mentioned uh reinforcing the turf that's going to be there at the Crossing how are you going to be reinforcing that was that the rock or is there some other method by which you're going to be reinforcing that Turf I I may have misspoke it's reinforced Turf so I think it's rock and then Turf on top is that correct Jason that's correct so our idea is that we um so this is you guys will face this also I'm sure but it's a fire code you know NFPA fire code that we on a 20 foot Lane for firein Access so we don't want to have a 20 foot wide concrete or asphalt swath so what we were going with is a 10 foot wide permeable asphalt and on each side of that is a buffer of five feet to allowing the total Dimension to be 20 feet that reinforced Turf allows like imption it's it's basically a reinforced Turf that allows um it to be mowed it's going to be maintained um it's we it's the structure of itself is not going to be we don't like the aesthetic of like having um you know concrete embres that going to kind of show through so our our goal is to have it be very feel narrow in a aesthetic but uh exible via like NFPA so that's that's the goal ref first TF means that's like it's drivable navigable by a fire truck but it's really a 10 foot wide permeable asphalt is the main aesthetic that most people will see that's going over the pipe correct that whole assembly is over the culbert correct from the Northend of the parking lot okay and I'm just I'm not I'm not clear what when you say the reinforced Turf what on the the two five foot stretches on each side that's going to be turf grass over Rock uh mostly grass like the it's basically going to be like a it's it's a Terrain system that has allowed that's like it's it's earn ground as that there Turf growing through it um mow down low similar to some of the um paths that we're going to have assembling to this site that are going to allow pedestrian access to it that are it's in Grass areas mowed very low that even though it's across grass terrain will be navigable by people this one's going to be navigable by fire trucks um NFPA allows us to have it be that they need 20 ft to get in there uh fully but they don't that's the idea is that if in if they ever need to put out their stanions it's they can put out their stanions within that 204t swap so we don't want it to read as a formal like hardscaped area it's um it's mostly like you know metall looking grass basically M low is this similar to like the grass pave like um it's got like a sort of a a membrane that's similar yeah it's like a yeah um we can get into details about that but it's permeable is our goal is that it's not a hardscaped area is our goal we did something similar at Hickory Ridge for the access for the sewer line um it's like a a almost like a plastic membrane that they put the the turf on so it provides like a stable surfacing and there's Stone underneath it so it's permeable so I imagine something similar yeah there are multiple styles of it there like a I'm not I'll check in with regard to like what exactly it is but uh on campus we've used a few different styles um you know we there's like mat systems that we've had that allow like you know metal grasses to grow through there's like a geogrid system that we've used that we access with I'm not ex sure what exactly it is but the intent is that the 10 feet is perable asphalt and 5 feet is you know in you know metog grats looking that's the idea is that it's it feels very narrow in regard to the serpentine approach to the the complex itself so I could follow up with more details with in regard like what exactly that is but I don't know if we have have middle and exactly what the grid is yet or what the materials are permeable I'd like to see a detail for that sure any other questions or com I'll just comment one more but like as my understanding that's a structural reinforcement like a plastic or concrete grid so grass at grade can grow over it but um within it but trucks can drive on it I can I'm sure we have a detail um in the plans yeah it's mostly so just to be clear by the way that it's mostly so that truck can drive in that 10- foot Lane and if they need to put out stanions they can do so but um again there's there's multiple assemblies for that I I could probably even like uh check with the manager I do remember talking about this at length for Hickory Ridge so it's permeable but also big trucks can drive on it so it's fun yeah and this this is going to be a Comon assembly you guys are going to see because it's a good way to get through like NFPA 20 foot Lanes nobody wants a 20 foot wide asphalt swall every where possibly need to get a fire lane through so that's um let me check and see if I have any info on that okay while you do that are there any other questions or comments from Commissioners okay um Jason I know you wanted to see more about that is that gonna hold you up on moving to close this public hearing tonight no okay um okay if there's any public comment please raise your hand otherwise if there's no further comment from Commissioners I think we're looking to close the public hearing and issue the order of conditions and thank you um Jason and Meredith for addressing those outstanding issues that we had previously talked about it's looking much better out there yeah we appreciate your feedback and always engag in conversation going forward so thank you all right I will move to close the public hearing and issue after the fact order of conditions de number 08907 38 with a standard Bo PL conditions under both the Massachusetts Wetlands protection act and wetlands protection town of Anis General bylaws article 3.31 in regulations with the noted additional conditions Second Jason on the motion Andre on the second Jason hi Bruce you're an ice and Andre hi Alex Alex come back to Alex Laura hi I'm and I Alex do we have your audio okay hearing nothing from Alex um is are we at uh Corum on our current boat Erin yes I think so you're also muted um yes we do have a quorum okay all right so I think we can move to close that one and hopefully Alex can join us with his audio on for the next one okay thank you very much Jason and than you very much appreciate time thank you thank you okay next up is uh opening public hearing is now called to order the hearing is held as required by the provisions of chapter 131 section 40 of the general laws of the Commonwealth an act relative to the protection of the wetlands and most recently amended and article 3.31 Wetlands protection on the town of em General bylaw this is a request for determination for Gard Consulting on behalf of Tom re bacon Wilson PC to the confirm accuracy of the resource area boundary on the site and whether the work proposed to construct a single family house and Associated site work is jurisdictional under the wetlands protection act in Wetlands protection town of emis General bylaws article 3.31 and regulations at Harkness road map 18d Lots 312 okay welcome Tom and Steve Erin would you like to give us our five minute intro please yes um so um um we had a site visit on 827 um and I pretty thoroughly checked the Wetland line um because I was really suspicious on this one that the Wetland was beyond the the flagline um but in fact it was very Rocky and very Sandy and I didn't see any um well and veg that was beyond the flag line so I don't have any um you know objections to the flagged wetland boundary um and I have a uh motion queued up to issue the determination on this one I do think based on the configuration of the lot that it's clear the um efforts were made to keep the house um structure as far away from the Wetland as possible and to limit disturbance as much as possible in the buffer zone with the project um the one thing I oh I I do have eura butter um cards I think this was the one where they sent them twice by accident right they sent twice by accident on this one so we do have theut cards yes great thanks sarin um Bruce do you have a logistic question no I I was at the site visit and it Alex was there and it seemed like they've done what they can given the site constraints yeah I appreciate that to Tom Steve or Barry sorry Barry I missed you before welcome um anyone want to give a five minute presentation on it or introduction if you like it I'm happy to show a plan if you're okay with it we don't have to do anything it really is up to you I think we're probably okay with it um so thanks for keeping it out of the wetlands uh yeah I'd like to hear from Commissioners who did a site visit so go ahead Alex I was on the site visit it was a pleasure to meet Tom in person and uh Mr Roberts and uh I don't feel the need to have further explanation on the thing it was uh pretty straightforward and Aaron did a very good job of checking the wetlands I don't have any problem with them great thank you any other commissioner comments or questions great okay so we're looking for a motion to close public hearing and issue the amended order of itions I'll read it I'm move close the public hearing and issue determination of applicability for harkless road map 18d Lots 312 approving a positive determination checking box 2A confirming bordered bordering vegetated wetman Flags wfgc through A1 to WF GC through a18 and box five confirming B jurisdiction and a negative determination checking box three approving work with noted conditions under the Wetland protection act and the Wetland protection town of AM General bylaws article 3.31 and regulations that is the longest gun I've ever we've ever had second okay uh we had Bruce on the motion Jason on the second uh Bruce Andre hi Alex hi Jason Hi Laura hi and I'm an i okay thank you everyone have a good night we appreciate it you too everybody thank you very much night okay next up um niche engineering I think it's niche possibly but nich engineering I'll let them I believe so on behalf of wayfinders Incorporated for their oh I'm going to open this this public hearing is now called to order this hearing is being held as required for the provisions of chapter 131 section 40 of the general laws of the Commonwealth and act relative to the protections of the wetlands as most recently amended in article 3.31 Wetlands protection on the town of amoris General bylaws this is a notice of intent for n Niche engineering on behalf of w finders Incorporated for the renovation of an existing School building demolition of an existing parking lot and construction of a new proposed Residential Building attached the existing School Associated site and utility improvements including parking and storm water management at 31 Southeast street map 15a Lots 20 I see a Coleman and a Jamie and a Josh welcome everybody um Aon would you like to give our five minute intro to this please sure so so um this is a uh a proposed affordable housing project um the town of amest has been working for quite a while uh with wayfinders on this site um associated with this hearing and also The belg toown Road Site which is the next hearing um as part of that the um applicant has requested several waivers um of the local um uh town of ammer bylaws um in association with the filing so um for these two projects the commission will be reviewing this strictly under the wetlands protection act um and the applicant may have additional details on that but that's just sort of a a brief overview this is similar to the um ball Lane project that we approved um so uh there were some very minor minor requests for adjustment of erosion controls on this just to add some more significant erosion controls between the closest work area to the Wetland boundary um which is an intermittent stream and Associated bordering vegetated Wetlands um immediately adjacent to the existing basketball court which is going to be reduced in size and become partially parking area um the critical piece for the commission to know about this site um which is not a part of this application is that the town has funding um through the cdbg grant program um for um uh doing some some stream restoration work on this site and so right now there's a the intermittent stream um flows through two very undersized coverts which have failed going under the um existing basketball court and discharge um on the other side so I believe they they come in on the North side and come out on the south side of the of the um basketball court uh We've explored um multiple options for how to sort of restore the stretch of this stream including um conversations with multiple engineers and also D and we've arrived that the um sort of most um effective and resource efficient and costeffective way to do this is to basically create a stream channel that re reroutes the stream essentially around this parking lot to its Outlet point which would be a stream and wet Wetland restoration project and it would be a um filed under a separate permit as a resource area restoration project which the town intends to do and we currently have a engineer retained to do the design and ultimately the construction will be done on that by the town so this is like a um sort of a mitigation piece that's associated with this project that the town is going to be taking on but there's going to be a separate permit filing for it which is going to be happening after this permit is probably issued or you know I I'm fairly certain that we won't be looking at it until after this permit is issued so just so the commission's aware of that thanks sarin um would one of you like to give a presentation of this project five minutes please sure I'd like that go ahead Jamie take it away okay I'd just like to give you a brief overview I know we're uh we're pretty late here but uh you know good evening my name is Jamie Gruber I'm a project manager in the real estate development department at wayfinders uh for use of those of you not familiar wayfinders is a local nonprofit based in Springfield that works across the housing Spectrum from homelessness to home ownership um I'm very excited to give you this brief overview of the proposed development that includes the creation of 78 units of mixed income and affordable rental apartments across two town-owned properties located at 31 Southeast Street and 70 Belchertown Road at the south at Southeast Street uh we're proposing 31 unit building including the Adaptive reuse of the existing school and a new construction three-story Edition at 70 beler toown road we're proposing a new construction 47 unit uh three-story building both buildings will be designed and built to rigorous passive house standards with sustainability as a core goal um they will provide barrier-free buildings with elevator access to all floors and will also be all electric um this development has been years in the making with a significant investment by the town of ammer in the amest affordable housing trust including providing Town Land Town funds and town staff time all working collaboratively towards their goal to create more affordable housing we're very grateful to be part of this development and for all the support we've received uh wayfinders was selected as a preferred developer by the town through an RFP process has been working working on the due diligence and design over the past two years the development will be funded by leveraging over $30 million in federal state and local sources primarily through low-income housing tax credits at the financial closing the town will enter into a 99-year ground lease agreement and once completed wayfinders will manage the property as it does for over 800 units in western Mass including two of its properties uh in ammer already Olympia Oaks and butternut Farms as Aaron said we're we are permitting the project concurrently with the zoning board of appeals through the 40b comprehensive permit process with hearing set to begin tomorrow evening and what that'll do is is you you'll review it as the um Conservation Commission for the uh the the wetlands protection act and any of the waivers that were requested or noted in the application will be granted um by the zoning board of appeals you know I appreciate the commissioner's time and service to hear this important matter now I'll turn it over to our civil engineer from Niche Engineers Coleman and Josh to disc discuss the um more project details all right thank you Jamie uh good afternoon my name is Coleman horley I'm a senior project engineer at Niche engineering um I'm here to present on the 31 Southeast Street site um as you can see on your screen um there's the existing School building that was called out and most of the work is happening in this you know pork chop kind of portion I'm in the front the uh back portion behind the basketball court is part of the wetlands um the wetlands extend into this property and then also um there's an approximate approximated Wetland into this 47 Southeast Street property as well um one of the major comments from the site walk yesterday with aarin um was uh it gets a little tight on this end um you can kind of see for the future construction um it gets a little tight to the existing fence and property line um she recommended we do a silt fence in addition to a a uh mulch sock or compost sock Version Control um so the team will be looking into uh beefing up the Version Control along that edge a little bit um as Jamie mentioned we are you know renovating the existing School structure which is in the rear of the site um that is within the 50 Foot no structure but we are seeking a waiver for that um we are adding an addition um to the East and then also to the um the South here of a three-story building um that'll be along Southeast Street and this will have Associated utilities um and a pores pavement uh system in order to uh manage the storm water on site uh the existing um materiality is you know mostly impervious um especially near the Wetland um with some impervious on the outskirts and then the building in red on the existing building and that's all within the 100 foot buffer which you can see here uh the proposed we are switching the light blue is to porous pavement so you know most of the impervious areas now being switched to porest Pavement um we are reducing some of the pavement areas um near the Wetland um within 25-ft buffer um and just slightly increasing impervious overall view count porous as impervious within the 100 foot buffer um the utility uh as the storm water plan as mentioned previously um is the porest pavement system we have extremely high groundwater on site um in some places it's as shallow as 7 feet below the surface um so as a result we are seeking a aligned um porest pavement system to keep groundwater out um but still allow uh rate reduction and water quality uh efforts um meeting uh the 80% TSS removal required by the master water handbook um snow storage will be kept out of the buffers completely um you can see here and then in extremely heavy rain um snow storms it will be uh trucked off site um and then as far as plantings go I just want to provide you with a quick um look at the plantings um that the landscape architect has proposed for this um that said I don't want to waste too much time so I want to yield the rest of the time to questions thank you Coleman um commissioner comments questions Bruce go ahead um could you go back to the very first slide that shows the aerial view that one and make it a lot bigger so just this is an additional point to what Aon said if you look at just show maybe Circle where the current um basketball court is that and the so the this daylighting of the stream is going to go down where those little dots are and then over to the other part and really what as what she described means that it's going to be a connectivity between two isolated habitat Wetland habitats and that's the town project not theirs but their link and it's a really it's a really good example of the need for connectivity and how to solve it agreed agreed yeah and the porest asphalt will overflow to that area um in the future we're really excited to work with the town on that okay thank you thanks Bruce so we're here looking right now we're looking at we're actually looking at two projects right with that Northeast one and then the Southwest one are different or like one the belter toown road one this project is uh just Southeast Street the next noi um hearing is for the belter toown road um so we gonna that's not on that snap okay got it okay great thanks um any other commissioner comments so this is going to be continued tonight but we're reviewing okay um Alex go ahead muted Alex I was on the site visit and uh very much appreciated the time that everybody took to explain things and I know not sure it's clear but for the benefit of other Commissioners because of the funding involved in this project uh amorist regulatory uh Wetland RS are waved yep um and we'll get into that on our next hearing I guess so um but specifically that 50 foot setback okay any other questions or comments okay hearing none um if there's any public comment please raise your hand seeing none I'm looking for a mo motion to continue the public hearing for D number 089 0741 to 92524 at 7:30 p.m so moved second right Alex on the motion Andre on the second Alex hi Bruce hi Andre hi Jason Hi Laura hi and I'm and I okay thank you for that I I assume you're both all of you are staying on for the next one correct great okay so this public hearing is now called to order this hearing is being called as required by the provisions of chapter 131 section 40 of the general laws of the Commonwealth and act relative to the protection of the wetlands and most recently amended in article 3.31 Wetlands protection under the town of ammer General bylaws and this is a notice of intent for engineering on behalf of wayfinders Incorporated for the demolition of two existing residential dwellings and construction of a new proposed residential building with Associated site and utility improvements including parking and storm water management at 7280 beler toown road map 15 C lot 58 59 and 60 okay Arin please introduce us yeah so um we had a site visit um also um yesterday was it um and uh during the site visit there was a couple suggestions that I had made um one of them was a invasive species mitigation plan because in the back of the site there's a significant amount of Japanese na we um which is located basically in the in the vicinity of the Wetland boundary and also where the um proposed existing infiltration Basin will be um there's I also requested some changes to the proposed bmps again um a more um robust um erosion control as well as some um sediment controls um in the form of biodegradable erosion control control blankets on the um uh section of the Basin Which is closest to the Wetland to provide immediate stabilization measures once the grading is complete um the other issue I guess or just sort of I think this comes down to sort of uh more of a minor adjustment is the the design which brands the um infiltration Basin on this site is located within the 50 Foot buffer and infiltration basins can't be within 50 fet of a wetland um per the dbmp handbook so um I'm had a conversation with the applicant that they may need to make some design considerations to either change it to an alternate BMP or shift it um out of the 50 Foot so they're working on coming up with an Adaptive way to um adjust and and um address that comment sarin um would anyone like to give us an introduction on this one I think Jamie already covered the introduction for both of them at the beginning so I'll just jump right into the design if that's okay yep go ahead so um you can see here Bel toown Road uh there's three Parcels here that the town is consolidating for this project um there's an existing structure at the rear of the site um and then another existing structure at the front along btown Road in the 80 btown road parcel um as Aaron uh noted we are are seeking some more extensive erosion control bmps um for uh the rear of the site near the Wetland um again those are going to be you know mol uh filter socks or um compost um and then uh jute or some sort of erosion control blankets um to establish the vegetation near the uh bio retention um area in the back um the building the proposed building will be along the front of the parcels um along belter toown Road uh very little of that building is actually within the 100 foot buffer and we'll go over that in a minute um and then we will have an Associated parking area uh that goes to the rear um for the residents uh and then the bio retention uh infiltration Basin will be at the rear of the site uh the existing materiality uh within the 100 foot buffer um is mostly perious with a little bit of impervious and then the existing structure you can see the Wetland lined here in red along the back um additionally this is the proposed conditions you can see the grading of the Basin um so we're we're trying try to have uh like a green infrastructure Basin along the entire rear of the site to pick up any of the uh pollutants that might come out from the parking area um and runoff so this runoff will be collected uh via catch basins um in the parking area um routed to water quality structures um which then go to a flared Den section and a rip wrap uh um Stone area before going into the infiltration Basin body itself um and then that will infiltrate down during most stor events then in heavy storm events it will go through the ri wrap Spillway and then overflow into the Wetland itself um uh as Aon noted there was a comment from the D about um 25 feet um or uh 50 uh the infiltration Basin being within 50 feet the infiltration Basin is the only storm water BMP in the handbook that has that uh setback requirement um but we are actually seeking a more beefed up version of a infiltration Basin it's actually more like a hybrid between a bio retention um so we actually have a more more um sand it's it's a sandier soil it's got more filtration usually like an infiltration base in per the handbook is just grass on like an earth and subgrade this is uh like a planting mix with uh restor of soils and and Seed mixing mixed in as opposed to just grass so we're trying to go for more of a hybrid approach here um and then just to close this out snow storage again outside the buffers near the front of the site and then during heavy snow storms will be trucked off um and just to end that the plantings shown here are you know native plantings and again we're uh looking to continue till the 25th for this one as well thank you thanks okay commissioner questions comments I'm seeing none okay um sorry go ahead continue now sorry Bruce go ahead and Jason they were probably ahead of me okay I couldn't see everybody with my screen uh I'll just go with Alex go ahead Alex yeah could you put up a graphic please which just shows the uh buffers around the Wetland and and that pertain that are provided by the mass Wetland protection act yep absolutely so this is the proposed site with and then the 100 foot buffer 75 foot 50 and 25 right here and then the wetlands in the red in the back and again the green is the prvious area proposed a lot of that is the infiltration biobase and hybrid structure uh the blue is asphalt um and concrete sidewalk and then the red Edge right here is the uh lip of the building that falls within the buffer so is there um presumed to be one vehicle per unit is that how you determine the number of parking spaces I'm going to defer to Jamie on that one Jamie do you have the parking ratio yes it's just under it's just under one um parking space it's it's like 097 so there's 46 um spaces for 47 units here so if you were to reduce the parking to pull that back um would that necessarily mean that you have to reduce the number of units well I mean it's something that we'd be able to to look at I mean this is this is the plan that you know we're presenting and and you know we feel that the the parking is you know sufficient for the for the building you know as as is um and the goal I think was is to um you know provide provide housing and provide housing units and um you know we don't anticipate that every resident May own a vehicle and this is in close Pro proximity to um you know walking to distance to downtown but there's also bus you know very um robust bus service just nearby across the street so but the the parking is um you know what we're showing is is almost you know a one to one um for this for this for this property okay I just had um two comments two two quick comments that are a tangent a bit and one is the house you're going to demolish I have no idea what the condition of the house is but there are people in town that are good at moving houses and I wonder if a contact can't be made with one or more of those individuals to see if that house is worth moving uh under some other lot in order to provide housing the second is just for the commission that this this this new these these units will be within walking distance of the community garden and in fact there could be a pathway provided from this property uh uh onto the uh conservation land where the Fort River um um community garden is located this kind of one of the goals of the community garden is to provide gardening space for within walking distance of people so it's just uh ironic in a way that this is so close to the community garden I think that's pretty nifty thank you Alex Jason yeah I was going to ask something similar to what Alex did about the parking um if it can be reduced and then you mentioned that uh the storm water is going to be collected in the parking lot and then go to water quality structures before it goes to the biofiltration infiltration Basin combination um what are those water quality structures and can additional space be made in the parking lot and the sides of the parking lot and the median in the parking lot for something like biofiltration prior to water or or even infiltration prior to water getting into the larger basin so that the basing can potentially be reduced in size we can certainly look into that um the existing water quality structures we were looking at are you know it's sort of like a storm scepter system so a hydrodynamic separator um but we can definitely explore options of uh some biofiltration or some sort of uh you know filter strip along the edge of the parking as well thank you for the comment yeah I'd like to see I I like to see those Center medians between the parking stalls be utilized as a water quality uh post construction bmps and then roof drainage where does roof drainage go I'll show you so um roof dange is picked up from a numerous number of down spouts um and it's directed through um subsurface uh drainage piping either through the parking lot or directly out to the side to a flare Den section rip wrap apron into the basement itself so It ultimately makes its way over to the Basin um either you know directly through the Landscaping through um you know subsurface piping or uh connects to the larger uh system that goes to the parking lot uh but it skips the uh water quality structures obviously because there's no TSS coming off of roofs can that negligible out yeah can that you know kind of same comment can that be re can that be diverted elsewhere as far as you know not for water quality but necessarily but for quantity to encourage more infiltration we can we can explore that option oh and I I do want to note actually since you're mentioning it we are meeting the ms4 requirements for this site so we are getting the phosphorus and TSS removal um as part of this Basin um and it's also providing the pollinator habitats uh with the seed mix so you know this is a really great green infrastructure option that we had to explore here um with the groundwater being as deep as it is it you know we really think it's a nice addition for the site sorry you said the Basin is is being utilized in that way yep exactly yeah so the Basin is being used for phosphorus and um TSS uh treatment and it meets the ms4 uh numbers okay thank you yep [Music] Jason any other questions comments Bruce can you go back to slide two it's the overview um first slide it's the very first one in the set and then R yeah now show the whole thing not just the red part but show the whole slide okay so this is what Alex Wasing talking about because the community garden is up there in the upper Center and this is uh now I'm going to blank on the name of the but this is a conservation area and then my second part of it is it correct is I think we learned at the site visit the town will continue to own the land in both of these examples correct that that is correct there's a n year ground lace um for these parcels and then the structures will be built and you know owned by the developer um and then at the end of the 99 year ground leas obviously that'll be worked out but corrup land will Beed you're going back and forth between us and the zbaa to mesh This Together yep and we did receive that comment from Aon about um potentially providing a path for um the public to be able to access that uh Conservation area in the back um and the team is looking into that um to be be able to provide that Public Access because that could be a great educational area there sort of a road that runs along the green line there okay thank you thanks forus Dave oh yeah sorry haven't spoken in a while um yeah just wanted to follow up on the comments about the Community Gardens so this has all been part of the the the longer term plan the town owned the uh owned the E Street school and we strategically um my staff and I strategically bought these three lots um and um with a plan in mind that these would be adjacent to the Fort River Conservation Area and I.E the um Community Gardens as Alex noted um whether a trail is created directly from the the U the um complex or whether uh we can work on some Public Access down the existing way is something to be determined in in the future I will say that the back of this site on the conservation side is all Wetlands so it's certainly challenging from that perspective the other piece of this is that staff fully had in mind that um we would eventually connect the Fort River Farm Conservation Area and the gardens with the new Fort River School with a bridge over the fearing Brook to the North in this slide so this is all part of a about a 5-year plan to increase the number of affordable housing units while also providing access to conservation land Trails fishing hiking uh walking and of course Community Gardens so thanks Dave Jason um is the road work that is currently occurring in front of this project associated with this project or is that separate from this project it's separate um we're coordinating with the with Jason the town engineer um to you know work out utility stubs and curb Cuts but it's a separate project okay I could just add so so it is it's funded by cdbg the Community Development block brand funds and um those are the same funds that we're going to be using to do the stream restoration uh project that was mentioned earlier over on the E Street School site um but yeah the road work and sidewalk work is funded by cdbg and again was planned in part to serve the the wayfinders project that's before you tonight thanks Dar I was just gonna say that um walking the site there's sort of an existing natural opening between this property and um uh Fort River Farm so um yeah Dave if it's not appropriate to put a connection between the two I sort of my comment with that was you know I think there's going to be a beaten path created like a desire line created no matter what um with but with the Bas in there that they may want to plan to have like some sort of a walkway or something so that people aren't just like trudging through their Basin to get to it um it might be something to sort of just consider in the design that uh that there's this open access to a conservation land right behind this the property that people might naturally want to get to than SAR I was thinking the same thing that you could probably assume there' be some kind of a path forging by people so just to assume it and maybe direct them in some subtle ways um to keep them out of places you don't want them to go especially if there's going to be a bridge there later um but it's a nice connection and connectivity project so looks really awesome okay any other comments questions if there's public comment please raise your hand okay seeing none from anybody else um looking for a motion to continue this public hearing for D number 089 0740 to 925 2024 at 7:35 p.m moved second Alex on the motion Jason on the second Jason 9 Alex hi Andre hi Laura Bruce Bruce and Laura your mics are muted I'm an i for the record how about Alexa hi don't say her name she'll vote Laura okay I don't have Laura but uh I think we have um enough people on this one so we can move on all right thank you everybody have a good night thank you thank you thank you okay I'm just gonna announce that if there's any general public comment please raise your hand I'm going to keep an eye in the room I think we only have one more thing to get to and that's our uh last enforcement is that right is everybody okay so Aon and I talked about this I don't know who's had a chance to read the most recent Communications um BAS basically the status is there's been a seed mix a wetland uh Native Wetland seed mix that's coming up in sort of the sunny periphery of the the forest in the yard um so that's good and there's things coming up um in the woods um the land owner is concerned that the the planting plan that we um had talked about would be disruptive to the current uh growing natural infill of plants on the property and is sort of I guess pushing back on whether or not to do it so he has a point and and also just sort of the um disturbance of the soil back there um the seed mix that's coming up um some of it is um annual species it's generally associated with like the sunline um it's kind of hard to see what's further down the line but it it looks okay I mean there's like hay scented firm coming up um we had discussed that um maybe he could put in the rebar he's going to do the rebar caps we talked about so if you looked at the pictures there these bright orange caps so that there's you know taking care of the safety concern of having exposed rebar and then covering them with rocks and then maybe allowing for the natural succession to happen doing a site visit in in September and then at that point sort of assessing whether or not we still feel that he should move forward with replanting the Disturbed um buffer down to the river so that was what Erin and I discussed and I just wanted to get a read from Commissioners on that and and see if anybody also looked at at the pictures and I guess the one last thing I want to add is that in the pictures I was concerned that there might have been some invasive species popping up back there and some of them are Woody and I did maybe see some like Oak saplings and and that's just relevant because way back before many of you were on this commission the original um interactions we had was he wanted to clear this area for a view of the river so our conditions are that he can't cut or trim or anything right now but there are saplings coming up so it's just one thing to think about if there's big saplings coming up there might be um a desire to cut them back so I want to be realistic about what we're requiring what's happening and just what the commissioner's standpoint is on the plantings or not the plantings so with that I'll just open it up for comments go ahead Jason so can you clarify the the oak trees if there's saplings coming up that they may want to clear them in the future I'm not I'm not quite following what what that sorry I mean that's just totally uh subjective because okay so several permitting processes ago this site came to us because they wanted to clear under story and trees to have more of a view through the property and so they did that and then there was all of this disturbance and now there are small saplings coming up as you would expect in a disturbed area but they're tree saplings So eventually they're going to be bushy and obscure the view that they're they originally wanted to have maybe they don't care about that anymore I mean I'm just like throwing things out there I just want to consider what we're saying they can or can't do and being realistic about it it's all are we are we concerned that I mean they got they were able to that was the original thing right they wanted to clear a little bit they cleared way more than they were supposed to correct and now we have saplings coming in where they were I mean I'm not I'm not that I take the position that let the saplings grow um that's my position and as far as the planting of the planting plan um I'll defer to the two of you I think I would like to see the plantings plant it or maybe a reduced planting plan in areas that don't have U natives coming up now I would be in favor of that I don't want them to go and disturb anything if there's good stands of vegetation coming up I don't think they should be disturbed just to plant something but in areas where there's not good stands of vegetation I think they ought to continue with the planting plan yeah and and the plantings are shrub so that they have sort of a Max height limit which is also benefit official okay Alex can you remind me where their property boundary is I'm not quite sure if they own down to the brook um and without knowing where their boundary is I'm not quite sure what they could cut anyway so the um the top of the slope where the rebar is that's the 100 foot buffer boundary but they um and I I I can't tell you the exact measurement but they don't own all the way down to the stream I think there's approximately like 25 or 30 feet between the stream and their property line and that area where the stream is located is on um uh ammer Woods uh Association land yeah so on their site they leveled the back of the house and built a very large patio so visually they look over their lawn they'll see the shrubs that are planted near the edge of the lawn but they're not able to view down to the stream on an everyday basis they have to walk to the edge of their lawn to look down in there so as as Michelle said it may not be an issue to them anymore I don't know okay I I mean I guess I think one of our conditions is they don't cut anymore so we just need to reinforce that and you know maybe point out to them if they don't want to have saplings coming up putting in the shrubs would actually help prevent big succession from coming in but I think you know what you said Jason if there's already growth in there that's looking good there's no point in planting anything so that's why I was thinking we would just give it a little time and maybe take a visit at the end of the month at the end of September and um revisit what we think is appropriate for planting go ahead Bruce I agree with what you just said I just wanted to say I agreed with Jason you know my concern was if there's all this herbaceous vegetation native herbaceous vegetation coming in and we've got native Woody vegetation coming in that I wouldn't want us to prescribe that he go out there and have a bunch of people tromping around stepping on all of this vegetation that's established and Fin stabilization that's establishing to put in more and just in my experience with planting plants that you don't want to over plant because if you over plant then it starts to become like you know things are outc competed things start dying so I just think yeah giving it another month we've had a pretty good growing season um this this summer with all the rain um to let the let the seed come in and see what it looks like and if we do have bare spots we could you know have some replanting but the other piece I wanted to say is when we've reached a point where we think that they've achieved compliance we would issue them a letter that states you know you've we believe you've achieved substantial compliance with the enforcement order however in order to maintain that compliance this is a mitigation area this this is this is not even a buffer anymore it's a mitigation area Beyond those rebar markers is a disturb Zone into into the future this is a mitigation area you've established to compensate for a violation that you committed and there is no cutting back here there's no Landscaping back here there's no dumping back here be sent via certified mail and attached to their property file in the town so that if there was any activity like cutting of you know uh Oak saplings or or otherwise back there um you know they should know better okay so we maybe you could um just communicate that we'll entertain his um idea about letting things grow in and then revisit it later the season and I just think it absolutely needs a sight walk because it's really hard to tell from the pictures so if everyone's okay with that that will be what we convey all right um I see no public comment so with no further Ado I think we can close meeting tonight Bruce I just wanted to ask Aaron um as far as you know has the state or Mac or anybody else done say a study of things that like what you just described that were put in place 10 15 years ago and what is actually happened in the meantime to those mitigation areas in terms of their disturbance or living up to the letter of the letter that you gave or does anybody know what actually happens down the road what a great question Bruce something to look we can ask Mac to do it but anyway I have an anecdotal story um in my neighborhood there's a covenant on the Deeds when it was developed that you could only take down like 20% of the trees on a lot and the neighborhood is still very forested I think people like that but then septics started failing and trees had come down and it was sort of a slippery slope about Aesthetics and what was acceptable but there was like a big neighborhood Uprising in the 90s where they got lawyers and neighbors together to like fight these developers that were clearing Lots because it was against the Covenant on the deed but it was a new developer that bought it you know 25 years later and they didn't care and there was no teeth to it and so it just nothing happen so it's like sort of you know the intent is sort of there but um eventually people figure out that no one's gonna come after them or find them and they just do it anyway it's really challenging um you know Michelle and I had this conversation earlier you can't record an enforcement order because it encumbers a deed and tarnishes the title basically so it can cause the land owner to have basic legal recourse against the town or the Conservation Commission if that happens um you know really our our only um strength is in our orders of conditions which we can record and have ongoing um conditions in our in our certificates of compliance um and then you know there's conservation restrictions which are separate easement process but it's it's it's always been a a difficult um road too so to speak with like making sure that things are completed making sure things are maintained um and yeah I think it's a casee by case basis and how diligent and how much um like institutional memory an organization has to be able to like Trace back what those requirements were and it's challenging okay sorry to bring it up at the last but on appropriate no it would be a very interesting study if Mac want to do it the outcome okay thanks Bruce well looking for a motion to close a motion to adjourn second third Jason on the motion Andre and the second Alex hi Jason Hi Andre hi Bruce hi and I'm an i all right good night everyone night everyone