e e e e [Music] [Music] w [Music] oh [Music] [Music] [Music] all right good afternoon everyone this is a hearing of the chadam Conservation Commission being held on March 27th 2024 in accordance with the Massachusetts Wetlands protection act and the town of chadam wetlands protection bylaw and its regulations my name is Janet Williams and I serve as the chair today's hearing is being broadcast live on Channel 8 and is being recorded for the on demand archives available on the town's website it's being conducted in person by phone and by video conference so the agenda instructions on how to attend and copies of documents for review have been posted on the town's website so to all participants whether you're attending by phone or online please remain muted unless you have been recognized by the chair if you're attending by phone you can mute and unmute by using star 6 if you're online and you're not a commissioner we ask that you please keep your camera turned off and until you've been recognized and you can indicate that you wish to speak by using the raised hand feature when you've been recognized please remember to identify yourself for the record so that we have a record of the Quorum attending today I'll now ask each commissioner to indicate their presence Vice chair Karen Laton present Bob rolls present Mary Sullivan present you're muted but I saw your mouth move saying present Elise Elise Gordon present Cheryl m present Eric Hilbert present and we're thrilled to welcome back our newest associate member Bob Delio we have missed for these past couple of months it is wonderful to have you back with us thank you Janet thank you for nice to see all of you again just it's an understatement of the century to say we have missed you so we are very happy um so we have a full house we have a quorum um so before we begin the agenda um I'll ask Paul Whitman the our conservation agent if there are any requests for continuances today good afternoon Madam chair members of the commission yes there are uh two requests for continuances 28 cranberry Lane Richard and Jill tuer and 414 Hill Foxhill Road Christopher lroy I'll read the legal ad when we get down to it but okay uh all right yep that's fine so if you are here for 28 cranberry laner 414 Fox Hill Road they are not being heard today um and with that uh Paul we can start at the top of the agenda thank you madam chair top of the agenda the first order of business is the requested order of conditions 34 scattery Road 34 scattery residential trust map 16 I parcel 32-2 D number se10 3669 raise existing dwelling construct new dwelling outside jurisdiction with pool patio and Walls Within jur dition and modify existing Land Management plan that is the project Madam chair all right thank you so the draft um order of conditions uh has been available in the Dropbox for members to access and look at we did uh pick up some some uh minor changes and formatting changes uh yesterday um reposted it um and there's one outstanding issue and um that I'm glad you're here because you're the person who can answer it um oh so there's a finding on the um coverage changes um as a result of the project and um the number I had come up looking at your plan with u 1860 square feet but the coverage table in the noi has it at 2190 Square fet so I'm ass assuming that that coverage table was not updated when you did the the revision to the plan reducing the size of the patio and pool is that right let me double check on that and okay I can go through the others and welcome back Bob thank you that it's nice seeing you again too yeah 1860 is what I'm coming up with okay so can you can you please um fix the the coverage table in the noi it's not matching the figures on the approved plan and and send that to Paul so we had that for the record perfect we'll have that this afternoon okay um I can take that out so um 1865 I'll change that 1860 18 1860 is what I 1860 not the best of years but okay we'll take it for this um so um question I have for you Thad so since this is now going to incorporate and supersede the prior order of conditions 3576 um did are you going to uh submit a a request for a um certificate of compliance for that so we can close that order out we will but we want the Continuum so we didn't want to close it before this one was issued it's kind of a chicken and egg problem isn't it because we we're hesitant to issue one where there's an open order already on the property that is going to be absorbed into this plan but um Paul is that a problem from the process perspective if we go ahead and issue this order or should we vote on it and then hold issuance until we get the COC request and then we can issue all one time Paul do we need um is there is is there a um is there any urgency with this would it would it be cause a problem if we vote on it and approve the order of conditions today and then hold off on the formal issuance and sending it for recording until we have the the uh COC um how about just the request because we can have that in this afternoon yeah but we have to vote on we have to approve it it's kind of and that won't happen for until next week right I just don't I just don't know issuing this this actually isn't going to be issued by next week so um I mean I guess it could theoretically but it has to go to the to the recorder's office register well I think this is a little bit this is a little bit unusual the situation I think we could make an exception in this case and and go ahead and do it that way St gets this in for the next hearing we can vote on it okay okay then get that in and we'll we'll vote on that next week so there'll be as little overlap as possible um okay so then the the final revised plan that we're approving with this um suedes the old plan the old plan just goes away yes okay yes that is the because it incorporates it incorporates the planting that was approved under 3576 but hasn't been done yet and will now be done under the single order okay I got it um good to be okay questions comments questions comments down here anybody that do you have any questions or comments on it oh I think we were good with the order all right let's have a motion then to close and approve I move that we close the hearing and approve the order of conditions for 34 scattery Road Gordon second uh roll call vote Bob hi Elise I Karen I Eric Dane Cheryl I Mary I okay and I vote I and that is approved unanimously thank you very much all right Paul what's the next one next on the agenda Madam chair is U another request for an order conditions 127 Christopher Harding Lane Ralph Nixon map 12d parcel 3- L6 D number se10 3661 project is Redevelopment of the site all right thank you so we've also uh had this order drafted and um reviewed um by members we did run some of the changes there are a few more looks like somebody couldn't help herself and made a bunch of formatting changes um came to regret that um but uh are there any other questions comments issues around uh 127 Christopher Harding anything from your side Madam chair yes yeah Bill really yes I'm beh of uh the applicant the um we actually have two concerns one is uh you know it's uh you put in your standard order where no grubbing after April 1 they're in the middle of this project uh and and would like to get the work done but they if you only have four days to do it theoretically there a 10day appeal period so we like to uh have that order that aspect of the order go into effect uh on April 20th give time for the the U appeal to run out appeal period to run out and then to get the work done that would be one issue the next issue is uh something you and I discussed in previous matters where you have the standard language about no Coastal Engineering structures but we're not doing anything to expand the existing building and uh I don't think it's appropriate to have this sessions 11 and 12 of the uh specific conditions the general the general order yeah um in the general right right um you're right there's no project within 100 feet of the bank involved here okay the these are as usual attorney Riley I'll take it out right thank you very much of course okay uh anything else just to okay give us enough time to get the thing grubbed out so we can finish the project before the summer starts okay all right um anybody else all right I'm going to go ahead and accept all these changes and take a uh motion I move that we close the hearing and approve the order of conditions for 127 Chris for Harding Lane Gordon second roll call vote Bob I Elise I Karen I Eric again I was not here when this started all sustain okay Cheryl I Mary I and I vote I so that is uh 641 exstension so Madam chair so that's as amended by our request as amended yes as I just changed it here yep thank you very much you're good to go for your help thank you all right Paul where are we next M all right next on the agenda is a submitted extension request the uh addresses 0 and 17 Billings Road Infinity K LLC map 7A parcel 6- S8 and 5-57 the EP number SC10 3310 propos repair and modification of an existing bulkhead extension requested due to new property ownership currently working with new owner to finalize plans and will be filing an amendment following his extension being granted this is the second request for an extension and it will now run to 520 2025 if granted okay thank you you're welcome is there anyone here from Coastal oh yes hello hi good good afternoon Cole baitman from Tian Bond forly Coastal Engineering representing the applicant for his project here at 17 and Z Billings Road um yes this used to be the old Cordell Hall property it's a very uh distinguished property along this area town right next to uh Harding's Beach um there was the previous order to repair and uh uh sort of replace the flanking return walls of the bulkhead we're working with the current new owners to potentially expand on that scope and in order to bring um a proposed amendment to the commission we request this extension to the existing permit thank you well I have a question question so what work has been done on the property since the order was issued believe no work has done has been done okay because I found a request last year the at this time last year there was a request for an extension and it said the same thing uh extension is requested due to new property ownership currently working with new owners to develop and finalize plans and that eort that that effort of finalizing plans is still ongoing uh yeah a little outside of the scope of this proposal project was some D um uh involvement for the existing dwelling that we're working through now so that was part of the scope that we were originally working through as the um part of the last year extension request with this proposed work that we'll be coming hopefully with Amendment for the dwelling is going to be removed from that proposed scope and it's a much more streamline we believe it's a much more streamlined process for this uh proposed work so this past week I had essentially an approval from the owner to move forward with presenting an amendment the amended plan to the commission uh and we anticipate to do that within the next few days or week or so okay so we can expect an amendment request to come next I believe the process yeah exactly I believe the process we're anticipating is to do the informal meeting at one of the next two commission hearings I know there's one on the 10th probably won't meet that one potentially will make that one but maybe we'll be targeting the next one and then if the commission approves it as a potential Amendment we would be following up for the public notification process to attend the uh whatever meeting comes after that okay and so this is the second so you'll have one year um the amendment does not change the expiration date so you're still going to have two years from today before the uh permit expires to get the work done um I also noticed that um in the order of conditions um there's a natur n natural heritage uh letter from 2019 um authorizing the project but I I'm going to read with the order of conditions um says natural heritage asked upon any filing for a renewal extension Amendment certification of compliance um the applicant shall contact the division for a written response regarding impacts to Res resource area habitat for the state listed Wildlife so if you have not done so um I would urge you to get a hold of them and let them know what the status of it is and that you are you've gotten an extension and you're going to be getting an amendment and they may want to have another look at the uh Plover situation there okay very good and I imagine it's the same thing for uh DMF yep exactly thank you okay questions or comments anybody all right let's take a motion then I move that we approve a one-year extension for 0 and 17 Billings road to May 20th 2025 Gordon second roll call vote Bob Elise hi Karen hi Eric this is Da Cheryl I Mary I and I vote I so that's granted for one year and we'll see you back here soon for an amendment very soon thank you okay thank you all right Paul what's next next uh is a request for a determination of applicability the address is 560 orings Road 560 orings Road LLC Steven Goldstein map 13j parcel 7- G20 r- 24-6 project is peer repair you're muted there go ahead go ahead yep I'm sorry can you hear me now yep I can um Mr Gman is on the call as well uh but we're here hopefully for a simple request for determination um we were engaged this past late summer early fall to do a notice of intent to replace the dock in kind um unfortunately the doc um had a failure in one of the sections so we're trying to repair it repair that one section um get through the summer and then file a notice of intent for the replacement um the work is all by that will be done by hand will match the dimensional number of the of the joists and the decking um including size and spacing um but we're just trying to get through the summer we're not doing any work on the piles or posts um and the decking will be uh cut and maintained and and mobilized from the driveway of the main house uh I'd be happy to answer any questions all right thank you um so because I understand the the situation um there will be an noi coming for the full replacement uh it does have to be this part these two sections it's the last two sections correct the one that's sitting on mostly on the ground and the one closer to the water is also needs to be replaced right yeah we in talking with Beacon Marine who will be doing the work for Mr Ste um uh we they felt that we just really needed to correct the failed component and didn't need y just the one we didn't want to get into dealing with the posts and because those things sit in water actually in the creek bed so we'd rather just do the repair and then tackle everything at one time okay so um because this is an RDA we can't attach a bunch of conditions to it so I'm just going to say that we will be willing willing to issue a negative determination based on um the assertions that you are making that this is all going to be done by hand that it's going to match the existing um Timber it's going to be using the existing supports uh and uh there'll be no Machinery or other impact um to the marsh area for this um I will note that um in the letter uh conveying all of this there's you made the statement that the applicant is also seeking to reconstruct the seasonal float um I would hope that's not part of this because reconstructing floats um generally does bring with them a lot of conditions that are not appropriate for a uh an RDA um so is that not part of this you're just looking to do the repair of the pier uh we we were hoping to do the replacement float at the same time is it a new float and the float that was out there has fallen to disrepair and so we are reconstructing the float um in the you know approved license size I believe it's 9 by 10 um currently the float that's has been used um comprised of Timber and and styrofoam MH um the new dock would be um uh plastic tubing um tubs if you will no styrofoam um so it provides some float and um but it would match the same size as as it was uh currently being used in the years past and it's all being fabricated off site so what what is um what activity would be conducted on site to uh is it the same that would happen seasonally for any float is that I'm sorry to interrupt you yes yes exactly it would be floated up the creek um the two pip piles that are are lifestyle licensed and then as it has been in springtime uh for years would be floated and then set and then the ramp would be installed okay um questions I I don't I don't have any questions I think it is probably beneficial to to not stand in the way of replacing the styrofoam float if uh if possible yep and again um I agree because uh that's a better thing but um the same as before we'd be willing to give this a negative determination based on on the statements that you're making that there's no impact to this uh activity in the the resource area that's our intention go ahead Bob just one small thing um how will you dispose of the uh styrofoam um that's a great question I I properly I guess would be the answer I would give you but I would have to check with Beacon and make sure that it's properly disposed of beac marine excuse me okay um yeah we we can't attach any conditions to this but um yeah do we have any idea what properly means in Cas I don't know but properly is the right answer well if if you would like I can certainly provide um uh Paul a a letter uh once I have a chance to talk to Beacon as to where they'll be disposing of not only the lumber but the uh styrofoam yes that would be good thank you for yeah we can do that all right um okay any other questions comments if not we uh are ready for a negative -2 I move that we approve 560 Orleans Road for the request for determination of applicability with a Nega -2 determination Gordon second roll call vote Bob Elise hi Karen I Eric hi Cheryl hi Mary I and I vote I all right thank you Mr O'Reilly we look forward to getting that letter because we are now curious about how one properly disposes of Styrofoam I must be licensed facility next email is to be thank you thank you all right all right Paul what is next next on the agenda Madam chair is a request to discuss the Herring run maintenance um Mr Keon is here and I Brad is here as well um either online or downstairs there with you nope they are here in the room so uh I'm going to hand it over to them okay let me just read let me just read it it's 86 personal Drive town of chattam mass division of marine fisheries map 10j parcel 12-11 R 23-12 uh the erronous fish passage restoration project very good thank you Ted Kon Coast resource director and with me is Brad Chase from divisionary marine fisheries uh we came before you folks back in early fall uh at that time we were proposing two projects or one project and one sort of uh for the record if you will and the uh for the record was relative to establishing a protocol for our annual maintenance at the uh Riders Cove Herring run um we provided a draft at that time there were some minor uh questions and comments on that draft we've made those revisions the other project that we were referring to was also accomplished last fall was very successful with the crew from division marinees Fisheries to enhance our wear structures that are located in the streamed um and some stream bank erosion protection again that project went extremely well and the hearing run is up and running so far quite well um so we're back here now really just for some housekeeping we hope to put the uh memorandum relative to our annual maintenance you know in the file on the record with your endorsement for future work uh for our you know maintenance activities and I'm sure Brad can expand on what I've just introduced thank you I'd be happy to answer any questions um it's a fairly straightforward uh guidance document to allow the remove removal of natural debris jams tree Falls sand Shing that occur in these stre these fish runs that have been maintained really for Centuries by local uh folks um this allows it to be considered under the president Wetland protection act and as well as Conservation Commission so um fairly straightforward but be happy to answer any questions we don't have that document no well I'm looking under the address under filed under 86 yeah I'm not it's not in our drop box does anybody have a paper copy I do okay we we did provide it I I thought it had been disseminated sometimes things uh lose their way on their way to us um it's not all that unusual but I would just ask if you would please uh yeah double check and and resend and we will um at our convenience oh thank you this is all the detail okay great um yeah I can't look at it now but we will review it and um tell you what we'll we'll take a look at it and if we have questions or concerns we would ask uh schedule a date you can come back and answer any of those questions but without being able to look at it now we'd also like to see the video if that would be okay and just to clarify what that's in reference to we did uh just last week last Friday another round of our maintenance with the maricor group project as well as Brad showed up or Herring Warden um again it went very well the fact that we've been able to maintain the run over the last few years has really made these maintenance activities less involved if you will so by noon we were basically all done so we did come before the commission twice on this before Y and the second time there were two comments for edits um one was related to uh cutting trees caliper trees saying it's not allowed and I made both those edits so the version that you will see um has been reviewed twice and and it had the two edits made from the the August hearing so hopefully a fairly clean document so when I turned it over the first sentence it just jumped out at me is stream Bank growth and including small cow or trees has ecological value and will not be removed unless a condition impedes fish fish passage or exacerbates corrosion that was an edit to make it clear that you couldn't cut trees on the stream bank with this plan yep really looking to remove things that are in the way of passage in the channel I don't I don't anticipate that we'll have any any questions or issues so um did you see that because you were the one who had brought that up you don't need to react to it this second yeah no it just didn't get posted I just looked there and it's not we're all checking okay anyway thank you for doing that for listening and appreciate it and um good project thank you very much thank you okay all right Paul where do we go next oh wait uh next we move on to the uh decision on an independent Vernal pool consultant um I'll read the legal will add in full um the following APPL applicants have filed a notice of intent 240 and 438 George rer Road 1652 Main Street chattman municipal airport map 9f 240 10g 43881 1652 main parcel 0-2 240 18 K1 438 53276 1652 main D number se10 3 3 658 the proposed project includes vegetative management required to remove obstructions within navigable airspace in compliance with the Federal Aviation Administration FAA regulations uh U Madam chair you were going to narrow the next uh next I'll leave that to you I don't want to read them whatever order you want to take them and I think there were three that you wanted to focus on today uh performance standards and resource areas yeah yep okay y we have we have I think we have finished this will be the end of the discussion I hope this is the end of the discussion we're getting close to the end of it in general but um the first aspect will be to talk about the Vernal pool and bring that to some closure um at least temporarily and then um I'm going to give everybody an opportunity to ask any questions they have about the performance standards the variance requests and any proposed mitigation um do you have something that you would like to present um we Adrien dunk from GZA on behalf of the applicant um we did bring information about our proposed um mitigation specifically a more robust invasive species plan that I'd like to run through with the commission and um we I also put together some information from the generic environmental impact reports and the subsequent updates over time to those reports regarding impacts to Wildlife habit at from vegetation management um because I did hear last time from the Conservation Commission that the conversion of forest to Shrub was um there was some skepticism on the wildlife habitat value given that conversion and that is a fairly well documented um you know there's a lot of interest in that at airports so there's many years of studies on that so I did want to highlight the findings um other than that we are here to answer outstanding questions and we um understand that you have requested a third party review we have a few comments on the scope of that review that we would like to discuss with the commission okay that's fair um we did vote on that last time and since then um we did Issue uh a request to a couple of different firms to submit um proposals uh we have two that came in um and they're they're a little bit hard uh to to balance because one is from the the gentleman who is clearly the state leading expert on the Burnal pools the founder of the Burnal Pool Association etc etc so of course that got our attention um but the other is from also a very good um ecological consulting firm who has experience in assessing Burnal pools um and so uh we took another look at that um since yesterday um and we believe that either one um would be acceptable for the limited scope of this work this is not a full-blown peerreview this is um an onsite field assessment of the current status of this pool because it hasn't been assessed since 2006 I think and even then it's not clear to me that the certification how much of that rested on actual fieldwork versus paper but um no one's looked at it since then and um because there's only two vernal pools in chadam and we've not had any prior experience with either of them we don't feel comfortable um recommending or requiring any particular conditions in an order of conditions with respect to the Vernal pool without being very sure that that these are the measures that will do the most to protect um we know that vernal pools receed the highest level of protection from the state um as well as under the bylaw so we're just being extra cautious to make sure that the conditions are effective that they work to protect the pool that they're not going too far um but they're going at least far enough to make sure so um I don't know why I'm seeing me on this not what I'm going to um so we we absolutely respect the conservation commission's jurisdiction and ability to require that third party review um and we appreciate that it is specific to the Vernal pool area and not the VMP um globally uh we have some concerns that there's a request to look for rare species rare and threatened species um as none are mapped there and that we have Incorporated um best management practices actually that are typically required by natural heritage so we feel that we we are being protective um but but more importantly when coming before the Conservation Commission any Conservation Commission an applicant has a responsibility to review their property for priority habitat an estimated habitat for rare species and if there is that habitat and work is proposed there they must coordinate with natural heritage if there is not mapped habitat there there's not a requirement to survey for rare species and so here we have we have priority habitat mapped within the ponds we have coordinated with natural heritage um we do have a finding of no take and so it does seem precedent setting to request that an applicant go and look for rare species because that seems like all applicants then could be required to look for the presence of rare species when filing a notice of intent for any type of project I hear that but isn't it the case that that the concern is whether there are rare species there or not and if there are and we don't know about it it would seem to me that you would we would all be in everyone's best interest to have a a conclusive answer to that question but rare species could occur anywhere there could be box turtles in people's yards so but this is a certified Vernal pool which means that it's Happ it is occupied by facultative and obligate species which may or may not be rare by being certified we we're not disagreeing that there are animals using that pool and we are not disagreeing that we are following best management practices to protect those species so whether they're there or not wouldn't change you know the conditions in in our opinion because there already are standards from natural heritage that have been integrated into the development of this the plan before you so I'm looking at the one one that I think we're going to propose be hired and it says um they will provide an environmental analysis of the certified Vernal pool and identify all amphibian reptile invertebrates and plant species contained in the Vernal pool and surrounding Burnal pool buffer zone the fal report will include a narrative explanation of of the associates uh methods results impact analysis regulatory implications pH and figures it doesn't say they're looking for rare species they are looking to tell us what exists and what impact an we're looking for an impact analysis as well and you know because whatever we put into the order we want to make sure that we are protecting whatever's there but we you haven't presented saying to us this exists in the Vernal pool that you saw frogs or salamanders or whatever and so we need somebody to come and tell us you know advise us not tell us advise us and you know as to what we need to do to protect this area and that's why we're interested in hiring somebody and yes we do need they may be rare but it's looking for any anything not just rare and I couldn't find where you say what exists in that Vernal pool right we did not perform a Vernal pool study right because the species themselves that are in there the animals the organisms are not protected by the Wetland protection act or the bylaw The Habit habitat the habitat the habitat the ability the capacity of the habitat to provide wildlife and we want to make sure that that habitat is protected and so we need to know what habitats we're trying to protect uh whether it be frogs which would be different than salamanders and so I I respectfully disagree with your viewpoint on that we our opinion and our experience tells us that if it's frogs or if it's salamanders or if it's a combination of them they are protected by avoiding amphibian migration periods with a time of year restriction m M we are proposing to observe a time of year restriction that's a existing requirement of the drri MH um imposed by the Cape Cod Commission so that time of year restriction will be observed for this work even if nothing was seen there today right um so the exact species wouldn't impact that um other vegetation management plans um across the Commonwealth have had rare species have had rare amphibia had salamanders they've had rare turtles obviously reptiles um and they are protected in vernal pools are protected by phasing the tree removal around the Vernal pool which we have proposed to do so we understand there's significant interest and there's significant value in the Vernal pool I I have a question real quick our our contention is just that that we've taken protective measures and that knowing if it's well you say you say protective measures is phasing tree removal something that you would say constitutes a best practice that is a recommendation by natural heritage for work around vernal pools within rights of way and airports that contain rare species yes Eric go ahead well back on that subject I I'm interested I would be interested to see their what their advice is on the the shade impact on the Vernal pool exactly for what species are in the veral pool I mean this is not like any other veral pool you know you can't categorize this Vernal pool is Massachusetts it's chadam and you know that's what we're here for we're here to try to you know protect what natural resources we have so this is a protective measurement for our reputation we you know I think it's important B yeah we don't understand what you're saying taking best practices um into account on the other hand we don't really know what's there you're removing shade as was said um what what harm would there be to the interest of your project for us to take time to assess what's in the pool this is a one of two vernal pools if we were to receive a project affecting the other Vernal pool in shadon we would probably take the same measures so I don't see it as discriminatory in that regard the challenges to the project include um timeline we do appreciate that the conservation Comm Conservation Commission and your agent have acted expeditiously to obtain these um bids for the third party review um but increasing our timeline of review is um it it is jeopardizing existing um grants application deadlines are coming it's it's increasing you know it's it's really pinching our ability to get this work done this year get it funded by the funding agencies um as well as the you know the airport commission um as the applicant would be expending These funds to pay for this study um they may be needing to go you know up to the town manager to appropriate those funds so there's there's those um more administrative constraints on the project and then the other the other factor is just that I understand there's this is chadam and chadam is not the same as Pittsfield but there's been 30 years of study on this and we're leaning on that 30 years of accepted study to say what the best management practices are for this work that's well understood and so we believe we're incorporating protective measures and that if we find out that it's wood frog or if we find out that it's fairy shrimp that's not fundamentally going to change the work or change the protective measures right but it is going to increase the cost and timeline to the town to be able to pursue this safety work and protect pilots and protect the public around the airport it it it it shouldn't based on what you're saying it's not is and I agree that in in many ways it's not really relevant what species are actually in the Vernal pool because the standards for the protection of the habitat around the Vernal pool remain in place um and it's that that we are focused on I mean I think that we we we did say no one really knows what's in there um it may be that there aren't any I mean I don't we just don't know because it hasn't been assessed in 20 years um but I think that um with all due respect while we are working on developing an order of conditions this work would be ongoing it's not that we're going to stop the process and wait for this to happen and as I look at the Oxo proposal um work to begin within 10 days of of the town giving notice to proceed so this would be fairly fast-tracked um and as we said last time it's fortunate that this is the right time of year um so I don't I don't believe it would have any significant delay um it does have an extra cost but I don't think that given the amount um that that's all that significant um we are we are going with the lower priced um proposal um recognizing that um we don't need to spend more of the town's money than we absolutely have to to get an answer to our question which are really more about making sure that the measures that we approve or require are adequate for the purposes of protecting this habitat and we being the first time we're going through a Vernal pool um process in the application we just I think we want that extra layer of confidence that we know that this order of conditions will be doing what it needs to do at least that's my you I don't know anybody else have go ahead leise I understand both sides but I think we have an obligation to the town and to the taxpayers of the town and to the people who are passionate about conserving what we have and 10 days to 15 days of of work while we're going through the the process of the final order of conditions seems minimal to me and the cost in my opinion is also minimal I think I think we have an obligation okay thank you goad Cheryl and while I respect that your priority is um the pilots and their safety our priority actually is salamanders and their safety so that's where we're going to side on or at least I am because that is our priority um it is not my priority to serve the airport it's my priority to take care of the conservation of this town thank you I just want to add that after this review maybe they'll say that uh because we're throwing around topping the trees around the veral pool and maybe they might say well it's not necessary to top the trees so that might work in your favor all right well as I said we understand it's absolutely Ely your right to require this review and we appreciate being heard on the subject we do hear we hear your concerns we will do all we can to to make sure this doesn't have any uh really negative impact on the timing of your project it has a slight impact on the cost but again I don't think it's um significant in the larger scheme of the costs that this project is uh bringing to this town so with that anybody else has anything to say about that I think we're ready for a motion to uh Oxo I move that we approve the proposal for services from Oxo Associates Incorporated to uh evaluate the veral pool Gordon second roll call vote Bob Elise I Karen hi Eric I Cheryl hi Mary I and I vote I so that is unanimously approved um all right so so um do you want to um is is is the uh do you want to go through your presentation or can I just ask one question quick before we move on from that um would could you let us know what the cost of that would be just so that oh don't you have a copy of it no we did not receive copies of it ahead of time oh sorry um it's $3,900 yes Paul yeah uh well under the regulations they get notice after you make your decision um on they'll get the whole package um but that doesn't happen until you make your decision because we don't start throwing money around till you finally decide which one you're going to pick so we will get that I'll actually bring it downstairs before they leave okay you'll see you'll get he'll bring you the proposal it's a it's not a it's a firm cost proposal it's $3,900 great thank you so um sorry about that thought I guess that's right we didn't uh we don't share it until until we do it now that's fine okay um so long as you're we have an opportunity to address the make sure that everybody is clear and don't have lingering questions on performance standards or variances or mitigation um you can go ahead with whatever you have presentation great close caption at the bottom oh I don't know how to turn the yeah I don't know where's that coming from the Clos captioning from from their computer go my mistake it was PowerPoint can do that now I didn't know it's their new AI capacity I didn't know till this moment um great so we'll go through our mitigation discussion first I think that might you know that ties in with probably outstanding questions on the variance request um so we have discussed a little bit invasive species removal um we were asked to provide additional detail so I'd like to run through the elements of we we've prepared a draft invasive species control plan I'd like to run through those elements with you all today based on that feedback we'll finalize the written document and submit it to the commission okay um so it's organized into four elements the identification of Target invasive species the delineation of treatment areas establishment of treatment methods and schedule and then what the monitoring success standards and Reporting would be um so the target species we've observed invasive species kind of throughout the area at low levels um versus you know a single monotypic stand um and primarily The observed invasive species have been European Buckthorn Asiatic Bittersweet multiflor Rose Russian olive and maro's honeysuckle um it's possible that some other low density species are out there but some of our most pernicious species um the Japanese knotweed Barberry um they've not been directly observed by us to date we're proposing the one toone mitigation area because we've heard from the commission and heard at other hearings that the tree mitigation and the area of impact mitigation should be treated separately so we we had previously discussed maybe a larger invasive species management plan for some reduction of tree mitigation but my understanding is they need to be kept kind of separate Avenues so we are proposing to conduct invasive species treatment area uh treatment wherever vegetation management plan tree removal occurs so again that would be you know when for the approach surfaces before during and after that work and then the transition surfaces um sort of the invasive species plan would reset for those areas um independently we did review several methods um we had previously taken a more conservative approach of no herbicide and said just manual cutting and removal but based again on some of the conversations we've had with you we we've we are aware that herbicides other than glycos Spate are allowed so we are proposing a cut and dab method using tripier as the preferred herbicide um with limited foler spray from a backpack sprayer if warranted so that's if a monotypic stand is observed um then that method may be more appropriate in that limited area or on repeat treatments when it's ground cover um and a cut and dab would not be in any way efficient then that um targeted folar spraying may be used um the plan would require a Massachusetts Department of agricultural resources approved certified herbicide applicator to do the application Tri clapier was selected because it is on MD's sensitive materials list for use near Wetlands um and it would the work would be performed in accordance with those applicable regulations at 333 CMR 11.04 um and then we have a document and we'll be attaching it to this plan that's from natural heritage and it's for um vegetation Management in rights of way adjacent to vernal pools and those are right those are vernal pools in rights of way with rare species rare salamanders so we are proposing to follow those restrictions for the herbicide application those restrictions are closely tied with mdar requirements so it's a little bit um repetitive but but we have that um guidance from natural heritage and we want to follow it um we are proposing a treatment schedule which includes a pre- survey of the proposed cutting areas during the growing season to identify where those rare species are and their relative densities and where potential monocultures either maybe have developed from our last survey or are likely to develop um and then in the first year following cutting or potentially during the same time of as cutting based on the exact time of year the cuting is performed there would be an initial treatment um so that's to really keep the invasives knocked back and allow those native shrubs to grow in um with with as little invasive competition as as reasonable um and then for two additional years after the cutting so three years total there would be monitoring during the early growing season to see where invasive species are coming back and if treatment is needed the treatment would then be contracted with a certified herbicide applicator to perform it um during the growing season whether that's um more appropriate in the early mid or late growing season um based on the species needs to provide the monitoring success standards um we are proposing a standard of no net increase in invasive species cover from existing conditions today so we would be comparing each year back to our pre-s survey results um during the pre- survey uh study plots would be established so at least one stady plot per cutting area because we know some of our cutting areas are like 1, 1600 s ft one plot there multiple plots in larger cutting areas um and those plots will be Field located that first year um a stake will be put in so that they can be returned to and monitored on subsequent years with photos of the same locations um there will also be a meander survey throughout the um the cutting area to observe other invasive species we know from one one single point you can't see the whole thing so it'll be a combin combination of plots and Meander surveys um and then for reporting we would be committing to um submitting an annual report to the Conservation Commission by the end of each year that would include you know the the species locations percent cover and the photos as well as if treatment occurred where that occurred the aerial extent of that treatment and any other management methods that may have been used cutting and bagging to remove material aterial um and then a comparison to the previous survey so that you can see a um you know change over time so that is the invasive species management plan as I said we we're considering it a draft plan so that we can incorporate your feedback and before finalizing and submitting it in writing okay thank you very much for that let me um open it to questions from commission members I'll start down here with the lease I don't have any specific okay I don't have any specific questions the moment okay we'll come back if you do Bob thank you for this U this is more or less along the lines of what I was looking for so I'm very happy to see it I do I would like to have a little bit more details about how many survey plots there will be per area do you is there a standard the commission usually requires or we can make a we can make a go ahead and make one up and then we'll uh we'll react to but yeah obviously if they're too far apart then it has less value but the Meander survey would depending on how rigorous that was could serve to fill in the gaps as it were so yeah this is the sort of thing that I thought should have been in the application and I'm glad to see it great all right thank you on this side Cheryl I have a question I think it's just because I'm misunderstanding under your first thing that says compared to pre survey results no net increase in invasive species covers now does that mean that there won't be more invasive species on that plot as like pre- survey I think of as today correct and so it will never be worse than it is today but it won't be better than it is today it won't be worse than it is today um today it has pretty low density oh that's true right um so you know it's yeah today it's pretty low density we don't want it to be any worse than today we certainly you know would like it to be to be better than today um we are expecting you know a lot of this is about setting up the native Community for Success so keeping it low density so that that native Community can take off and be resilient okay yeah I'm just curious if there's some way we can say we want it to be better than it started instead of equal to when we started but I don't know how to say that without say having to count every single little invasive plant on the plot we're not doing that have to think about it thanks all right thank you there there is some guidance and in again from the the studies that have been performed at airports and based on those you know because there's always the chance of introduction of species and reintroduction of species from from birds and wind and animals and that that the eradication is not really a feasible goal and so exactly kind of maintaining if if there's low densities now maintaining low densities if there's High densities getting to a low density State um is what is a goal I have I do have one question CU you had listed earlier a lot of the things that are on that property excuse me and I have heard a couple landscapers here talk about they call it chadam Berry but I guess we call it porcelain Berry um is there porcelain Berry there because it just seems to run wild so I'm just curious it didn't you didn't have that I don't recall seeing it um during the preparation of the BMP someone other than than me did um a habitat you know did did review the conditions and and they did not identify that either it's certainly possible that it's out there and if it was observed Within These cutting areas it would be treated so if there's species other than those that are listed they would also be managed and that would be reported to the Conservation Commission you know hey we did see porcin Berry and this is what we did about or if we did see frag mighties this is what we did about it yeah I just know I I live kind of in that same general area and Porcelain Berry is taking over my property it's very aggressive it's very aggressive thank you I have a question um the um uh so let's look at the protocol here so you you plan on taking all the let if you take all the trees down in the winter right and then how long after that before you trample in there and and and swipe and and take care of the invasiv I mean the you know the it's a shock to the system as it is you're going to be taking a bunch of trees down it's a lot of work a lot of noise and then you're going to go back in there again when did you plan on going back in and when did you plan on having the trees removed what what is the timeline the intention is to have the tree so for vegetation management plans trees must be removed during Frozen dry or otherwise stable conditions now it's not frozen our plan is to remove the trees in early winter of 2025 January when it's hopefully Frozen and there's decreased and then when do you expect that the trees will be removed what month january2 and then after that when do you predict to be going in there and swiping and and cutting and re and and fooling around with the invasiv it would be during the growing season so April or May of 20125 and that's when that's that's the highlight of nesting right yep okay um I I think that after the trees are removed I I think we should revisit the site to see what the invasiv look like because you really can't get in there and you can't tell but you but you can once the trees are removed and I think that you know it's appropriate to to look at it then it I mean if the commission wants to look at it right after the trees are removed certainly we're not opposed to that but treatment can't occur then yeah because it wouldn't be effective the plants aren't bringing that material down to their Roots so treatment has to occur during the growing season to be effective is it like some of the I mean we know for some certain invasive species treatment is best done in the late summer early fall when when that process of pulling into the roots is underway is that generally true is that what you would anticipate it would be you'd start that treatment in the late summer early fall of 2025 the you know the Connecticut invasives program has pretty robust profiles for these species and the ones that we've identified um they didn't emphasize that late growing season I know that's particularly important for um not weed not weed yeah um but you don't we don't have that either we've not observed not weed on site my God okay but it's kind of a unique situation it's a Vernal pool um to be going in there in May at the highlight of the nesting season and and to be doing this then versus doing it at the end of the summer when all the everything is mature enough to get out of your way when people are in there doing their thing if we wait till the end of the growing season the concern is that the invasives have an opportunity to get a firm tow hold they've already had a firm Toe Hold I mean they're they're in low densities now so you know yes they are in there and they have a to hold but I I find it very unusual that more that that many more invasive species are going to rot in that period of time to the to the end of the summer versus the beginning no they love disturbance they love light they're you know that's a I know I keep telling you you know oh the GE says this is okay it says invasives are a big deal and you got to nip them in the butt and I personally think that after you take a bunch of trees down and it's such a talk to the area I don't see why you just can't wait till the end of the summer to do your first uh you know invasive act I I just don't personally see the difference I I think that that would be much less successful um to take the invasiv out around theal pool um the the natural heritage does say to don't be in there um between mid- March and late May so around the Vernal pool we would wait till after late may but we do do it in June then because it is important to not let controlling an invasive species once it has a a large stand a monotypic stand it has a lot of area it's very challenging you I really appreciate you it's very concerned about the invasive species around this Vernal pool I I I find it quite amazing I mean we're you know really are after taking the trees down for the airport but all of a sudden we're all concerned about the invasive species around the veral pool well this is part of the mitigation that's being proposed to try to balance and that but you know but doing that during the my opinion doing that during the highlight of the nesting season after the all the trees were taken down the winter before is pretty intrusive well can can I suggest then that we just will take the timing issue under advisement depending upon the particular species that we're talking about so that it the right time of treatment is matching the species um and take a look at the geir and natural heritage and others and see what the recommendations are for when this is done so that it doesn't to to Eric's good point cause even further trauma and damage to the system that is trying to recover from um what it's recovering from yeah because you might have to do a little bit more the next season you know because you did you waited a couple extra months so you might have to do a little more the following year than you had than necessary I don't our concern is it's not a little more it's a lot more and it's not from an effort point of view it's just from once it's out of control it's extremely challenging to bring it back into control and we understand there's a lot of sensitivity about repeated you know human entrance into that area which we are trying to minimize by by keeping at low density instead of letting it get out of control and then having to go out many times a season to bring it back into control we understand there sensitivities about herbicide use this minimizes herbicide use by keeping the populations down um and so I I hear you certainly you know it doesn't need to be April 15 the start of the growing season that we're out there it could be actually we're later than that usually here in on that's the regulatory start of the growing season it's not regulatory in chatam it's it's much later in chadam it's usually around May and well we can wait till you know early June but I think waiting till August or September really that would be a detriment to the native shrub population well this could be also a question we can ask the the Oxbow um you know the uh see what their opinion is on this Vernal pool okay thank you well yeah I am it is more than just the Vernal pool that we're concerned about though we're concerned about invasives resprouting throughout the project area and I it's my experience and I'm not a professional that the early as you say the earlier you catch it the easier it is to keep it under control so after after nesting sure good idea but fall seems to me uh too too late and especially when you said that you might have to use a spray to do it overs spray on the ground and you know there could be vertebraes on the ground and and and what have you I mean swiping you know I could see painting the stems and all that right but you know cut and dab is broadcast sprayer spraying herbicide on the ground you don't even know what's underneath right which is why we said that would be if there's a it's a monotypic stand so there's not other native vegetation growing in that area it's just one thing or when it's young sprouts and it's you know still is the it is the ground cover um then again that's where it would be from the sprayer versus the paint or the dab um but a sprayer you know we're not talking about from the back of a truck like spraying up back I've had I had a state license for many years yeah so it's we understand that that's why we would prefer yep to to get it you know get it as soon as possible get it when it can be cut and painted and then keep it knocked back I would expect that the uh the order of conditions will will Express the preference for cutting and swiping um and and require that in those situations that you've just described where the spraying is is appropriate that notice would be given to the agent who'd have an opportunity to look at the area before any spraying was done a process issue we the order can handle yes setting up a process for that yes go ahead Karen question um so all of this that you're proposing is within our Conservation Area correct yes so can you address what might be bordering the conservation area that might come back into our Conservation Area because if they're you know invasive right around no matter what you're doing they're going to creep back in so it excuse me it would be those same species um that that we identified because the though it's a resource area the aura um it is an Upland and so in the adjacent unregulated Uplands we would expect to find similar species and densities so how are you going to to protect this area that you're working in to remove invasives from the invasives that are right literally next door to it in those areas there are more um Avenues available to the airport to manage invasives including things such as mowing um or an annual brush hogging um for invasive species removal as well as herbicide application um but it would not require the same necessary um survey plots and monitoring over time with reporting okay so invasive species removal is a mandatory part of the vegetation management plan in all cut areas not just jurisdictional ones however the more specific plan that's more targeted right um is is within the jurisdiction are I get that I just am concerned about an effort being put to take care of our area that we have jurisdiction and it's right there next door I mean you know we usually will say to any property owner how are you going to keep that invasive that's right there you know next to you out of it and you know mow strips things like that but I don't see how you can mow in the middle of a woods but um and how long do you plan to continue this invasive management we're proposing to continue it for three growing Seasons post cutting provided we're meeting the performance the the the success standards um if there were increasing invasive species we would continue to coordinate with this body and continue the management efforts until those success standards are met because we usually require it to be continued for forever that's why I'm asking and you know there's a limited to your project and so I'm concerned that once you all walk away things start to come back um yeah let me just pile on on that so when invasive um species management and removal is part of the mitigation that is offered and particularly where it is adjacent to an area that has existing invasive ve vegetation the um obligation and responsibility to manage it in the resource area including the buffer zones is Perpetual it's a continuing condition so um we now we require that in all of our orders of condition so um your monitoring and the locations of the plot plans would make sense to do some at least near to the where the up is the unregulated area so that you can see where it's beginning to come in and take action um but that kind of um and I understand that those areas would be subject to the airport management of Mowing and other actions that would um at least try to keep any invasives under control and from entering into this area but it is a it is a generally a Perpetual condition to keep the mitigation area as free from bases as is feasible okay we um I and we may depending on how the timing of this works you know three years if it goes to extension for another two or three years post that we would carry that forward um specifically and if it needs to be tailored we can do that um for those subsequent periods okay you have a question I have a maybe a counterveiling perspective on that normally we require that we should check our RS uh because that's normally for mitigation areas right which this technically isn't or restoration areas which this technically might not be considered so we have to be sure that we are applying the regulations equitably in this case this is being offered as invasive removal for a period of time we have to be sure that we would be able to require that beyond that good point Bob I just have a quick quick note um did you talk about any talk anything about disposal I know I'm all about Disposal today but that's good um what about the what about the uh invasives that are cut what happens to all that debris they would be cut bagged and removed from the site they wouldn't be left to drop their seeds is that in here is that in this I appreciate you bringing it up um it will certainly be in the written document you receive okay thank you but that that removed from the site um needs to also require disposal at a licensed facility for invasive vegetation not at the town dump oh of course yes yep removal and proper disposal yes okay anything else on the mitigation I mean on the uh yeah invasive okay thank you thank you that's all very very helpful um information where do you go next sorry I go ahead make your note I don't want to forget I don't want you tell me in two weeks that Adrian we spoke we spoke about this um all right so the next up is mitigation for the tree removal um there has been some interes in tree topping specifically around the Vernal pool that tree topping is very not preferred um at airports it's not preferred by this airport but it's also discouraged by mass do and there's two primary reasons for that one is it gets to to that maximum allowable height it's right there at that maximum allowable height if it continues to grow up it requires repeat treatments repeat cutting to keep it within that safety zone so it increases trespass into the Wetland it increases Management in those ways if the tree dies it creates really great nesting habitat for larger Birds such as woodpeckers uh Raptors and that's a wildlife Hazard at the airport so the airport has as required it has a wildlife Hazard mitigation assessment and it's taken steps such as removing the lobster trap storage area to decrease the risk of plain Wildlife conflicts and creating habitat for large birds at the end of the runway increases those risks um so so we strongly don't prefer tree topping um however we have we do understand there is goad we move into the en Luffy I want to offer the opportunity for people to ask questions about this because we we've been talking around this issue for a while um and I guess I'll just start and say I hear your point about if it's cut just to the bottom of the of the maximum allowable in that obstruction Zone than what you say makes sense um but depending on the growth rate I would think that it would be feasible and where I've seen it referenced in other orders at other airports it's been cut below that so that there is some time frame that it will be growing before it reaches that back again whether that you know depending upon the rate of the growth of the species that that can kind of be managed but I guess I wonder um and again I guess this going to depend on what um the Vernal pool consultant comes back with that um given and we talked about this a little bit before given the slope of the of the topography as it slopes downward to the Vernal pool which is you know to be honest in a hole in the bottom you know how and those trees I would think we should be able to be trimmed and kept they're lower than any of the other surrounding trees just by nature of the topography the topographic range of the area that is it possible to keep them at least surrounding that area at a level where they can survive and provide shade for the pool um and still avoid the obstruction zone so I'm just checking the maximum allowable height um that's drawn in there and right around the edge of the Vernal pool the maximum allowable height is 20 ft tall so they would have to be cut well below 20 ft to be below that maximum allowable height for a sustained period of time the shrubs that are in there are likely to grow to 12 to 15t tall 20 feet right around in the in the buffer zone to the pool yes okay um let me open it up the question on not topping I'm word parsing today and it's not against you it's against nature likely to grow to 15 12 to 15 feet tall when a tree already could be there with foliage and over story I think of shrubs as under story I don't know if I'm using the right words Eric but a blueberry bush is never going to give as much shade as pick a tree and I just o an oak but my yard is filled with them so I likely to grow doesn't give me Comfort when you're taking away a tree it just doesn't I I I don't know how to resolve that in my brain I'd rather see a tree topped to 15 10 even 10 feet of a tree most likely and I'm using that word because the cre tree tree could die when you top it um would provide more shade so that the conundrum for me is we're we're bucking against what nature is going to do yeah usually an oak can handle it it's also not a question it's not just the shading too it's the habitat that the canopy trees are providing corre if you take them down completely that's completely lost now I understand that from the airport's perspective that's a better thing because you don't have nesting going on in the canopy um with potential uh conflicts with birds but um um it's that's that I believe is why we came around to despite despite our prohibition on topping which to be fair we we we did because the only instances we ever saw it happening were for revew purposes so it didn't occur to us at some point we might take a different view and say from an ecological protetive standpoint it might be preferable to removing but um does anybody have other comments or questions about whether go ahead Bob I just want to for the record I was never on board with the tree topping so okay at least one of us here is not not a fan of it I we don't we don't want that for any other project in this particular case for these reasons and and just for the health of the tree I I don't think it's we always want to replace trees where they must be removed with lower growing habitat which would be the ideal case here correct um but just letting whatever's there grow up without filling in gaps with additional low growing Shrubbery would not be the right way to go either we I think we would want to make sure we're filling in gaps with Native shrubs in this area when the trees are if the trees are when and if the trees are removed so anyway I just have a different perspective on tree topping I just want to make sure it wasn't you on the record it's not that all this are we're necessarily unanimous this is because we've never dealt with this before to to what Bob just said if we do go with shrubs and replacing I hope that they're planted fairly mature bigger bucket shrubs rather than SE talking about planting I know you're talking about seeding and and things like that well that's going to take a lot of years well I I do think this has been something that's been bothering a lot of us um I mean I hear you that that when the canopy is removed the the excess light will encourage the growth in the in the Shrubbery level and that's fine in the under story um but I do think that we would want to put something in the order of conditions that would require monitoring of um the regrowth that's happening and um if at the end of say the second growing season when there's not adequate um expansion of the shrubs that we know were damaged probably as a you know during the course of the project um that there would be a an affirmative obligation to to start doing to do some planting to fill in those gaps because we know if gaps are there and nothing is planted we know what what's going to move in right so it's part of your the monitoring effort is that that one of the weapons to to use is the planting of some of natives where there is a bare area so I yes let the invasive species or the the mitigation we're talking about today is in addition to mitigation we've already committed to in writing which does involve monitoring in the growing season after cutting to identify if or where areas of poor regrowth are occurring okay we had proposed seeding in those areas um but certainly if there are bare areas we could plant a more mature shrub there instead um so that that monitoring for regrowth and cover um should have had its own slide in this deck but I was only thinking about um you know additional material yep okay uh over here yeah I think it would be pretty hard to plant anything in there because how you going to get water to it run a hose from the airport I mean it's Ian it's public an responsibility to ensure the success of those plants so if they have to go out with buckets and water them then they have to go out with buckets and water them I mean that's that's one of those things that's our our problem to meet the success standard yeah it's probably just I would imagine that that the the undercover will grow eventually um to to fill in if you do not uh top the trees on its own without planting I would imagine that's been the observation is that the shrub the shrubs grow very vigorously and actually studies at other airports have found that they outc compete and kill planted shrubs the existing natives so that's why we don't want to like hop right in there with planting shrubs we want to wait and see and certainly if there's an area that's struggling adaptively manage that area but we don't want to proactively plant a 100 shrubs so that they can be killed by existing natives got it and just from the opposite right we we hear that but in the case that it's not happening naturally action will be taken in coordination with this body okay anybody else I will say this time I last time I was for the Salam Anders this time I'm for the Raptors so I do appreciate that you're looking out for the Raptors we really don't want to we don't want to encourage them to live in danger so but having been on an airplane that ingested a bird at Providence Airport yeah I don't want a small plane to see that happen so it's it's a bad thing okay okay I think that's it for this okay great so then inlu Fe we had discussed that that has been um performed elsewhere in town where a um a tree based fee can be provided to um either the Conservation Commission for use on conservation lands or to a nonprofit um to perform conservation work and or treat planting um and that this was maybe done with some pump stations in town no I'm seeing a head shaking now it was discussed but I don't uh no actually and I'm in the process of compiling what the Town O's we have said in past in our orders that um they will plant do mitigations which are plants equaling however many square feet they owe us um some place on Town property and it would meet with the approval of our agent we have not that I'm aware of to this day taking money in lie of you know um planting someplace from the town that is different than other conversations I have had which led us to believe donations could be made to such as the um you know the chattam Land Conservancy um for this mitigation since I don't think we're saying it couldn't are we well you can donate to 3900 for Oxbo no um one opport the the town's going to be voting in two months or so a town meeting on a on a bylaw to create um a tree protection bylaw that gives new powers to the tree Warden including establishment of a fund that is used for tree planting so there will be a fund set up we've not done it before because it doesn't yet exist but that's a possibility that we could um that the money could be paid into that fund to support the planting of trees I don't know would would there be but any any reason that money could not go to third party like local conservation organization is there's no regulation to prevent it I don't I I you're out of my area of Municipal law expertise about whether the the town can can PR can send money to a a private nonprofit I don't know you know we're not beholden to it being a nonprofit if there is This Town Fund that you know is acceptable to the airport um we just want to it have to discuss it with the airport commission um but the airport commission is conceptually on board with this as are the funding agencies when you say conceptually on board um I mean you're talking about taking out a lot of trees and it's a large area larger square feet than most of the projects that come before us um I'm concerned if it were fee based the cost would be something that they are not on board with so has this it all been discussed with them yet the fact of doing it has been discussed some potential ballparks have been discussed we were under the impression that a previous agreement existed and so we were hoping to see what the commission had previously agreed to um to help us you know hone in that number it sounds like that's not I don't have accurate information on that front um um so certainly we want to work with you to to to get to what that number is and we're not I think and maybe I'm misspeaking but I think in the past when we've mentioned a fee it's more been not Town property owing us mitigation for a project like a pumping station it's more of a piece of property that absolutely can't put in the medication required based off of what they're doing and the Topography of of what they already have and so we have at times and never that I'm aware of nailed down how that would work said that we it would be good to allow them to put pay into a fund that the town could then use for projects elsewhere but I'm not aware of that I can remember and my memory is not perfect so um where anybody's actually chosen to do that so we don't have a fee B what I'm there's not a set number I'm not aware of a fee basis that we come up with to figure this out right I perhaps the best way to proceed is just let's we'll hear your offer and then we'll go from there would you prefer an area based or a tree based offer well we don't know the number of trees do we the number of trees we you know have an environmental monitor on site during cutting oh after the fact we'll know how many trees and so during that time any trees over 3in dbh would be recorded as to their um their dbh or their you know kind of Bend dbh of you know your typical ranges 3 to 16 16 to 24 24 plus and species so there would be a full log you know that's that's what we're proposing because as we've discussed we can't flag each tree now however we do know it's important to you to have an accounting of the trees removed and so that accounting would occur during the cutting and the fee you know will well to me the the big impact of the project is tree focused so yeah to my mind if we start with some sort of compensation or a tree is removed that's easier to deal with great so like Emory Pond and the cranberry bog area it's a lot easier to identify I think at least I thought when we were out there what trees would need to be removed I mean could we do sort of a hybrid and say maybe mitigation physical mitigation could be done in that area versus the Vernal pool you know depending on how thickly wooded some area is I think some areas could benefit from some actual physical mitigation where other areas it's a lot harder like the Verna pool um I guess I'm not sure what mitigate like do you mean doing additional plantings in the around Emory Pond and the Cranberry Bogs as medication I know that at one point you said any proposed plantings would be at least 75% native so at some point you were trying to address the fact that that there might be the need for planting so really that's what I'm talking about is yeah that reference for planting was we were using that in reference to um the Adaptive management of bare areas so if we were planting shrubs Andor seeding um we would do that in terms so the easement for the air that property around the cranberry bog and Emy Pond is not the airport's property right they have an easement to it and certainly they are allowed to take safety actions on it would have to work with the homeowner if the homeowner wanted those areas naturalized right um so we could ask the homeowner that um but that's the final decision on that ultimately not up to us oh no I get that I'm just saying that potentially there could be a hybrid solution to this if the homeowner said yes I'd rather not have it be Barren and you know have something put in in its place that could be part of your mitigation um and then we would I'm not fundamentally opposed to this we can run this down um would the commission then accept shrubs instead of trees because the bylaw does say tree replacement I understand the intention is biomass replacement um so then would the exception be made to allow for shrubs in Li of tree planting so that we don't have future we're not the future cutting down and then replacing mitigation plants I I don't know well we we've done it before yeah yes but but it isn't been it hasn't been traditionally been a shrub for a tree no so that's that's the rub there right I mean and then there's also there's existing shrubs in those areas so um but but we have we have done it we have done it and are there not um understory trees that don't grow Beyond it won't make it into the obstruction Zone that could be considered there are some understory trees that would not grow again planting in these areas has proven to be a highly competitive environment so it's we we're not suggesting planting you know low growing trees so that and to Eric's point if you can't if you can't irrigate them in the first couple growing Seasons you've got some risk nonability kind of the constraint there we don't want to be mowing down spice bush to plant a flowering dogwood or something you know that so okay point taken okay Jan I have a yep go ahead question um ordinarily you know people get paid to determine the value of a tree uh like an arborist and so forth and they have um calculators that they use to determine the value of a tree if an arborist went out there looked at the trees or looked at a tree uh an average Tree in that area and determine the value uh would that be something that you would consider yes I mean well we can we can consider that I don't know the value in terms of board feed of these types of trees um that are out there we we could consider that to base the fee the in fee on that the value the commercial value of the trees um if that's what the commission elected would that work Bob on even some of the these smaller dbh trees well would the minimum would be what three 3 in the boss that's three Ines as a tree 3 in dphh y yeah I mean every every tree has a uh price you know I'd be interested in that because that would I think that the that the to the extent we're willing to consider a fee and I'm I'm still a little bit troubled by some of the aspects of it and how that works but still if we can get past that um I think doing it by number of trees rather than area is preferable um it's more precise it it's a it's a better match to the yeah that's us well like I said we we plan on having someone out there anyway and recording what's coming down so that can be translated and then Bob so they're not in the field but based on the inventory that the Observer compiles would that an arborist still be able to reach them that conclusion if you have a a a predetermined inventory of on the ones you you're going to remove they know um we don't have a predetermined inventory we would have a during and post determined inventory it's post inventory unfortunately be hard to do um I have a quick question also um we haven't got to the point how the trees are being taken down yet right they went through a presentation of all the different options we haven't made a choice okay thank you we can determine that they said yeah okay anything else anybody okay so how would the commission like to move forward in this vein reluctantly but on the on on which aspect this particular one or I guess both the um confirming the legal process um if it's you know the receiving entity of those funds so you're talking about the inl feas in because it seems like there's still a lot of process questions yeah I think we we need to ask Town Council about how how that works yeah and um we will do that and find out um and we don't need to wait for a hearing we can let you know what advice we are given and then it goes to you to start thinking about the uh the what the offer would be okay and does if it's would the commission like us to review in place mitigation around Emory Pond and contact that homeowner to see if additional plantings in that lawn area would be acceptable to him yes yeah I think with the revisal they have you mared they would need to be native plants yeah and have you marked not those trees yet no no are I know when we were in the field we said certain trees like yes this area could be marked this area couldn't um I was not under the impression that that was um requirement of closing I thought it was going to be all counting and accounting for the trees during The Cutting versus some pre- accounting and some might help the that homeowner to know which trees are being removed might be more amenable to the process if he knew how much was going yeah cuz that's the area where the height is quite the right there's a there's a fair number of those trees that won't be coming and he doesn't have any sense of of what that is we can measure the trees in the lawn area near Emory Pond yes and we could measure the trees along the driveway probably not the interior trees anything that can be measured I think would be a huge help and it gives us a better idea of what's going on over there too okay okay thank you okay writing okay okay um so the next slides I have are about wildlife habitat and conversion of Woodland to shrand because I do know that's a a very certainly very important yep um so this discussion is based on on the 1993 final generic environmental impact for vegetation removal in Wetlands at public use airports um this was a multi-year document to promote but was finalized in 1993 it's about seven inches of paper um the in 1999 um it was required for a generic environmental impact report update SL expanded generic environmental notification form and um similarly an update and expansion was required in 2006 these requirements were all preset by the prior approved document so that as projects were implemented the record was updated with outcomes um so they do recommend measuring the area of the removal so that's why we did do it that way that the total canopy area to be removed um but we do understand that the emphasis here is on pery so that's why we're doing the combo method of we submitted the areas and we'll count the trees um the 1993 geir regarding impacts on wildlife habitat were primarily based on literature reviews um peer reviewed published literature that was largely from various forestry and other cutting projects and so it did find a variety of outcomes you know some animal populate these in italics are quoted from the document some animal populations increased um in foraging and habitation of clearcut areas While others decreased um thinning in the Southeast increased bird diversity um similar in um the Northeast they had greater number in diversity of song birds bird density reduced in the southwest and um it had no effect on gray squirrels so at the time in 1993 the literature said it it seems like it's mixed some animals um the habitat improves and some it does not approve but it it provided some best management plans um for these projects to move forward in 1993 when that document was prepared it was updated this discussion of wildlife habitat based on the completed removal of 4983 Acres of vegetated wetland and bordering land subject to flooding clearing at airports um and so it concluded that you know obviously there's a result of loss of mature trees at airports um that's you know very very blatant um it also concluded that it it would be unproductive to attempt to replant the cut areas for those same reasons we've been discussing about creating future challenges and future safety concerns it did find that in Cut areas the resprout was vigorous that it outcompeted plantings which is why we've been um not not keen to be doing proactive plantings um it also found that the shorter trees that remained below the maximum allowable Heights the shrubs and the herbaceous cover that was there and expanded following cutting provided equal levels of soil stabilization water quality protection and improved air quality compared to mature trees um it also found that if there were existing trees providing specific wildlife habitat such as a Raptor or a dening tree that needed specific review but that otherwise it concluded the habitat value of younger early successional forests and grasslands could outweigh the value of mature trees due to the fact that younger trees um which usually exhibit more diversity than mature forests and grasslands which are disappearing throughout the Northeast are temporary landscape features and they're home to a large diversity of species including rare species and it in the final sentence of the section said therefore in many cases important wildlife habitat can be improved by vegetation management at airports in 2006 um the VMP the the geir was again updated this time based on the completion of 567 Acres of VMP work um in Massachusetts including a specific Ally commissioned study of 5 years of monitoring at 10 airports to assess impacts to Wetland interests including wildlife habitat and so these studies did find that high nesting songbirds were less likely to inhabit the area that habitat generalists continued to use the habitat um although they did sometimes transition to a different phase of their lifetime maybe um it specifically calls out red tail hawks maybe be used to Nest but now they forage very effectively in that area um so it concluded that there was a combination of winners and losers but no Universal loss or degradation of the habitat um and then similar to the last one it discussed about the um early successional state of shrub and that's an important habitat that is um unique on the landscape as as we have largely developed an urban areas and then very critically have protected forests we sometimes lose this in between shrub land state stage and grassland stage um and so that airports can actually uniquely provide this metastable habitat um and it concluded that wildli diversity can benefit um Again by providing these varied habitats it did discuss um BMP activities proposed near veral pools um and within priority and estimated habitats sometimes those overla sometimes they did not but it found that the VMP activities did not adversely affect wildlife habitat when they Incorporated protective measures including time of year restrictions for cutting along amphibian routes and phase tree removal around vernal pools um so this is the the you know available literature to date and this is why we this is what's formed our position um and here in chadam you know we we've prepared our impacts base on that aerial extent of canopy removal and we will complement it with an inventory of trees to be removed we are proposing to allow the vegetation to regrow and monitor it treat invasives so that we can have a natural Community if there are bare spots adaptively manage those um we are including a time of year restriction for work around the Vernal pool from mid-march to early May um and we are proposing phase tree removal around the Vernal pool so I just wanted to highlight that because it's a lot it's a lot to go through through um I wanted we we have given that a a quick try and and you know you're right about the seven inches and uh went through it online a little bit but um these are important facts that are that you are not asking us to believe you this is from the geir I mean no offense but no no no that's not about my opinion right right so these these important these will become findings that we will need to uh consider making um because they are established facts yes I just have a a yeah not I'm not going to discuss the whether I believe or don't believe in the in the results of this um even though it's a lot of evidence the are just remind me are any of the areas that are within our jurisdiction going to be mowed periodically okay no no mowing in your jurisdiction okay thanks no no because that would you know that'd be a different story right yeah yeah yeah no no no no okay um is that the end of your that's it for me I do have the um the guidance document to conservation commissions that I'd be happy to give you an hard copy if that's help anybody would like yeah we have it electronically but some some of us yeah I just have one copy with me now but um I know I'm a like a tab or highlighter yeah highlighter and and Pen in Hand when reading um I'll get Crystal to make poppies and have them disperse them thank you to everybody cuz this is actually a pretty important yeah I don't know where it ended up last time I didn't take it I I didn't it yeah I don't think I did either but anyway Crystal can make copies yeah it's in we we have digital copies of it but um for as we're as we're getting to the point of drafting um findings com there I have a question Jan um is there any is there going to be any uh demarcation or any signage around the Vernal pool after the trees are removed so that people don't intrude into that area considering it's in in close proximity to the airport we have not included that in our proposal however we certainly would if that's desired yep we can add that I think that's that's a great point and it's important because of the location of the bike path we of include sensitive T you know no trespass no dogs even um even like a short post and rail fence or something like that I don't know if that's that's going overboard but maybe in certain areas there is a section of fence the whole thing's not fenced but there is a short section of um split rail fence along part of the bike path on the curve yeah what even and maybe some some sections on the opposite side uh maybe of where the trees are going to be removed or the opposite side is right up against the airport fence so there's okay not there's not walking trails through there or anything but certainly along the bike path Edge on the airport would have no no problem putting up sensitive area signs okay great thank you other questions comments um I do want to come back to address an issue that um oh my God we we we did beat to death last time um but I think that we've arrived at um uh at least sufficient documentary evidence to convince us about the the appropriate size of the approach zones on either end and whether and whether the airport is currently using an instrument um approach Zone which is the larger one or just the visual circling approach um and what we came to is I'm going to try share this I think that's it yeah is the um I think I can't share if you uh do I need to stop I don't I don't I'm not okay sure how to do that that's all right you're you're out I'm gon to see if I there got it so this is the um the Airport layout plan 2020 this was specifically approved by the FAA and the FAA approval letter was put on my town go um along with this plan and is in the Dropbox for anyone who wants to see it um and as you can see um there are there are various iterations um for different reasons and actually I would call everyone's attention to this is all about the obstruction removal this point of it and you can see the diagram is indicating why so many trees going to have to go because of the way that the obstruction Zone cuts down across all of them but the interesting fact that I noted was um let's see if I can zoom in no more more there at the end of the runway this this approach plan um is well I don't know why but it has a a demarcation here of 500 feet from here to here it's somewhat less than that um which leads me to think that it's probably about 400 to 450 is and that's true on both sides the 500 foot is extends Beyond just a little bit um so this is clearly uh the approved approach plan that the FAA has approved um and um I think from our perspective at least from mine and I would invite people to chime in it it settles the the issue of what is the approved approach Zone um and I believe that there's another there's more of these here's another one the runway Center Line plan view also shows the same at 500 feet on either end um and at some point in this place there's this um packet there's also a table that indicates Runway width and approach Zone width which is listed at 450 ft so um it seems that that's what the FAA approved um and that's what the uh the plan calls for so um does anybody want to discuss that any further I think just it is what it is is well yeah it's something that we that Janet found I wish I wish we had seen it earlier for some reason it didn't come to our attention um um where so as a follow-up question to this are you aware of any other approvals were any other approvals needed for this approach besides that from FAA in other words state county do certified this is the correct surface as well okay in a letter all right but were any other approvals to your knowledge required aside from these that you have for the size of the approach surface right different branches of the FAA but yeah generally the FAA and essentially the FAA it's yeah it's okay all right thanks yeah okay so [Music] um is there anybody uh online or in the audience would you like to come up and make a comment or ask a question yes yes you may but you need to come up here and identify and do the whole rigoll and identify yourself and or you can sit there it's your choice press yes well you have to press the little button to make turn the green light on took me a while to learn that it's my name is jurus suon I live in chadam I have a question based upon that chart on the right side all those trees exceed the um Glide slope path since you are against um top cutting the trees chopping it you would then because all those trees um have extended through the Glide slope those trees would be clearcut is that my understanding and within within the protected resource areas they would be cut and left left flush cut in outside of our resources areas they would be cut and the stumps ground out okay my question is what is [Music] the the um space required from the uh plane coming into the Glide slope that a tree can exist without it being cut down because the the plane AR would not want to fly over um 10 ft on top of a tree the so there has to be a a maximum safe Zone that um any obstacle could exist Tree House telephone pole Etc so on that picture yes so would all those trees be then clearcut there's the Glide path surface and then there's a 10t gap and so there's a parallel surface underneath it and that parallel surface is the max maximum allowable height so you're saying that plane can fly within 10 ft of a obstacle yes so if there's a telephone pole he can fly within 10 ft of that telephone pole no I don't think any pilot sorry hunt or if there's a house with a chimney this is the the maximum allowable height is 10 ft below the surface so that's the height that dictates what needs I can't speak that question I don't think any pilot would fly within 10 ft of any obstacle you're absolutely right Huntley Harrison airport commission um what this what this line depicts if I'm correct and I believe I am is the what they call the Glide slope qualification surface right all right understand 10 ft below that 10t below that is the area the Glide slope qualification surface planes come in above that think of this this way and I've explained it this way before think of a highway with a breakdown Lane just turn just let me finish turn that Highway vertically okay trees on the side of the road that exist in that breakdown laneer they're always cut back think of that as the 10-ft buffer the planes don't ride the white line along the side of the road they're more in the middle of the road so that's what's Happening Here we have the Glide slope qualification surface you have that 10t area below the Glide slope qualification surface within which ples don't uh trees can't or obstructions can't can't be with in okay planes fly up here they don't fly within 10 ft of the trees or the telephone poles or anything else based upon that Glide slope can planes fly at that altitude as that line shows there no I just said that's the Glide slope qualification surface they do not fly at that line that's the white line on the side of the road that I'm referring to and you have that buffer between the side of the road and the trees on the right outside the road that are cut back but cars do Drive pretty close to the white line cars do pilots don't because they want to be above that second they're flying a particular Glide path which is above that a 3% Glide path above that okay thank you thank you any other anybody on the platform with a question or a comment is that a is that a hand uh yes Dr Thompson oh no oh no not again oh no not again which one of these this this yours or um no I choke mine so that controls the computer mouse but you should be able to use this one or there's one on the other uh Michael Tom for for the record Michael Thompson um I'd just like to make one or two comments on what we've been discussing first um just just quickly is as I've sat in your seats in the past uh thoughts come to mind um one of the things uh Madame chair uh you pointed out that the uh veral pool was is a hole it is it's a it really is a hole it's it's actually at 5T above sea level so it's right down close to the well where the wells pump and where the aquifer is so when one's talking about folus playing with a herbicide I think you need to to register that as a significant concern um another comment talking about invasive species yes remove the invasive species but there are two issues there one is the speci species leave a seed bank a significant seed bank uh that wasn't mentioned and also invasive species move into Disturbed areas I mean where where there's been no disturbance no invasive species is typical once they've been Disturbed the edge of the roads Fields Gardens Etc that's when they move in um I I do think you need to be concerned about budgeting how how the airport is budgeting for all this work that you been discussing um I think another issue if if you really went this way is how how can the agent monitor these trees and the trees that should be removed I mean he he's can't go around with an altimor and measure the height etc etc so I think that's that's a big issue uh as then then this issue of Fe P tree came up and and I think that's outrageous um um in fact the airport Port plan to remove all the trees along the runway they want to make that section instead of being 250 ft wide they want to make it 500 ft wide that would pull up about 15 Acres of trees so if you're talking about mitigation for this you bear in mind that there's a hell of a lot more trees that the airport W will likely uh remove if they carry out all their plans that they have um that the last drawing that was put up put up that came from the airport layout plan uh it was submitted to the FAA they approved it so-called approval the approval letter was sent within 10 days and it has lots of caveats in there about how they haven't actually approved what you've submitted them but the other point about those that Airport layout plan there were 12 drawings some of them are outrageous they're they're not real proposals one of them is a departure surface which is a one in 40 departure surface you you put that do your geometry that one in40 departure surface would lead to houses being removed at the top of great Hill it's just totally unrealistic we're talking about 20 to1 surfaces here so those drawings are not as a whole approved so also the gqs the GL the Glide qualification surface in one of those drawings is to on as a 30 to one and that's that also is is equally uh uh unrealistic so I just make those points uh just to uh but let's get on to this this will be a very quick talk by the way um where am I here we are go why is this not coming up whoops oh okay I've G down to the bottom right so just very few comments but I would make the point that airport statements about competing approaches is oh what is all what's all this no thanks airport statements about competing approaches have been extremely misleading and incorrect okay aviation databases and ampo 5123 confirm that Chad airport currently only has two published approaches called circling approaches and dampo 2641 confirms that these circling approaches are visual am I hearing something [Music] or do a do you have a video running on another program or that could have could have started it's have I accidentally started something in here I think is it oh it is Friday the 13 sounds like it's coming from you sir okay okay okay it was your phone I have hearing AG so I had this on to uh but okay um so I pointed out that the uh Aviation databases that are confirmed chadam airport currently has only two published approaches you go and look in the in the database and see those they're circling approaches and it's also stated in the ampu general knowledge that these circling approaches are visual hence the airport only has visual approaches one in each Direction and there are presently no instrument approaches with type four approach surfaces which is what I just talked about last last meeting so there's no 400 foot initial width as shown in the drawing G13 which was submitted by the airport in your um in your packet uh ampo 5 1.23 does state that the airport would like to publish non-precision instrument approaches with straight in and lower visibility minimums but and the last sentence is left off here but ampu 51 2 three continues that this would require type four approach surfaces and involve easement Acquisitions and obstruction removal no there we go oh and I tried to get rid of this fellow I no it's it's it switch it back okay so this this shows the actually the bottom of the picture is important because it shows the the code so the present airport approach zones uh is this inner uh triangle there so that's that's like the that's the Present part 77 um which is in the 1958 map and remains to this day then the outer the outer triangle is the non-precision straight in instrument surface which is what is being proposed the category four type four approach that's the outside limit so the region in between those two triang Les uh the yellow and the U pink there are is the extra area that they asking to you to cut down the trees within this was shown actually at the uh meeting to the selectboard uh two weeks ago and Terry whan put up this picture which shows he's overlaid basically those two triangles that you I had up just now on top top of the gis map of of chadam and the yellow zones are the new zones uh that U that are being U requested here in order to accommodate this type for um uh approach surface so just in summary uh this noi is not simply for maintenance as has been claimed it is for enabling New Uses of the airport it is and I should also point out that it's notable that the state Wetlands protection act 10245 only allows airport projects which comply with part 77 and also projects shall not include the expansion of existing airport uses I.E New Uses are excluded in the in the state Wetlands protection act so you're being asked to increase the width of the approach surfaces to enable New Uses with an unprecedented distraction for Vernal pool contrary to both town and state laws these New Uses are primarily for the benefit of turbo props to allow them to fly straight in without a control tower and to land in poor visibility this according to the latest FAA advisory could include hundreds of people especially in sum or notably in summer in dramatically larger rpz danger zones paradoxically Mr Huntley agrees that the airport does not even meet safety standards for these turbo props and cannot be adapted to do so because of the geographic constraints so why is a wider type four approach surface even being considered FAA advisory ac150 533b and the ampoo figure 61 both illustrate a dis displaced threshold as an alternative and I haven't heard an alternativ analysis been discussed in in this forum yet or better just having the turbo plops use henus airport which would solve so many issues thank you for your attention thank you very much for that do you have would you like to resp respond in any way briefly yes the only way I'd like to respond is that we've covered this in depth already my colleague Matt karon last week gave an in-depth discussion on the types of surfaces afba has approved this surface we have a letter saying that and that is all I'd like to say thank you let me just ask you this so that surface um the instrument based surface is currently being used it's not aspirational it's not something in the future future because there's language in the master plan that seems to Dr Thomson pointed to said we want to go to this but it is that is that old language that the the master plan is a planning document um so I'll leave it at that sometimes plans do change what we're proposing the work now is to clear what's existing oh there's a hand up okay uh hang on uh Paula lran yes go ahead Miss lran oops yes that's her but you're muted so you need need to unmute okay how's about that okay speak up so can we're can barely hear you thank you I would like to um offer my Paula lman uh Cham I'd like to offer my support for all the points that Dr toset makes in um his presentation this evening and I share his his concerns um I do have a clarification question it has to do with the point uh the final point on his uh first slide about the airport commission wishes to have this approach and the fact that that approach does not um currently exist as an approved approach which says to me that this you know this is something they would like to do and that is my question to the airport commission the FAA has Pro approved what the airport commission has asked for in the master plan but does the FAA require that chadam have this approach it may be a wish list for the airport commission but is it required by the FAA that we put this approach in when I sat on the um airport commission myself I know that the Mandate that we were under was to balance the needs of the community with the needs of the airport and if this is not specifically mandated by the FAA does that change the conversation thank you very much Madam chair thank you um Mark I'll let you but also know Matt has his hand raised too yeah I was going to say I believe Matt think he wants to have respond yes go ahead please hi good afternoon everyone thank you so much for the opportunity to respond so I I do want to State first you please identify yourself just so we have it on the record please yes my apologies Matt Karen with Gail Associates airport consultant to chatt municipal airport okay um yeah I did want to just make mention that the airport master plan was initially started to be drafted back in 2018 um so some things have have changed uh from the time that that was originally drafted to where we are today however uh Madam chair as you pointed out the approach surface in question is on the airport's Airport layout plan there is a letter uh of approval from the FAA and I believe it's mot on sheet four of that plan um there's a lot of terminology that's getting thrown out there turbo props which I'm not even sure why we're discussing turbo props it has nothing to do with the project uh and the tree clearing that we're looking to clear as part of this project FAA flight procedures has in fact published a non-precision approach for the airport they have a GPS approach uh at the airport that is current that's exactly the surface that we're looking to clear to today that's something that the FAA publishes not the town not uh not the consultant and not the airport commission I would be more than happy and I've done this in the past would be more than happy to sit with Dr thomsit and explain and show him within the airports advisory circular where that's all stated um offline but again you have in front of you written correspondence from the FAA approving this surface and I don't know what more we can do to demonstrate that this is the surface that exists today that we're looking to clear but if there's any more questions on that again happy to get into that but I I don't know that we need to go back and do you know sort of revisionist History to the airport master plan and and getting into turbo props that are not the critical aircraft that we clearing surfaces towards uh for this project okay thank you very much um thank you you have something to do there's another hand yes go ahead Miss lren um thank you am I still um unmuted nope you're fine we hear you okay good thank you Matt for that question you still have not um answered my question however is that the airport layup plan yes was done during 2018 which is which is a new uh document relative to the history of the airport but it doesn't answer my question which is does the FAA require that we have this um approach given the environmental nature of what has to happen on the ground the fact that um there's severe congestion around the airport um are we required to have a type four approach or is it just the pilots would like to have one thank you okay uh Mr Karen are you there yeah sure yeah still here yeah in response to that I will say again that it is FAA flight procedures that publishes the approaches and that is an existing Approach at the Chad municipal airport and per the grant assurances yes the airport is required to clear that surface okay um I don't see uh Dave there's somebody named Dave with his hand up may go ahead sir yeah hi it's David bi is Paula down I saw her name a minute ago yeah she's yeah go ahead you're up uh this is a little bit of a uh change in subject and I don't want to if everybody else is done with this discussion I'll I have some questions uh it was my understanding that the Conservation Commission made a discretionary referral to the Cape Cod Commission um but I haven't been able to find any documentation on that has has that happened did the Conservation Commission make a referral to the Cape Cod Commission or did they not this Pro yes we did make a discretionary referral and and is is is that available anywhere for review I believe there's a memorandum that um was should have been posted to to my town gov uh when we voted on that if not I'll make sure that it is and include it with the airport documents could you send me a copy sure thank you um next question I have is uh The Cape the the Cape Cod Chronicle just uh had an article last week saying that the uh Cape Cod Commission uh notified the airport commission that it had determined this project to be a major revision is the language that was in the chronicle I'm kind of assuming here that they meant to say major modification and maybe the Y chronic mated yep yep that that yep that it should have said major modification that article also said quite erroneously that the Conservation Commission had asked for the minor modification that's not true it was the airport commission who asked and the Cape Cod Commission has as far as I know um moved it to a major modification process if I may the the Cape Cod Commission asked us not the airport commission didn't ask the Cape Cod Cape Cod Commission asked the airport to submit a minor modification okay yes during during pre-filing consultation when the project was presented to the Cape Cod Commission they recommended the minor modification tact which is what we performed yep as based on the referral we are pursuing the major modification with them okay does that answer your question Mr Bixby uh I'm not sure so the Cape Cod Commission uh determined that a minor modific was insufficient they instructed the uh airport commission to submit the project as a major modification no I don't think it changes the submission it just changes the process that the Cape Cod Commission is pursuing to review the project they originally had it as a minor modification and and I don't think I don't know how I I'm not privy to what's happening inside where that change happened or who made that determination that it should become a mo major modification but but but the decision but the decision's been made yes that's what I've yes I think so I asked for documentation of that and have once again I have been unable to find anything on that is it possible that the people involved whoever they may be could make all this public well you'd have to ask the Cape Cod Commission for that that would be their records we haven't seen anything um the that I'm relaying that they are treating it as a major modification and pursuing that comes from well the chronicle and from conversations that the conservation division has had with staff at the Cape Cod Commission so I haven't seen anything in writing and the Cape Cod Commission has not been in communication with the town with uh you people on the Conservation Commission regarding any of this no not at all not not at all that's interesting so they have not uh answered your uh you made a discretionary referral to the Cape Cod Commission um they have not responded yet not not not to us not to the Conservation Commission Madam chair can I clarify yes Paul go ahead can you shed light on this um Mr who's who's speaking this is Paul this Mr Bixby this is Paul Whitman conservation agent I can answer your question okay um we have been in contact with the Cape Cod Commission staff it was the Cape Cod Commission staff recommendation uh internally uh with the kod commission uh to review the project is a major modification of the 2005 permit in lie of reviewing it as a discretionary referral so we have had contact and you did request uh uh voluminous public records request which we gave to you so all that information was transmitted to you recently so you should have everything in terms of communications I have received nothing as of this point in time okay well give us a little little time um the request came in a couple of days ago but you should be getting should be getting that okay thank you you're welcome sir um one last observation then go ahead uh has there been any discussion of the uh 7year period of validity for Dr decisions the the the the decision was 2005 I think the Cap Cod Act and the cape C and the enabling regulations place a seven-year time limit on drri decisions and that also applies to Major modifications and and the Act and the regulations say that the um local municipalities can't issue permits uh associated with that Dr decision in 2005 after seven years has there been any discussion on that yes there has um I I would encourage you to contact the Cap Cod Commission staff directly uh these are probably not questions for uh the commission but I can tell you that I had a conversation with the chief regulatory officer and she indicated that there is a condition in the 2005 minor mod permit that allowed them to continue to review the project which will be reviewed now as a full commission review a major modification and the and the expiration date did not apply based on that condition which was in the old permit so if you have any issues with that you should contact the staff directly at the k commission okay thank you yep okay yes ma'am uh thank you uh Donna Jabor uh chadam so I hope this is an appropriate question for this forum but with the widening of the approach zones does that and the if I'm understanding correctly the current focus is not to increase plane size coming in but does it leave the commission open to changing their mind in the future and does that increased size allow larger planes if they decide they would like that okay at some point in the future yep Huntley I think you've answered this before that's the simple answer is no it all depends on the design aircraft and right now everything at the airport is based on the design aircraft which is a beach Baron twin engine Beach Baron so so excuse so if you could in more layman's terms if I could understand that better so the beachcraft uh that you just mentioned versus the the the pc12 or I the Polaris coming in the uh charter flights coming in the much larger planes that are a little scarier to me having fly over my home than the small private planes that come in and out yeah no the the Pilatus meets the criteria and and that could be so that so then that could be a larger so we could have an increased traffic of that in the future or larger chartered planes that is my question no not larger airplanes okay this is this has straight out of our area yeah yeah no I know there's a there's a burning question about size of planes and and the frequency and all of that but that is not it's not in the purview of your commission and I understand that and I I believe mat karon has a response that he'd like to provide thank you go ahead Matt yeah no no problem and I again I don't want to get too into the Weeds on this as I know we're getting off track right now but so Pilatus type aircraft turboprop type aircraft they they can and they do and they are capable of land at chatt municipal airport that is not something that's within the control of the airport commission they're they're allowed to land there but these approach surfaces that we're clearing are strictly for the existing critical aircraft um we're not looking to expand the surfaces if they were if the airport was looking to expand the surfaces to draw in different type of aircraft we'd be going back to the FAA to change the airport's critical aircraft and update the Airport layout Plan and there's no plans to do that um on their Capital Improvement program and there's no plans to do that that I'm aware of period so um so no no increase in aircraft or traffic uh as a result of this this clearing project okay thank you all right I want to um uh is this on it's on this on this very points no but these points are Beyond I just they're beyond us the number of aircraft and the size of aircraft is not an issue that is before for us we're not going to hear anything about that on on the question asked but she okay you can't speak from there you can't speak from there we're getting you can't speak from there sorry the question that was asked was actually the wrong question but it was it was an appropriate question she asked whether the what whether the increased width of the approach surface would allow bigger aircraft that's it doesn't we know that but the thing it does do is that it allows Landings in poorer visibility and that increases the rpz the danger zones at the ends of the runway that's the heinous effect of this okay thank you yes Jerry do you have a very quick question on this on Jerry chadam uh I just like to make the point that the uh sort of elephant in the room is has to do with these two um approach zone different differences the width uh when they were presented to this to the select board um at their recent meeting uh with the diagram that you saw up on the board um Terry whan who's the staff Town staff person person for the airport commission said that the two widths represent a migration of the airport from its old the 200 foot wide uh flight path to its new flight path which is the 400 which is what the Consultants are asking you to clear trees for but they're claiming that they're working on the 2005 Airport when they're not the airport since 2005 whether it's at 2018 or 20 200 whenever they claim the FAA approved this new width and the new approaches it's not the old Airport from 2005 that they're that they're asking you to uh rule about and clear trees for they're asking you to clear trees for their future version of the airport which you're not allowed to do according to the bylaws for changes to the airport that's all I wanted to say all right thank you we've had this question this has been at the heart of this um the vegetation management plan is prepared to provide for the surfaces at the airport today the 2005 era is not a planning document that was when the Cape Cod Commission within their jurisdiction issued the drri that is why 2005 has come up the vegetation management plan before you within their jurisdiction will be tied to their findings in 2005 the vegetation management plan is for what exists at the airport today it is not for a future airport it it's not for a past airport it's for the aircraft using the airport today that have at least 500 takeoffs or Landings so that is the design aircraft those are the the surfaces and they've been agreed to by the airport Professional Engineers massach its do and the Federal Aviation Administration all right thank you this this conversation reminds us that there are many issues regarding the operation of chadam airport our inquiry however is one small part of that we are looking at protected wetlands and resource areas that comprise about 2 Acres of the total clearing which is more than 60 we have a small small piece we are looking at protecting the resource areas the other issues regarding planes and sizes and is is is outside of our the scope of our review we have no authority to talk about that we have no authority to rule on that it's what we we have said before we are at the moment the only permitting agency that the airport needs to move forward with this we have called upon the select board to initiate create a conversation in the community to have these other issues uh aired uh it's not it's we can't deal with any of them so um I'm going to repeat my call to the select board um you will have an opportunity with the Cape Cod Commission who will be looking at it in a broader sense as well but we are we are determined to keep our review in within the confines of what the wetlands protection act and the chadam Wetland protection bylaw standards are for us for our permitting process and they're they're very limited they're they're pretty broad considering there were mitigation and now now but but you know in the grander scheme of airport operations they're quite limited so that is the only thing we're going to take comment on okay thank you and I hope everybody else has an opportunity to comment and and provide input in another Forum there should be and there will be the next airport commission meeting on April 10th we'll have a public hearing starting at 6:00 in this room uh and everyone is invited and we will be addressing some of the issues that came up here this afternoon and uh great you know then the the select board supports that and and uh great that's what we'll have a regular airport commission meeting from 5: to six and then after that we'll go into a public hearing okay thank you for that so mark your calendars uh April 10th is it um all right so we have some work to do you have some work to do um we're going going to um did did you have something about our small piece of this harout can you hit the green button push the Harriet Prout um my concern is the number of trees that are going to be taken down and I if I understand you're not even questioning how many there are being taken down hundreds hundreds and hundreds we are but you there's so many that is actually what yeah that's what we been saying for two months now and Tred to get the Chronicle that 62 acres are going to be cut so all the trees that you currently see behind the job lot and all of that they're all coming down only a few are in our jurisdiction so have you got you you don't have an actual number you don't have pictures of the trees that are actually coming we walked the area we saw them there are hundreds then they're small because there are hundreds because they are kind of small but why why outside of well they're only 3 or 4 inch diameter you can't and they're very densely they're growing very densely so there's we acknowledged in our field visit that there is no practical way of identifying them ahead of time you can't measure them you you can't get your equipment from measuring in there because it's so dense so we're really doing it by drone you can't take pictures by drone there are there are drone images that is what the clearing areas are based on is the Drone measured the the elevation of the canopy and that's how we have the area that needs to be cut and those pictures are available where though the limits of The Cutting are on all of the plans and that's based on the Drone and I can find those where the airport commission the Airport commission's website has all the plans thank you very much and if not we they're on the uh well they've been posted to mytown go in advance of each of our hearings so there's many documents there we should probably compile them thank you very much get a free moment um yeah we're going to so so we're going to consult with um Town Council on the question of the inl uh fee um and then when and we will have the Vernal pool um assessment done um so I'm I'm the expectation is that the next time we meet we need to be able to um be prepared to finalize our conversations and we have to finalize deliberations because we haven't been doing that that we're in on the public record in terms of um the performance standards we we we've keep going around but I think there's nothing left to say about that but we still have some dis internal discussions about the the variance requests and the Alternatives analysis that are in the documents um finalize our um what we're going to expect and require in terms of the invasive species management that's been proposed um finalize the mitigation um with whatever ever we get from um Town Council and advice we get from that and um to Jerry's point or not Jerry Eric's Point make sure we finalize and deliberate on what we will be putting into an order of conditions in terms of removal methodology is there anything else I missed I think marking trees on the where they can for that one side you know with the bog and pond um so that hopefully the people involved can get a better idea of what's going on there as well as we can yep okay um during these meetings um we have committed on the record to certain revisions and amendments to what was initially submitted do you need a written supplemental document from us to codify those in writing or on the record because we're going to be the final versions of anything that has changed in any um significant and substantial way should be updated and revised because they will become the documents of record great and just as a process point to the commission um the way that it works with the VMP is we submitted the draft VMP with the notice of intent upon receiving an order of conditions we update the VMP with those conditions with any okay um they become part of part of it all becomes part of the VMP and then the VMP is finalized okay that's good to know that they will become part of that yeah okay so um with all of that we should we need to pick a date to continue to a date certain said May um we have um I don't think April 10th is is enough time but April 24th will that be enough time for the third party to I don't know hoping that we'll have something I'm curious does it make sense to wait I mean I I don't want to keep I know I don't want to I I don't want to waste everybody's time here's what I here's what I'll say I will we can schedule it for the 24th if we get word from him by about the 10th two weeks before that that he won't have anything by the 24th then you can submit a request in writing for a continuance to the next date which is um May May 8th I have I can't see my counter yeah um and we can work that so that you're right I don't want to spend any more the next meeting needs to come finalize as much as we possibly can so that we can get and in the meantime we'll be starting to work on an order of conditions there's a lot of conditions are going to have to go in there we believe it um okay that sounds that sounds good thank you okay so uh April 24th he has a quick question yeah I I just have a quick question yep uh if possible since the airport commission will be paying for any fees y uh for the uh inl piece could we be included in that correspondence with Town Council yes just send it to airport commission at chadam go yes thank you we will we will include you you should be in that conversation I move that we continue 240 and 438 George Ryder Road and 1652 Main Street to the meeting on April 24th 2024 for noce of intent Gordon second roll call vote Bob Elise I Karen I Eric hi Cheryl I Mary I and I vote I thank you for your time hopefully we're back on the 24th or as soon thereafter as is humanly possible fantastic thank you very much thank you thank you everybody else we're going to take a five minute break at this point because we desperately need it yeah we don't have a whole lot more e e e e e e e e e e e e e phone on e uh are you up next yeah we're going to do a couple continu oh then Shad yeah so looks like we're back up Paul yes we are back so okay okay Paul what's next what's next are two continuances h y all right uh first first one's 28 cranberry Lane Richard and Jill uh teer Matt 15 J partiel 18 se10 3653 is the D number project demolition of an existing dwelling and construction of a new dwelling within the buffer zone to a bordering vegetated Wetland the applicant has requested a continuance to June 26 2024 right I move that we continue 28 Cranbury Lane to the meeting on June 26 2024 for a notice of intent Gordon second roll call Bob hi Elise I Karen I Eric I Cheryl I Mary I and I vote I okay next one on the agenda for continuance is 414 Fox Hill Road Christopher lroy map 11m parcel 5-2 the EP number SC10 3652 proposed doc replacement the applicant has requested a continuance to April 10th 2024 I move that we continue for 14 Fox Hill Road to the meeting on April 10th 2024 for a notice of intent Gordon second Bob hi Elise hi Karen I Eric I Cheryl I Mary I and I vote I and okay April next on the agenda is your last notice of intent and after that we just have a quick certificate which no work was done the minutes and discussion on storm water and it should be done so 21 shat Lane clay a Rosenberg and Andrea Lind Flink map 15c parcel 12-6 p number SC10 3671 the project proposed house addition pool replacement hello guys Hardscape hi this is hold on hold on he he's not finished reading the uh the matter go ahead you said sorry about that project is propos house addition pool replacement Hardscape and Associated site improvements that is the project okay now you guys should identify yourselves and you can go ahead yeah good afternoon Derek Redgate um um civil engineer uh from Coastal Engineering and um on this phone with with me is Sean pepich the uh landscape architect uh we were here a month ago uh we continued the hearing to um provide some more information um mainly um mainly on the planting plan which um we provided in the initial um initial application um U but it didn't have uh number of plants and and um was U need some more information on the uh location so um that's been provided in uh the supplemental information uh for this hearing um the two other plans you see in the supplemental um was confirming some of the zoning information it was uh setbacks uh so we've shown those on the plans but nothing has really changed in the design um since what we initially uh proposed and um other change on the erosion control plan is we pulled back from the Coastal Bank um uh the erosion control line from the Coastal Bank we've put it uh at the limit of work which is roughly around where the shed is on the plan that's on the screen so um that that was a change to just the basically the limits of work we've pulled it away from the uh from the Coastal Bank okay okay um what else can what else do you want to walk us through in terms of how this has changed yeah so as as I mentioned we uh I I can go through the project briefly uh quickly again we did the last hearing but I know it was a month ago um nothing on the project has changed other than um you know we went to start to talk about the plants and uh um and the number in species and location wasn't on the plan that we submitted so we sort of you know called a timeout and thought they would would pick up that conversation um uh in this hearing so I think that's probably appropriate is if um if we focus on the uh on the planting plan but again happy to go through the rough um quick quick summary of the project if you'd prefer that no I think we remember the project that's fine I just wanted to know whether anything else had changed um so no I'd like to to uh have Shawn go through the planting plan yep thank you Sean papic is Sean Page landscape architecture 222 North Street Hingham Massachusetts I want to make sure that you understood that there was already an existing and I know that uh Jerick has his drawings too that illustrate that there is an existing pool and a deck on the property today and I'm not so sure how much of that you saw or remember oh no we saw it it's a elevated pool teetering on the edge of a cliffing it was hard to forget I'm sorry I don't mean to say teetering but it just seemed it just seemed an odd place for I appreciate colorful language no I appreciate the colorful language in description um so we did extend in uh a very small amount within the 100t buffer on the east side we extended the pool deck uh slightly and then we actually retracted it a bit on the South Side from where the current bu deck is and so that actually shrunk a little bit so it's still pretty similarly uh located just in a little bit of a different shape I'd say um what we did propose yeah what we what we did proposed to do was um provide some native plantings at the bottom of the wall essentially for good siiz swath both actually inside the jurisdiction and outside the jurisdiction um we were proposing to use our typical species uh between the Bayberry Beach Plum Virginia Rose and inkberry all in those areas and a swath all the way down to the area that is the existing pool equipment and will still be the same location for the new pool equipment is where that area it's referred to as a shed um essentially little lean to where all the pool equipment has been for the last I don't know how many how many years this this uh pool equipment has been there but it's been there for quite some time you can see all of our plant material we've identified in those areas um roughly 750 square ft probably within the 52 100 um and then again outside and Beyond we want the same feeling um Beyond uh the 100 foot buffer that we have inside the 100t buffer so um essentially also use some switch grass some native switch grass so stuck to the typical um accepted plant palet in those areas and that's really a description of it as you can see there it's mostly those shaded plants you see and they're on the east side the right hand side of the pool Terrace thank you so thank you very much appreciate that so did you count the plants that are on the outside of the 100 foot buffer in your mitigation calculation or is it only in the jurisdiction uh we would probably have shown we did show them on the plant list um but um when I refer to the 750 square ft that's what's within the jurisdiction okay and out of out of 1152 total okay correct I got it correct that's correct can you run all right let me um before we I'm going to open up the questions in a moment but let me ask this one um in the and we talked about this but it's not addressed here and I'm wondering if maybe we have something something wrong um the original noi in the project description included in addition to the above the applicant also proposes to install 144 linear feet of fiber rolls on the Coastal Bank the fiber rolls will stabilize the toe of the bank prevent erosion and provide protection in a par and a barrier along the coastal bank but there is no plan that shows the location of those fiber rolls the size of the roles the contents the system for installing them anchoring them so is that still part of the plan or is that not part of the plan yeah so I I can um I can share my screen and um it is U it it is it is not part of the plan it's been relocated so um I'll try to share my screen here okay just give me a minute sorry about that we all struggle with that yeah I have a lot of things open here and I I do think there was a question of it it was the fiber roll was really meant to be erosion control that would be that's what we thought we decided yesterday that perhaps what we were reading as a fiber was really the the Waddles and straw and the erosion control at the top which was why we were confused about a fiber roll aray going in at the top of a bank understood so I think that there was confusion yeah if I if I could explain it that's exact that's exactly it and you know it's a uh it's a straw waddle with um um with staked and then the construction Fen is um blocks the you know the limit of work or the construction area it goes um just you know outside of the straw waddle line so that's been moved up into the um you know roughly the area shown where the new plantings are um and you know we're more than 50 ft away from the um from the coastal bag previously we had shown it at the definitional top of the coastal bag um and referred to it as um um as fiber roll so um yeah that that's been revised and that that that's not needed for us to to work in that area at all okay so on the on the plan titled um erosion control plan it's the proposed straw waddle with Sil fence so it's the dark it's the heavy black dash line which I'm assuming is also the limit of work correct okay just above the top of the bank okay so we do not need a full fiber roll uh plan which is good news okay I'm going to with that I'll let other other members ask questions because I have to write this stuff down I'll start over here um I have a question The Cutting border that's by the pool is that a planting bed that's going to go all the way are all the white spaces with the diamonds in them cutting beds yeah the intent was was for that to be uh just some flowers that you wanted to cut use for cutting there that's going to be it um and and is there any possibility given the size of the the the um patio area and the Terrace with the fire pit and the area beyond that is there no opportunity to move that pool out of our Zone I don't think so just based on when we were reworking this trying to get the usage I mean it's very very close to what's existing there today and we did pull that pool terce up probably give you a feel for that that southernmost piece of pool Terrace we pulled up at least right around another five or six feet up away from where it is currently right now so we did try to shrink that as much as we could okay we really tried hard on that but they I will tell you that even though it's outside your jurisdiction they're going to be planting this property up extremely heavily that's for sure okay and also to add on our on our plans the uh L material plan there is um some calculations that show the um existing versus the proposed and um there is a reduction in the area in the within the 50 and the 100 yeah okay I just always try no no nothing asked nothing ever happen Bob yeah I have a I get this sense but I'm not entirely sure that there's a fence within the resource area I just wanted to have you lead us through whether it is or isn't there and if so where is it exactly yeah there would be a fence in the buffer area um essentially um it wouldn't be into the full resource into the resource area it'd be still within that 50 to 100 it would just be mesh a seat of posts and there's currently one yeah of course there's currently one now because of the uh the pool Scott in my office one made to remind you he right around the corner um and want to remind you there's one there currently um and that's really just for pool enclosure for they need to put it on the plan identify yeah it's really hard to determine where it is and then the followup question would be if the pool is elevated to the degree that it is why do you need a fence down especially in the in our in the resource area but we again I think it's within the buffer not so it's not at the resource well that's what we call that's what we call the resource that's the area within our jurisdiction shall I say yes understood understood um typically where we're doing that is also a part of where you place your gate um safety is always a concern in case anybody were to get up and in there um you could keep it on the side of the the wall and until it gets to be too too short of a wall to actually be the pool enclosure um and then pull it off of that wall um so you could reduce it and cut down uh some portion of it but either way you'd still have to have a gate anytime we don't have a barrier that's greater than 4T we'd have to have a fence going to be elevated is it going to be not be elevated nope not elevated let me just clarify the question so this pool is currently elevated it's held up on some sort of pilings or something um the plan is to to have an inground pool correct that's correct right so you're going to have to put in a retaining wall to create and that retaining wall is shown on the plan to create the space for uh to to to create the flat surface for the to create the pool so is the wall next to or on top of the what's the relationship between the proposed fence and the retaining wall uh the proposed fence that we have is um sitting off of the retaining wall toward the kind of what you might call the edge of work at this point okay can you please add that to your plan because it's not on there so we we do have it on the plan where is that we've got our our uh gate hang on I see a gate so that tells me that there must be a fence somewhere the fence yeah but I fence does the fence go around the whole yard does it does it on the planting plan the fence okay let's see well if what I'm looking at this is the planting plan where's the gate there's the gate is is this is fence it doesn't fence no well we know where it I don't know where it goes here oh here it is look look look it goes here yeah yeah it's around the whole yard it's yeah this is not a pool fence can I U just yeah go ahead Eric yeah normally um uh it impedes the the movement of wildlife in our jurisdiction um I think it would be a good mitigation offer to remove the the section of that fence that's in our resource area um we we could take take make it in an area to the east of the um east of the pool Terrace where we where we get up to 4 feet for our wall but as you start to yeah as you move toward the As you move toward the South as they're kind of like moving toward the shed um that wall becomes shorter than 4 feet so when it's moving to the South it becomes shorter than four feet so we would have to at least kind of tie a fence we could we could take it on that you know that where you see it running north south on our plan on the far right we could pull it a little closer on once we had 4 feet which is kind of kind of where the Spy area is straight across from where the Spy is we could we could uh bring the fence off of that part of wall and run it toward the shed and so we could reduce it by pushing it to the left on the plant I should say to the West on the plant and get it close to that wall but it will at some point it has to engage engage that wall um or at some point I should say the other way around as it moved to the South if the wall is our barrier then we will have to have a fence that engages and comes back to the shed because it'll be less than a 4ot grade change there so that's where we need to have a barrier um well even removing maybe the fence where you're at the 35 mark on next to the shed where it says 35 on the planting plant just to the line correct maybe just move that remove that section would would that way Wildlife can move freely through there yeah so we could we could take and move it that piece and I don't know if D are you still control is Derek controlling this right now are you controlling on a steep post the screen right now no I asked the question no I was wondering if somebody else was on who has the I'm not controlling it right now I'm displaying what would you like you can I can let go or you could show me where you want to go that's helpful know that's helpful if um just to show that that kind of north south line of our fence that you see there we could we could use that yeah we could move that over and if we go at the 100 foot and connect it to the wall so take that 100 foot buffer line yeah exactly and do a straight line along the 100 foot buffer to the wall um yeah well essentially yeah come down that whatever yeah the point is that that if you can put the fence on the wall then it's not an issue as far as Wildlife uh moving is concerned but right now the way it's designed it appears to be a it's not a pool fence in our in our estimation it's it's a yard fence so we we just need to have it pulled out of our resource area wherever however you can do it to the maximum extent possible however you wish to do it okay I'm a little confused about this fence is it like on this you know there's a really steep bank I walked around the whole pool holding on to the pool CU I thought oh God if this just goes so it's on this very steep Bank correct correct it would be a at the bottom of the bank it's at the bottom of the bank middle of the bank no it's in the middle I think no it's along the bank it is along the bank um it's currently along the bank there's already a fence in there right now that is there what I'm saying here with when uh with Mr R's conversation or his comments were that we could uh keep the fence of restricted essentially along the 100t buffer back to the wall and then once we come to the South ways we can we would have to pull it off of there and engage kind of the shed area so a shorter little run of fence reaching back to the shed from that lower corner of the Terrace better so why would the shed need to be inside the the fence yeah uh we were just going to use that as part of uh our pool enclosure use the shed as part of the pool enclosure well you wouldn't have to we could pull it up we could pull it up I don't see a functional reason to have the shed fenced in so I would I would think more along the lines of following the edge of that pool and then get out of the resource area as fast as possible yeah all right we'll we'll look at that then definitely all right question about the Wall go ahead how how this retaining wall how tall is that so where it starts in the lower on the South Side there on the lower corner it is basically going to just be at grade and then as it followed the line of the pool Terrace going to the north which is toward the upper side of the page it will be at about 4 and 1/2 ft tall when it is um straight east of the the spa area um which just a little bit 4 half to 5T tall as you get just past the spario which is the edge of your jurisdiction okay and is there any way you can decrease the size of the patio um in the aura outer Aura I mean I know we asked if you could move the Pool and Patio but that the right side with the raised spa and all of that that's quite a bit of patio and that would at least have less in our outer aura well we we did reduce the size within the 50 to 100 we did reduce the size of that Terrace um it's 10t we did do a lot of back and forth with the homeowner on the size of it patio furniture pushed it and pulled it in terms terms of size so we thought a reduction would at least be an improvement it is it is it just we always I always love even more Improvement so I was asking does anybody get the figure on the percentage that it's taking up of the 500 not much it's not getting near the uh it's fine anything else go ahead Bob I know I'm late to this but was there any consideration um uh and getting rid of the uh Japanese knotweed along that bank there yeah I think that that a lot of that consideration happened uh long before we were involved I know they talked about trying to get it it's pretty solid all the way down to the water right um which is a really large extent and I think cost purposes Alone um has uh really intimidated the home owner in terms of the cost of trying to remove all of it what's it what's it yeah insan it seems like you're investing a lot of money into the plantings and The Hardscape and everything else we are that seems like um it seems like it would be a priority for me to get rid of that um that Japanese knotweed how about next to the plantings at least are you going to have like a 10 foot maybe a gap between the the not weed in the plantings yeah I think the intent would be in those areas um where they're working would be to be able to cut and that back as much as possible and I know that use of glyphosate is not on the table more than likely so not only most towns uh well a lot of towns they do not appreciate that so it would just be repeated cutting I think the intent would would be to try to cut to the sides of that to every degree possible um repeated cutting 8 to 10 cuts in a season and that seems to be if you not if you're not applying an herbicide that seems to be the method um just to not to interrupt you but just to clarify the prohibition on the use of glyphosate on especially not we only applies to town-owned property okay so private owners cut and swipe as much as you can get rid of that stuff that would be that would be fantastic if they could do that yeah yep okay so make it feasible to to have a go at getting rid of it yeah I would agree I would agree that that would probably be the only thing I do think PL in yeah because otherwise it's just going to migrate into the your mitigation plants are going to be but goners but definitely doing uh cut and dab techniques um specific uh injection into individual plants that would be the the method to go with we believe if if we're allowed to do with the glyphosate so maybe we could have a a a management plan as far as the uh the knotweed goes good we actually had asked for a management plan at that meeting a month ago um and also uh I noticed some um landscape lighting in the uh that large tree to the south of the pool had a um had some landscape lighting on it you plan on um Illuminating any areas within the 50 to 100 we were proposing some some small uh path lights along the edges uh we didn't have any larger uh uplighting under that tree so we were just proposing some some uh landscape lighting some small lowlevel path lights so low voltage low voltage low voltage lights 18in tall nothing nothing up into the trees or anything like that no we're not showing that there okay nope are they on the plan yeah they are on the plan and they are Illustrated those three yep they are the three along the cutting border pathway I just had one more quick question I'm done yes um first of all I'm impressed with the size of your plants that you're putting in 36 in um you don't see that much uh I was just curious on the inkberry um how was your experience with inkberry I mean I know it's on the list but they just don't seem to do well after a while um have you have you been having trouble with them uh along the water uh yeah they tend to thin out and die in a short period of yeah the nor the bayber is an excellent choice uh the beach bom's a little small that's probably wish you get them at 36 but the uh the inkberries just don't they they just they just G they just I don't know I have I have about a dozen in inkberries and I would say eight are doing well and four are leggy and they only have a few leaves at the top and a bunch foundation planting but they're all in the same in in the same are so it's hard to say really well we consider we would consider sliding those around and and adding more of the bay Berry or something like that and also the last question I has once you put the wall in and everything and you remove the uh the the knotweed the bank is going to be really steep uhpr you're not going to use like a a jut netting uh uh to put down first and then plant in the jut netting once it's anchored oh we would use the juk mesh too oh good good excellent yeah we've go use the juk mesh in that condition because it is a tough slope you know honestly that's that's Al also one other reason why um trying to remove all of the not weed is something that the homeowners a little anxious about because of that slope um as much as we don't like we have we've seen it on a bunch of other projects all over up and down the coastline um and um we've never had to deal with it with this kind of slope I don't think yeah okay I think I'm kind of anxious about that okay anything else I will mention one more thing I mentioned it early on it's the shed Y and I think I asked if he had any indication that it had ever been licensed for for where it is in the resource area I'm guessing that it isn't or was wasn't hasn't been so I just want everyone to realize that by approving this plan we would be approving the so and you actually asked about the pool in patio as well I did so do we have any idea it I think the impression I I think impression do you go ahead had you checked on that no no okay so could you yeah could you please before the next for the next next hearing get that information and let us know what what documents exist or what evidence there is of the licensing of these pieces is it is this requiring another hearing yeah because you're going to come back with another with a different um plan that shows the change in the fence and the management plan for the not weed management plan for not weed fence design maybe an alternative for the shed put it elsewhere here yeah of so we could schedule this depending on well um two weeks from today would be April 10th does that sound okay does that work for you You' have to to get everything can I can I just ask a clarifying question first so um as far as the management plan um that would be sort of in a narrative form um and not an actual um you know plan view it would it would suggest the yeah okay yeah management plan right it's what you're going to do to manage that in basis I know the word plan I just try I just like to uh I know it's not a site plan of any that kind y all right take it to the 10th of B I move that we continue 21 sha Lane to the meeting on April 10th 2024 for notice of intent Gordon second roll call vote Bob Elise hi Karen hi Eric hi Cheryl she left at 430 oh she left at 4:30 Rec we like that Mary I and I vote I so we will see you back here on the 10th of April hopefully wrap this up thank you all right thank you thank you very much okay Paul okay we'll follow we'll follow up on the shed per a minut go through the file see if there's anything there okay thank you all right um so next is a request for a certificate of compliance this is a very easy one um 33 whistle Elaine Charles R and Marine con map 16j parcel 38-10 a d number SC10 3532 proposed additions relocation of a septic system elevating the driveway proposed patio in mitigation so the work was never completed so we just issu the certificate as work never completed okay okay hold on hold on hold on are you are you gonna say something no you're not okay you don't have to okay I move that we approve a certificate of compliance for 33 Whistler Lane Gordon second roll call Bob Elise hi Karen hi Eric hi Cheryl not here Mary hi and I say I so that's that's done okay I know yep you're going to miss the show I'm so sorry that's okay he's a patient man okay we next have hold on Paul I mean hold on that we have minutes does anybody have any changes to the minutes no but you weren't here for all of them so we them together yeah I did too um the uh the formatting was very funky because uh they were in they were in uh PDF so I had to convert them to and you know whenever you do that you get something funky so we could do January 24th and February 14th together yeah let's do that I think everybody's here that yeah all right were there any changes I just accepted them all there were some minor I mov that we accept the minutes from January 24th 2024 and February 14th 2024 second roll call vote Bob hi Karen hi Eric hi Mary hi and I vote I okay okay and then the next one then I move that we approve the minutes from February 7th 2024 second all right roll call Bob Elise uh Karen hi Eric hi Mary hi and I vote I that's approved wer oh I that's the one I abstained from stain boy we're really going we're almost done we're almost done okay aren't you lucky all right Paul we're just going to go to Thad storm water proposal okay okay all right discussion uh Thad eldr storm waterer Management in conserv districts hello it's an alridge I'm with impact chatam and I can run something through the web page um first and foremost I was sick last month I did not get everything done in time we're not going to be at town meeting this spring so we're going to keep this conversation as light as you'd like I know you've had a long day but it is good to start the conversation so that you have this in mind we will be back so storm water and the conservant district with our zoning bylaw back in ' 66 we adopted the Conservancy District that um that didn't include a provision to allow for storm water in 79 every Wetland had a zoning District associated with it what's nice is we have a record high water elevation associated with each of those from the 70s in the 80s we expanded that to include the flood plane and now we have a number of properties that are in Conservancy District where we're technically not allowed to use best management practices under D we're not allowed to fill or regrade or alter the ground terribly which I know it's not great to alter the ground but when you can provide storm water treatment is a true benefit so the proposal will be to add it as a a permitted activity this goes along with with you're allowed to put pool equipment gas lines water lines all sorts of utilities and septic systems are all permanent activities already but we're not allowed to treat storm water today I want down to oyster Pond just because this is a great example if you go there we have a closed to Shell fishing within 100 ft of the radius of the Culvert where we have storm water runoff that comes down and into the pond this is a very popular bathing Beach it' be nice to clean this up there was a project that was done I didn't take a picture of it but it's off to the left from the scene that cleaned up the the storm water in oyster Pond well enough that it was open to Shell fishing again after many years and the shell fishermen were out there getting just tons of cawks big and all the town folk were there like seagull buying cogs off of all the shell fishermen and we made a few Cog pies in a whole freezer full of stuffed cogs so it was it was neat that it reopened it's not done yet this is a little runoff that comes off of ridgeil road I walk by it just about every day what you really can't see in here is all the sand that's accumulated underneath the cedar tree there's a puddle that forms somebody cuts out a notch and it's untreated storm water that's going right into and it's all resource area but it this is heading towards salt marsh when you get to the other side of that cedar tree this is the base of Misty Meadow Lane it itself is not within a Conservancy District but just beyond that knotweed stand um you're getting into Frost Fish Creek and Conservancy District flood plane um I mean it's a problem that needs to be addressed somewhere I was just driving down scattery Road one day and saw the puddle and said hey here's something that could be taken care of now the town in the Town Road layouts is exempt from zoning Provisions but usually drainage is outside of the road layout so I've provided a map on here just to look at this is the big one what are the parcels that we have currently that are in the coastal Conservancy district and that's all of Eastward Point INF fluence all the time and technically we could put in traditional Drainage Systems in these places your catch Basin your leech pit but we have proximity to groundwater so now you need a shallower system so it has to be larger in order to infiltrate all of the runoff and even with a simple Basin pit system you don't get the same level of treatment that you can recently I was here with Christopher Harding Lane wherever Christopher Harding Lane ended up it's right in front of me so right in here it's not the storm water generated inside the Conservancy District inside the flood plane there's a good amount of water that is generated outside and heads inside that one I really wanted to put a nice Swale in sediment for a bay capture something so that it could be at least somewhat treated but technically we're not allowed to the last project where I was allowed to do anything was little beach where we took a landscape Hill and we turned into a Landscapes whale and it'll catch the storm water run off just the rain water floods are still going to affect things differently out there so like I said we're going going to be um working on this throughout the year we have a couple other initiatives that we'll be working on as well and we'll we'll be in time next year fortunately we missed this year now this puts most of the responsibility on the commission but you're used to dealing with changes within flood plane within within the wetlands the one Saving Grace is you do have the ability to have the applicant pay for the the third party review or when a project gets a little technical some of these can so you could certainly bring in an engineer and that's the saving point when I first proposed this I offered it to the planning board to have it reviewed much like a driveway in the Conservancy district and I was informed that their schedule's a little busy that they would rather not review all of these so I said fine I about one yeah yeah I put it in under the special permitted category just like the last I was going to ask you is how how do you deal with it do you add it as one of the exempt uses that's allowed as by it would be in the permitted section okay would it need a special permit would they is it no no like a septic system I you can put septic systems within the Conservancy District without going to zoning or planning okay whether that's right wrong or indifferent this at least it provides a mechanism to let people um you know make these storm water improvements and I've given a number of examples throughout here that Dr Bob was always fond to the absam Run technically if the Building Commissioner had not looked the other way they could have said no you're not allowed to do the regrading at the base closer to the the creek down there um years ago we worked on Harding's Beach Road near Kima and there's a low Point goes right to The Ponds we have a couple of sediment for Bays there that the town put in and closer to the beach there's a sediment for Bay these are outside of the layout technically they should have met with zoning behind my office they they um gained an easeman and a lot of Queen an Old queenan Road drains into a for Bay now provides some treatment before it goes out to perge Pond there there's some good that can be done here I've been to the energy and climate action committee and one of their concerns the chair had a concern that people are going to use this to get what they want and that's the same with Land Management plans with any benefit that we can offer before the Conservation Commission obviously we use that for mitigation whenever we can um The Hope here is to help clean the environment right while the sewer is the major concern for the saltwater estuaries as we start cleaning out those estuaries by by sewering we're going to be looking at what are the other problems that we're causing and uh we could either take all the land and remove all the roads and all the homes in the flood plane or we can provide some sort of mechanism to to help work on them right and build resilience to you know the impacts from increased storms and flooding and erosion and it's it's really the rainwater that we're looking at yeah it's not the coastal side it's the yeah cuz the coastal side everything just just gets covered over right but the um the storm water even in a regular storm it's your first half inch or less that's going to pick up everything in the road and take it right down to the water you see it all the time in town a lot of the older roads the rural roads they have there's no there's no um storm water system they just have where they've etched out channels and they the water [Music] I'm not sure I'm not sure either but uh at least it treats it somewhat before it empties into the into the pond well my business is on my land's on Enterprise Drive it's all the water oh no complex just goes right into the lsh yep oh and you just reviewed School Street um there was a well I say just it was a couple of months ago there was a um 305 mhm yeah Street School Street oh yeah um the storm water from the road goes down there may have been an easement for that that was lost in paperwork that it's nobody could find um went through a number of different pipes different materials and then ended up in the cranberry bog on the other side or the salt marsh former cranberry remember that came back for okay so the status is this is if we don't maybe we got a special town meeting and you can sneak it in there sneak it in there if we I don't want to call a special town meeting no no not for this but you know this town loves a special town meeting so there might be next one it would be like one article that would be great nobody would show up to vote no you know it would show up to we'd all show up and how did you say it was going to be funded privately the owners it's the owners yeah it's the owners so in the case of Christopher Harding Lane we had a perfect place to we were providing mitigation Land Management plan everything was going to be stripped away if we could have regraded that created a for Bay that would have captured everything and then drained out afterwards that one has the added difficulty that there's a lot of clay out there but we could have designed it I remember one that was appealed to the D years ago up on salt marsh cranberry Lane area and uh we had designed it with a sediment for B was all outside of the Conservancy District but just in the buffer and and somebody complained about storm water and the D representative looked at and said they're meeting more storm water here than they have to there are cases where you can do that and it's not terribly expensive to do certainly not burdensome when you can provide some sort of benefit it's um certainly a tool that we could use to help mitigate projects but more importantly it's a tool that we can use to help clean the water I do you have a question for you that you you you proposing this isn't a is a changing the what's it called the zoning bot zoning B basically and but but you've been told they don't necessarily want to adjudicate U projects associated with this oh this is my favorite line the town is like a hand with different fingers going in different directions so District we were down in the little Beach area and said okay I need a new water service that's a permitted use in that zone so the Zone word could take it up it it would get to them it would not get to them a permitted use does not get to them a special permitted use so if you want to um construct a new driveway or improve a driveway or a road in the Conservancy District you're going to the zoning board of appeals the planning board and the Conservation Commission but if you wanted to put utilities going to your house you're going to the Conservation Commission and that's it well I'm looking at the list of permitted uses and looks like a number of these would require some sort of review by somebody even if they're listed as permitted you us us um okay yeah um does mean zoning doesn't have to look at it they wouldn't zoning doesn't have to look at it because it's a permitted use it's considered having a permit so what would it still needs a How would how would it come within our jurisdiction well if it's in our jurisdiction it's within a resource area it's in okay all right every Conservancy district is a resource area by definition okay yes it's the Conservancy districts for Inland it's based on 2 feet above the record high water and then it goes up from there they have a different Inland Bank definition which is more honorous than the commission's Inland Bank definition so the zoning Inland Bank is a little different than the commissions Inland Bank but they're still well within the 50 Foot buffer with all of those all right so we might start seeing applications dealing specifically with the storm water storm water management as opposed to anything that we normally see yeah we never see it because we don't see those single family residential doesn't need any kind single family residential is exempt um I brought the uh Heather's hair what used to be the natural foods that was before you that was also before the planning board and Samanthas yeah Samantha oh thank you Samantha's I got one of those to do you go back and look at the little I do all right so I mean I'm okay with more work aren't you well especially if it serves a good purpose right yeah the good purpose is what I'm interested in yeah I I will note that in the I went to look at the protective bylaw took a while to find it but anyway one of the prohibited uses B is no person shall drain excavate or dredge in a con Conservancy District so wouldn't be draining wouldn't seems like there's a conflict between this prohibition and what you want to allow is an acceptable use you may want you may have to modify the prohibited use language also possible usually draining it's if you want to drain a pond or a wetland right drawing water no it just says it just says drain okay that's it so I think you may need to touch both of those okay good catch so how effective are these four Bays uh we could certainly get it some examples from the storm water management standards and I I can't tell you right off the top and it depends on sizing and and otherwise um we can provide has to be an improvement yeah and and the point here is not to mandate anybody or to it's just to enable them to be to do this so even if it's only a a 20 to 40% reduction it's still better and even with the um storm water management standards for like total suspended solid you only have a 46% reduction it's a 25% and 25% reduction before it gets into the leeching pit so and there are a lot of different varieties that are out there yeah yeah well even if it cleans up oyster Pond I remember swimming in oyster Pond oh yeah learn of those things in the beach I remember splashing around there I had a lot of fun but it's storm water it's not something that no and and it's a popular Beach we should be making that a little better for yes we should for the summer there all right um I'm going to get us out of here before 5 please do that is it so I'm calling time we have time to discuss this thank you and when when you need to get those signatures again let me know I'm thanks that that's appreciated okay it's the softer side of you iour don't need a second hello hello second hi hi Mary says hi bye Mary hi bye bye Paul bye Crystal if you guys are still there you Haven left anyway by bye take care good [Music] night [Music]