okay I'm going to open the meeting and first the notes on Zoom remember to speak loudly and give your address and name so that it'll be on to the tape that we record um we don't have any members who are going to be on Zoom so we don't have to take votes by roll call but um if you don't hear something let me know so that we can make sure stuff gets uh gets heard all right first we're going to review the May 15th minutes this is the copy I'm supposed to have H is this I'm supposed to have this attached to oh that might be the original okay yeah for okay any unanimous okay all right um tonight is likely to be the last long meeting that we'll have on 5:30 Glendale unless something in particular comes up um I expect to expect to complete the review of all but a few last bits um tonight and the bit at the meeting on on the 17th of July there is a meeting in between but we're not doing solar on the 9th Bonnie so the next have here is nth and the 17 there's two of them yeah oh you don't I didn't put in no well that's because it was just Glen so the meeting on the 9th um is going to have the scantic valley water system which I know a lot of people are interested in it's also going to have um new poles on chapen road um and some other electric maintenance uh pole maintenance uh items and then on the 17th um we're expecting uh 5:30 Glendale to be the first item on that agenda and um likely take a vote unless L to said something odd comes up and then there are there's the Main Street Bridge replacement which is a big one um a couple of nois rdas and some more whole Replacements so the 17th is the next meeting oh oh 5:30 Glen okay um going to open the continuation on April 17th we heard the primary peer reviews of the noi and the storm water report by Jean I don't know why I get horse the minute I come in this building by Jean and Melissa and discussed them and we had comments by the DP and the commission the proponents in between developed uh responses to the peer reviews and other comments and submitted them to the commission and and the peer reviewers on May 15th the applicants describe the new information and revisions they provided in response to the peer reviews and then Gan and Melissa supplied their new updated second round peer peer review responses and we discussed those as well as the need for a a review of a few more technical items uh in the in between I went through all the discussions uh from the beginning and created a summary list of items that were still needed and submitted a request for extend of the current uh peer review contract to a third round on June 5th we reviewed revised and signed the extension proposal which is a contract and reviewed another set of the submissions uh which had been sent back um by 5:30 Glendale and discuss concerns uh voiced in letters including issues around the northern access road and auding properties and a draft set of special conditions we deferred discussion of the riverfront restoration plan and the more detailed agricultural plan until tonight so that's what we'll discuss first um we'll start with um Steve Rivery from gter Consulting to discuss the riverfront restoration plan hi thank you everybody um I don't know if you can pull it up I'm kind of I'm about to go on another hearing so um I don't I wasn't ready for the for the meeting tonight if anybody has the the plan but we didn't really change the actual River restoration plan for the comments last time we provided a narrative to go along with it um that's a little bit more explicit on what's going to happen when and and the kind of The Logical order of things and added some more detail to the invasive species removal and what's there and how it's going to be removed and those type of details so it's more more looks more like a spec that a contractor can look at and know kind of exactly what to do and what to do where um you guys had had some comments on um you know demarcating the the edges so it's more you know visual barrier where the restoration is during construction so it's you know not impeded on or trespassed during during work um and kind of impacted during construction so we kind of added those details to it I know at the the last hearing there was General talk of concern of turtles on the site so it was a relatively easy inclusion to add some turtle nesting features into the riverfront mitigation area and there's plenty of material on site to do it so I think it's an easy thing to do to kind of add in some extra habitat features to accommodate any any Turtle nesting that might be happening on site so we added that as a feature into there and kind of supplemented some coar Woody debris to help amphibians and reptiles and stuff kind of around the peripheral of the site so those are the kind of changes to the restoration plan it was more you know enumerating it a little bit more and um you know putting it in text form so there's a four or five page text narrative I can show my screen too if you guys need me to I don't know if it's I have screen sharing permissions or anything um if we need to look at anything on it one more down yes please that's the report St prepared sorry Steve P if it's easier to give access access either way shutting off anyway I'm just got I've just got my little laptop so I've got like the screens like buried I don't have my big monitor like I usually do you're host now speak okay want see if I can share and I think I got it right here share see if you guys can see the monitor um zoom out a little bit Yeah so here's the restoration plan we like I said we haven't really we didn't really alter it too much you know we kind of refined a couple things in here but um going through it you know we have a restoration area here on the southern side of the array in the riverfront area then one here on the Northern side that's the green areas and all the little dots correspond to different plants that would be going in those areas this green area in the middle is more of a invasive management Zone that's within the existing forested Riverfront area the planting areas are all existing you know either pasture or part of the old horse rink or you know Disturbed exposed Riverfront right now so that's areas proposed for restoration we have fencing on both sides of it um it was in our folder last we've got details on the plant things um you know there's a planting table in here that corresponds to the figures and then we added some blowups to the area I don't know if we had those in last time but we just kind of did some zoom inss and put it on an aerial backdrop um so there's down here there's um just a zoom in of the southern area so it for a contractor it's a little more legible and on the other sheet there's a zoom in of the the Northern Area and these kind of gray areas in here are some turtle nesting Mounds that will add out there which is basically it's just a sand pile that will naturally kind of vegetate over time and give Turtles some kind of exposed sandy soil to be able to Nest can you point out where the fences are that you were talking about yeah it's the dotted line on each side so there's dotted line here it just corresponds with the edge and then there's a fence on the back side here so basically the whole thing will be encircled with fencing during construction and once it's stable the fence can come out once it's stabilized the invasive species area we didn't propose any fencing that's just hand workk in the riverfront in the Wetland just you know hand cutting invasive vegetation and it's mostly going to be cut in dab methodology where you just cut the stem and then you apply the herbicide right on the cut stump so you're not having any you know ancillary effects to other vegetation nearby or just targeting that one plant that that you really want to get rid of you know the multifloor rows or gloss Buckthorn you know whatever it is most of it's Woody invasives that all can effectively be treated the same way glyphosate probably sorry would that probably be glyphosate what's your favorite herbicide to use oh glyphosate yeah I mean I'm not an herbicide treater I'm not a licensed pesticide applicator so I don't like to specify exact chemicals but glyphosate is typically for the Woody stem the most effective I mean there's a host of other things to use but glyphosate's kind of the more tried and true one there's a lot more newer ones that you know that haven't been researched a lot you know some people use some people don't but you know I would just point out to who's ever choosing that that's really close to the water so exactly yeah gly and glyphosate can't be used in aquatic situations there's a special there's a special formulation for aquatic use I think it has a different you know roundups the terrestrial form of glyphosate for land but there's there's an aquatic version of it that has a slightly different chemical makeup but they would need you know a different license to treat aquatically versus treat terrestrially whoever did the treatment um okay but yeah if you want to put that as a condition I think that's fine you know no no glyphosate use within you know open standing water areas or stream or anything like that I think that's completely you know it's a good condition and I don't think you know just makes it clear to everybody that you know that they can't do that and the last page is just you know kind of contractor notes about access and Mulch and all that kind of stuff um kind of you know whoever's bidding on this or gets to work it kind of it's all laid out exactly what they need to do and wear that type of stuff in the in the narrative you talk about putting in um the temporary roads that the uh machines are going to use the machines for digging Etc um where are the those roads going to go kind of we didn't show them because it's more of a like figure it out in the field um but it would just be within this area if they need to put in like a matte Road or something just to get a bobcat in there to plant the trees you know they would just lay the mats down they might not even need to do it it could just be all handwork and that road could essentially just be right on the outside it when we say road it's like temporary Road just for construction access like I don't know I'm sure you've seen Timber mats on the on the eversource the National Grid power lines I mean it probably doesn't even need to be that substantial they have things that are made out of like a composite plastic you know there's different proprietary names for them but they basically just look like Legos and you just kind of lash them together and you can drive on them and it displaces the weight um H talking about any huge machines just no no no I mean this is this is like Bobcat work to put this stuff in if not you know people with a post hole digger an auger like drilling the plant holes and then going out with the plants and putting them in there's not a lot of plants and not a big area so most of this can be probably done with hand workk with machines I'm thinking that the most they'll have is a bobcat out here okay anybody on the commission have another question any question any Resident any questions I just had one admin part uh the labeling of the map says 503 Glendale Road I believe it's 5:30 yeah yeah we could that's a typo on our end we can change that easily enough and look 503 glendell Road wants a nice Riverfront [Laughter] restoration okay thank Steve no no problem all right and yes John Matthews um area two I believe that residential property is that correct to I never read yes and the dark line is the property correct yep is that going to be issue with having the fence there no it would be it would be on our side of the property line we wouldn't be you know yeah but the planning board has setback so I just want to yeah and I'm not representing I'm presuming that a temporary offence would be okay while they're working on it okay yeah this this fence here is a Sal fence it's not a it's not a fence fence yeah they'll let us know if it's not good so we may have a follow-up meeting somewhere along in August or something after the planning board sends information back to us just um to be clear okay um all right and now we have Caleb from Agra Vol having some connection is there a Callin number is there you have a zoom link is there an actual has a call yeah usually there is yeah it should be on the town website I'm there it has one for the planning board it doesn't seem to have one for the commission there's a link in a meeting ID in P that like a number I think I've done it before will he maybe put off t Don do you know it should be way down at the bottom of that page if you go into where to zoom there's a me I there's not a see there's phone numbers with in New York or Chicago there's numbers that won't see thats you're in the zoom box you write to that one sometimes it's also down the same number as the planning board um Bonnie thinks it's the same number as the planning board will have just a guess how how is does it make sense to do something else until I can get Caleb on here and then we'll go back to the I don't I can get him okay um so we also have Jean uh Christie and Melissa Cody here from tyan Bond to go over the third round of the of Feer review um so we're we'll we will go through that and um we may stop you at certain points so that we can stick in some other stuff sure you want control either one of you I if you want to pull up the letter that's fine so everybody can see it I have notes on mine um I don't need to share with everybody it's there here we see no BL out W yeah the up no that's no that up over there the top that one you no the next one okay now F G3 right at the bottom okay we got it all right so start talking um hi everybody Jean chrisy principal engineer at tyan Bond um can everybody hear me okay yes yeah yeah um so after the early June or during the early June meeting um you know we were tasked with a number of additional topics to review I think we have 10 items specific items to talk about some smaller and some larger than others um Melissa and I did our peer review in the same letter so we're going to go back and forth a couple times here okay uh so the first one was reviewing um The Watershed that contributes to the Culvert at the Northern end of the project um you know this we we received additional documentation that delineates that Watershed um based on you know an industry standard practice and reviewing of a desktop model um of that system you know the the Watershed size topography um flow paths curve numbers all look adequate to us um so we're in agreement with that subwatershed delineation that contributes to the Culvert that then parlayed into the design of the Culvert um based on the plans it's a 12in round Culvert um that it can pass the 100-year storm so I think the the analysis shows that it will pass that that that water um one piece that we might want to look at is you know we we we modeled the Culvert as just a pipe we didn't look at you know we have this embankment of a road Maybe in front of it does water pound up there and where how far does it Pond into you know the the adjacent property I don't think it does I think it's been sized appropriately but we might want to just look at that really quickly model that um Culvert as a pond with some storage above it and see what happens there okay we're still trying to get an outside person to do an actual delineation above that property line um if they can that's of the stream um that's of the sub catchment behind the property line so if we get that um we could send it to you I I guess that's in that's a confusion because we have something in the storm water report that shows that subwatershed so I don't know who what we're delineating separately you did you actually go out and delineate it you modeled it I think there's a little confusion I think what Judy's talking about is she is still uh convinced there's some sort of BBW Beyond wall no I'm I'm more interested in how much water and and how it's shaped so how much is going to come to that Culvert yeah no that's what I did and that's what they reviewed that's what we have that's not something that you feel delineate typically okay um one thing that we didn't note in this peer review letter that I know was a topic was the option of the bridge um the bridge obviously maintains the existing flow path it does not constrict water at all so water you know there's no capacity issue um it's a substantial cost to the project and at this time based on the size of that subwatershed I don't think the bridge is necessary based on the information that I have right now we didn't have that we didn't have that topic in the our letter so yeah it wasn't for this for the flow it was for um getting it away from the property line okay well for flow wise that okay um the last piece about the Culvert is I think the the um sizing calculations for the the rip wrap pad at the downstream end um I don't think we saw that so that's a that's a really quick Nick one to fill in may not put that in there but we missed it let me know we can pretty straight forward we'll uh we'll take a look and get it over to you okay um that's it for the culbert comments is there any questions so there's two parts to that right there's there's the ripl rep Outlet pad and the culbert outlet pad were those the same thing same thing okay all right and number three is uh Melissa so I'll turn it over to her thanks um so uh this com the comment or the response is to uh you know review the revised summary of Riverfront area performance standards and provide a final summary of resource area impacts was our comment um so uh there has been back and forth discussion in various um documents prior to this regarding um land and agricultural use um I defer to the commission's evaluation of things prior to this um but emphasize that in the wetlands protection act um the definition of land and agricultural use is focused on um excuse me um land um within resource areas or buffer zone presently and primarily used in producing or raising one or more of the following agricultural commodities for commercial purposes and its animals including but limited to livestock poultry and bees fruits vegetables berries nuts maple sap and other foods for human consumption feed seed forg tobacco flour saw Nursery or Greenhouse products and ornamental plants or shrubs and Forest Products on land maintained in Forest use um so whether or not uh the commission uh finds that this is or has been in the past five years land and agricultural use um the commission is far more familiar with the history of the property and its use um but that is the wetlands protection act definition um of that term um with that had some at the last meeting Rory said he didn't have issues with that right you're not going to use any of the exemptions for agriculture I think where it still came up was that in a lot of the narratives it still still says it's a farmer it's in agriculture use it has been but it's not currently it's in chapter 61b we have applied for 61 a that go into effect next that wouldn't change anything right because that's a tax qu quation I'm not looking for any exceptions okay great then we will move on you don't want any exemptions the intent of the narrative was to detail proposed conditions which is the agricultural use in addition to the so that's where right and and again in that context the term in the context of the wetlands protection act has the caveat regarding you know commodities for commercial purposes so if there is an agricultural commodity for commercial purpose then in the future a permitted activity would be could be considered as land and agricultural use in the context of the wetlands protection act regulations um looking for any exceptions okay they need it you can always submit all those documents to the commission and they can decide okay um there is a citation regarding uh exemptions for minor activities in buffer zone regarding existing fence yard such as an existing substation yard um that does not seem to be present at the project site the applicant does not appear to be claiming this exemption either is that correct that is correct so you have her her paper right clarification of um that particular citation um getting to the context of the riverfront area performance standards um for 10584 a protection of other resource areas um that standard has been met the project was redesigned to eliminate direct alterations to other resource areas um protection of rare species it has been established that the site is not within mapped rare species habitat so the standards not applicable and has been met um the applicant 10584 C Alternatives the applicant has presented two alternatives to the proposed scope of work um including an evaluation of suitable and reasonably available real estate within the municipality per oh bear with me 310 CMR 10584 C 2c1 uh this standard uh has been met and for 10584 D no significant adverse impact um the proposed alteration of resource of Riverfront area forgive me is less than 10% of the total Riverfront area no alteration is proposed within the first 100 ft and the scope includes restoration of degraded Riverfront area however and this is where I will defer back to Gan um the project does not currently meet the requirements of the storm water standards entirely so there is an open-ended um discussion to be continued regarding um further comments in this letter and then I just noted um there was a cleric I believe it's a clerical disparity regarding clearing and Grading within the 25 foot no disturb Zone um in a previous document it was noted as 683 Square ft in this it's 693 I think it's a minor clerical error but I don't wanted to point out the disparity and that's it for that comment so the vast majority of the riverfront area performance standards were satisfied or have been by the documentation provided to date okay so does uh Caleb need to go or can he wait he was trying to get on Just I asking you let him in but we don't see no waiting I don't see him yeah okay okay the shade analysis all right so I'm back um so this was number four um we were asked to review the shade and analysis relative the hydrological impacts of tree removal um a couple things we noted with the shade analysis is that you know shade analysis is done at the winter solstice so the worst case um but at that point that's where the sun is in the South so um while we agree that that is the right time of year to do it we think that the that's the maximum clearing limit from the array um only to the South and then the East and West are different um we also think that the the clearing limits shown on the plans appear to be offsets from the property line not from the array I don't know if we got to pull up the plans and take a look at that um they kind of just generally rub parallel but they should be offset from the array not from the property lines to minimize the tree clearing Nick which one has got the shade analysis in it the clear [Music] okay just go to the plans then is it on the yeah I think I was looking I have sheet C 2.3 up above right nope the next one up Y and I can't see what you're sharing you're what was the number 2.3 2.3 so I I can't Judy I can't see what you're sharing on the screen oh he's going down to the site plans uh for 2.3 okay so if we if you look in the bottom leftand corner you see a 50 foot clearing line label and then a dashed line um if that's the clearing line it looks to be 50 foot offset from the property line not from the array so that I think may be labeled wrong update you on the plan that's not a limit of disturbance line that's like the the town no clearing 50 that's a planning board line that's a that's a z that's my confusion the limit of disturbances has always been that purple the purple line okay on my apolog that's my mistake well I mean you can see we do dip into there because that area is already cleared um in some parts you know so that's why that liance goes down a little bit further right here yeah because that area that's part of the track area that area is already clear okay so okay so so my concern may be much less at this point um we can take another look back at that you know thank you for the clarification that was our mistake um we can take another look at it and see if there's any areas that we concerned of but briefly looking at these at the plans and what the provided clearing limits are I think we're okay but I can definitely revisit that one for the most part we tried to keep it as tight as we could on the back right of the property um we're going to have the hay field we clear we show a little bit extra clearing uh just to have that hay field available to us for the agricultural use but it's nothing major can you pull that down if it relevant to that um it's not relevant to the shade but it's um that line is really tight against the panels and I keep wondering where the trucks are going to go that have to go to maintenance or um Oh there's uh that's aren't they going to be driving in the riverfront if they're going outside that fence no driving well they have to construct it and they have to go back and check it there's I think there's about 12 going to clear veget fence the fence between the fence and the panels between the fence and the Ed so they can go inside the fence correct yeah they drive a pickup truck that's why I did plan that room for a pickup truck it is tight you know we wanted to keep as much restoration area as possible but you know then but I just know from other projects sooner or later a truck is to go out there okay um now if it was on this side where the space is what about the backside where it really is right up against it doesn't look like there's 12 feet there you talking right there on the back side of this array yeah because otherwise it goes outside the fence it's going to be right right up next to the WW right well you have that's the 25 foot no SB yeah right can it can it do everything from that inner Road and not and not have to ever go out to the edge yeah I mean there's still access how much space is between the panels have A2 mod Y you still drop a bob cap through there still get small equipment in between the rows perpendicular to the you have your interconnects between the rows of panels are they under just clarify each module is connected together and then the the ends are connected underground underground so the truck can pass through yes but all that's done before I ever touch a module so all the underground colies are the first thing we do because otherwise I'm mucking it up when I put the racking so they can drive up and down each each roow well that brings up another question I had which is does there ever have to be maintenance on those underground conduits that are under each array I hope not I like that's be catastrophic that's why we put them undergr just like any other utility line I mean it's the only reason would something would happen to be get crushed from a vehicle driving over itself so then you'd like have to pull out all the panels or something we test everything so basically you make the and then you test the wires to make sure everything's fine and then you do you need some sort of Baseline before it'll last for all the it gets very tough but we do do a good job making sure that this is done appropriately the conduits just carry the wire wire can always be pulled like a new wire can be set through the conduit sleeve so as long as the conduit sleeve isn't damaged and the wire gets cut you'd have to have something heavy push down on it to actually break that PVC pipe or before they go we like Mark every pile location so they know where everything goes and then we do the like a method to demand make sure that we don't you say break any questions how far underground is the conduit 3 to six feet I feet it may be de six feet I think it's 3 to six feet is pretty reasonable any other questions out there oh we're stopped okay sorry Jean no problem um the other piece of this one was you know asking what is the hydrologic impact of tree removal um you know we think it's our opinion that the way that has been modeled is appropriate um we've modeled an existing condition with trees and then a proposed condition without with the solar panels um and think this is an industry standard analysis so we're okay with that right and note that that's your response to M um so Jud you that and if you had a question he's finding the P it's it's hard for him to switch back and forth between the p riew and the the submitted materials go well I there okay there you go the bottom [Music] one all right okay all right so number five was um taking a look at panel orientation um as compared to topography um in general and a solar project our our dream and our goal is to have um you know your panels oriented parallel to your topography so that when runoff comes down the panel it will continue to go you know in the same direction won't change direction and won't channelize um there is in general I think that the project is it works there's one area on that same sheet SE 2.3 on the right hand side of the roadway where we do have some perpendicular orientation that I have a little bit of a concern about only because that area is really steep I think it might be like maybe 20% or so 25% um but um you know one piece of this is you know and we can get we'll get into another phasing discussion a little bit later because that's another comment um but with you know your your Construction general permit that you're Swip we're going to have to like really watch your storm water in this area I think um during construction especially it's going to be a challenge um you know we're going to definitely want lots of construction period controls in this area um and I know we don't have to have that nailed down yet that is usually a contractor thing do you want to look at a plan is it this one right one yeah she took a step at of PL put it in the letter yeah so it's that right hand side of the roadway where our panels are perpendicular to the topography and it's pretty steep so this area um we're going to want some to pay more attention to it during construction a little more care you know making sure that we get full stabilization because that's going to solve a lot of problems um Christine so in other situations i' jel with I've um you know maybe I put in maybe two rows of just uh almost like rip wrap um intermediate rows to kind of break up the flow as it's going down that steeper section is that something that you think would help here I I think there's lots of solutions you know um we've seen many different types of things we've seen like a whole Channel Down parallel to the panels I like the idea of intermittent kind of they're almost like stop logs right where check dams um and I think they I think think that's that's definitely something that can work um I think what we're going to find though is we're going to try a couple things during construction so you know we can definitely propose something at this point um but then you know we always have to be prepared alternative you were talking about was pulling some of the panels apart so the water went down through did I understand that that's I I think that's probably may already happen and I think um I agree that's another technique that you can use is to put gaps and that's that was recommended through Mass D's guidance on solar voltaic systems they don't give a lot of detail of what that means though that's the challenge um so I mean we can look at that that's probably another option um as well and it may be compounded you know a few different things together to fix this or to make sure this area doesn't erode too bad any you okay yeah we to make some notes on the plan so we're talking about kind of Gabby and type things yeah well essentially it's just um what I would spe is they would just kind of trench in just two or three foot wide just mounded section of rip ra put these Filter Fabric on the bottom and it kind of almost acts like a check so the water kind of hits it and kind of disperses through like the larger Stone and slows it down and breaks up any of those channelized flow patterns yeah how would that affect the animals that are in that field that' only be a couple feet high just like a little and we wouldn't run it don't they have screening over that they could like get their feet stuck in or whatever just just a little pile of crush Stone you know maybe 6 in uh six to 10 inch 12 inch size uh variable siiz Stone in that area and then we could stagger them so you know we in that lower array section we' put one or two then we'd go up to the next section and put you know two just kind of staggered so there's not just a continuous almost like line I like that idea yeah but I've done that before in other situations and it seemed to work out pretty well and I think I actually have a section in the maintenance plan that kind of details that um type of procedure you do see channelized flow in certain areas do this uh you know that that's that's a fix that the maintenance crew could do so that is in the o that divided but show a few spots on the detail all right moving along number six was about um some sediment for Bay sizing information Jean said it was say 25% rate Jean 25% grade that's that's the note I have um I think that's one of the steepest parts of the parcel I'm happy to provide a specific agency the racking manufacturers would go as much as 35 or 4f what oh yeah no I'm thinking he's thinking it a flow she I exactly I'm looking at it from stand you know your point AG if you put the rip W in there and you're one have there is a possibility so they actually have I believe you'd have to you know put a six to 8 inch RI wrap covered with like an inch and a half and then covered 3/4 Stone to be able to stabilize the area for any animals that walking that area I mean 25% is steep right yeah it is so Nick is that doable what he's talking about I mean we we'll discuss it with you know what he thinks is most appropriate he's the expert with the animals that's not my field of expertise if he doesn't think that he thinks the animals will have problems with 20 foot long strips of crush St like I said I would break them up so it's not a continuous line that Le through them yeah but they're not always that smart they they do what they do yeah if he thinks uh something sign a little bit different is warranted then you know we're more than happy to take a look at it it is probably the area of greatest concern that is the steepest yeah it's pretty steep 25% is you know I mean it's not flat but it's not your standard size much for a driveway but your standard stabilized side slopes 33% right 3 to one so if you think of it in that regard you know if you have a standard detention Basin with side slopes that are you know Lo and seated or any site that gets developed all the slopes are essentially 3 to one um around a prop so it yes I'm not going to say that it's not it's not flat but it's not incredibly steep so I just want to you know clarify how steep it is compared to other grading practices that would be used for any type of construction practice you know time B comment on that 3 to one is the standard the gold standard for stabilizing grades what you okay to move on yes okay am I and I have you started the npdes process or you and leave that till it's all decided that gets filed a couple weeks before construction actually starts okay uh so looking at number six we're looking at the sediment 4 base um sufficiency and maining M maintenance planning requirements um we were provided with a detail for the sediment forb uh the detail is adequate in our opinion um we also were provided with the maintenance requirements that are consistent with um the mass DP storm water handbook which is you know our typical practice for um you know identifying maintenance of storm water management practices um so we're all set with that comment okay um okay then we look at number seven right I don't know because I can't say away any but as soon as we're done I'm gonna tell them to please call back in so you can see I okay she's GNA talk about the agricultural plan next that's why I'm asking I don't see him online yeah I think he's having trouble getting a connection we may have to just put him on the 17th um so the the agricultural plan was talking about the grass species what the selection um you know how is it going to grow how do we have to control it what medium are we using um and the the seed mix provided proposed um while the agricultural plan doesn't say something specifically the surface seaing treatment under the array um in the site plans indicates four to 6 in of clean screen Blom um and then the seed mix is a typical one that we've seen in New England um it wasn't anything you know outside of a normal seed mix that we would use as well um the point of all this is the maintaining maintenance and you know consistent healthy grass growth is Paramount to this project it is really important for storm water management if we're going to have this work the way we want it to we need the grass um and it's the Project's responsibility to maintain the grass and make sure that areas that aren't taking are reeded and if we have to find a different seed mix we have to find a different seed mix that grows in that condition um so there there the the commission may want to consider a condition that requires kind of more long-term um inspection and Reporting just to make sure that the gra is really there everywhere you know it's a big site um Sometimes some areas can get you know ignored and we've seen this in a couple different projects of our own um but we just want to make sure that Grass Is Always growing and we're doing what we have to do to take care of it okay thank you we have I have to come to you to BL this but you will Contin be okay I did this until that is m back stop I have to come to you to ask right for permission I will write in a condition that just has a reporting on it general maintenance some storm water basins and site that's pretty standard the yearly a yearly report well I think for the grass it would have to be more often than yearly I don't think that's often in I don't mind with it for this for year one we're in death with yeah tell it's well is if you do that accept a year one report pass make sure the thing I'm absolutely terrified the most about this project is that we'll have a storm flow that just carries everything off so I want to put all the back stuffs that we can question yes Road I think he talks about uh raising animals agricultur Commodities hate Fields is somebody in charge of running a farm up there or the owner is a farmer um he's that's Jonathan guir there that's sitting next to you and uh so it's G to be actually Farm he's GNA have uh sheep cattle and chickens that that um run in some of the fields under the solar panels is this new no it's in the original proposal no no no has he been raising animals up there this is relatively new yeah it's not it's not currently classed it has been a farm in the past it's not currently classed as a working farm but he has animals now my my real question is is it being farmed so that it can solar panels put into agult land or is it really wants to have AG uh I'll have to ask you and Jonathan that we will have to remove any land that we're not using in agol produce so it is it will be in chapter 61a it's defined by AG next July and any land I'm not using I have to take out did that answer your question not really take out of the project take out of chapter 61a oh not in agricultural use I think the question was are we putting the solar there because it's going to be a is that correct sir no you're putting a farm there because it's Sol are you putting in a farm so that you can get it approved as we could just do the Sol has had a farm since 2021 so that's when ledge value Farm was established which is before the solo so in the Commonwealth there is a special thing Agra volan which this is not um so it is not like solely meant it's meant to have an actual Financial layer on agriculture solar and go together because it is it will be in chapter 61a next year does that help it's a little complicated because as we were just discussing with Melissa it doesn't currently fall under the D qualifications as a farm but it is he is keeping animals there and he's you know using them as people would we could just develop the site as a solar facility without having a farming comp I think that's what you wanted clarification yeah that could be done but the property owner wants to utilize the land for farming so we're looking at this dual use which would be to good use for this site was previously farmed um it doesn't change anything about the part we don't deal with the smart program and all the other qualifications but it doesn't change anything about that either does it no benefits to it the land owners wishes so I don't 10 chapter 61a was for agricultural use and what that means is basically I'm going to paraphrase a little of it but you know it could be honey bees things of that nature but forbearing animals is one of the principal things and it has to be from the state's point of view it has to be an active business in other words those animals will either be slaughtered whatever but their use is um primarily for saale so that's what kind of a chapter 6 okay so then I would think that the state would have to see that that that sort of thing has been going on before they're GNA all pay you for 61a they're not going to give you the 61a until they yeah but even even if what we were saying is that even if they gained 61a um from the state that's still under DP doesn't mean they've met the D qualifications as a farm so there's like two whole sets of things um to get Farm exemptions it's even tighter um I think they're very close to meeting the 61a state rules but not the D exemption rules and I just didn't want to confuse that yeah okay I know it's kind of hairy I do have a sheet on the the D considerations of Farmland if anybody wants to get one I have a couple with me or I can send you one okay all right Jean okay so we're moving on to number eight this is where we get into um some real technical nitty-gritty stuff with storm water um we were asked to provide commentary on some new St water information concerning Peak flows and basins um I guess guess our first standpoint is we continue to agree with the Curve numbers and the modeling that the applicant has performed to date um we're satisfied with the Curve numbers as a post construction fully stabilized site so that means the grass is completely there we're not dealing with exposed Earth um you know one of the things that we wanted to note was in the number of St of solar projects that I've been involved with throughout Massachusetts and Connecticut when you reach that full stabilization the storm water management features youve built are sometimes they they don't receive any water um so I just wanted to point that out that you know the full stabilization of the grass is really still really important I'm gonna say that over and over again you're going to sick of hearing that um another piece that we were asked to review and this was based on public comment during the last meeting was um you know some of how the basins are working relative to groundwater the groundwater mounding we did find a couple things that we think the applicant should address um really just with their groundwater mounding calculations um we don't need to talk about the specifics of that until they've had an opportunity to really look at that and you know dive into it and happy to have a conversation offline to talk about you know what we've been recommending in here if that's okay with the commission of course yeah as as long as it doesn't break the open meeting laws if it it would be just the app myself I think yeah and Nick I don't know if that's all right yeah no I'll take a look at the comments like I said we just got this yesterday but understood that's why I don't want to spend everybody's time talking about it when you're not prepared so yeah I don't think it's complicated it made sense to me so I mean the Basin are essentially just filled you know they're at grade filled slop so we have to raise it a foot to make it work it's not right it's not a concern right we we we'll there's things we can talk about and do there yeah so we have no no problem if you had to do that how would it affect the BBW that's next to it by raising because then you you obviously you'd have it raised above where the BBW is right well the Basin doesn't really interact with the BBW so that's the basin's taking flow and we set them in the lower parts of the site but they are right next to it in several places correct yeah but um she's worried if you raise it too much you're now gonna have then you have flow that comes off that into the BBW well there is some flow from the side slopes that's just going to be grass that just kind of runs the BBW we can't catch every drop of water on the site right so we're we can position those basins and put swes in certain locations to collect as much as physically possible um you know as far as the runoff goes from the areas that we're we're trying to mitigate and those areas are primarily in the wooded area where we're changing the ground cover from wly part of the site there's only one small Basin right there because primarily all that the whole area is mostly Fields already so we're just essentially going from field to field but field with sold P but it's still considered field so it's that North correct yeah up in that area that's that that's the water we're trying to collect and then slowly release because uh of the change in surface cover that we're going from wooded to the grass that's why we require the storm water bases okay okay all right now we're on number nine um this is where the commission asked tyan bond to um respond to Gary wier's comments um the first one in a is in regards to construction phasing and how um in some areas where there's steeper slopes and tree removal that we're going to be doing quite a bit of grading um and that we're not going to be putting seed down we're not going to be stabilizing anything until after panel installation um and then another topic about you know um some curve number oh that's next hold on retract that so the phasing piece of this um what's interesting is that the applicant has stated in you know their phasing language that um the solar field racking and table installation occur after the site is cut cleared and the a area has been stabilized um and then that also includes storm water management features been stabilized so you know these panels aren't going up until we have some vegetation growth and again that's my important thing that I want to reiterate here um so I think with the the phasing that's been provided to date is is um adequate in our opinion and will help to you know avoid that interact the the occurrence of a fully unstabilized site with panels constructed I had a question about the phasing um Phase 2 is 7.18 acres is it possible to cut that piece in half so that you do half of it at a time so you know the the problem with that is it's the reality of mobilizing and getting you know the tree clearing crews out there and doing their work because you know they pull the trees they can I cut it all and I can I stump it and stabilize it at half time there's a big machine that comes to cutting and then you can there's different ways in which you can stump it if the be okay with cutting it all at once I would then then you would stump it half at a time yes yeah that's cool that's com as long as you're not doing that okay I think that works because they'd have to build out they can come in there cut stump the lower half build the Basin out and then seed it that that's what I Envision happening you know when we're talking stabilized it's not going to be 100% right I'm hoping that they get 60% 70% hopefully growth they'll come in and respray it again to you know surface you know spot treat areas because you know they're going to come in they're going to set the racking throw the post and that'll disturb some of the ground so they'll have to clean it up a little bit but the goal is I've seen this on a few other sites that we worked on really worked well yes certain parts of the site get dug up um once it's been once the grass started to grow but it's easier to fix it and you don't have 10 acres of just dirt draining it you know off site which is what we absolutely don't want so that's why I did put that language in there and this site's relatively manageable because you know the primary area that would cutting and clearing is on that easterly side so we we have a large portion The Cypher doesn't require any cutting any any stump any stump removal it's mostly just Fields cleaning it up doing a little bit of grading work installing the drive way so it it should be manageable to cut everything like Rory said stump that lower part build out the base and then go move you know spray it then move on up stump the next section spray that area hopefully get good growth relatively quickly before they come in and do the racking install because sometime I found on other sites it goes from it's cut then it sits for for two or three months and then the racking goes in or there's a delay of some sort so that's why I like to have it why I specified it as such so get it stabilized immediately okay uh so letter B of which one number are we on nine right um this is regarding in regards to um the water the modeling um that was provided and using smaller watersheds or subwater sheds to model storm water runoff um and also to you know consider increased curve numbers of 75 to 85 um regarding the watersheds the subwatersheds how you know they've been designed and and modeled um we didn't have an issue with the way it was modeled um you can you can microdel this you know to to I don't you can just microdel it you know if you wanted um but because the the receiving water of Eastbrook is you know by both legs of this Wetland um where water is going to go we thought it was appropriate the way it has been modeled um regarding the curve numbers um I think we've talked about this previously we we we are still satisfied with the curved numbers that are used in the analysis provided by the applicant um one thing we did want to note is you know the way that some of our modeling works with disconnected impervious um you know as as a mass D um kind of low impact development technique is imper is is disconnected impervious so it's pieces of impervious that aren't one big mass and that's what this case is so solar panels the whole long strip isn't one impervious thing there's breakes in between it where water does come through um so again you know as long as this grass is there especially where the grass you know where the grass is receiving runoff from panels being stabilized is really important um I think that's it for that one the animal issue the animal issue paragraph there on that page the increase of erosion due to grazing animals and I I think that's that's really um continuing to enforce um maintain a grazing plan that it may it may evolve over time as you find animals are eating more or less or you know it can't be a oneandone kind of thing um having the right vegetation there in the first place making sure that there is the right vegetation as the project ages and that the grazing plan schedule is um adaptable to the actual ssy conditions and will be adapted to ssy conditions so again I think we we re we recom Ed talking too fast here um that you know that the the commission consider a condition around that and how you I noticed that in the in the performance standards it says that you can only plant native stuff underneath the panels um but it's obviously you can't the gra grazing pastures aren't native stuff so how do you uh reconcile those two things together I'm sure they when they finally come out with an agro solar plan that's actually developed they haven't at this point do you have any suggestions on that or I is that to me or to the applicant doesn't matter Whoever has an answer I think that's that's written into you know what this like in a condition where it's adaptable we have to roll with what punches we find as you know this isn't quite document yet here so you don't consider that absolute the need for Native grasses well I think we always want native grasses but I don't know of any other solution at this time I don't know if the applicant does we're going to defer to our agricultural specialist once he's available but if we can't get on the meeting we'll respond in writing okay I mean obviously de must have considered this when they started allowing AG Agro solar but it is it is a conflict in the performance standards and the actual grazing plan which I I will get back to you okay notes and make sure right set up all right letter C was in regard to nitrogen loading on the scantic river um you know the scantic river is not impaired for nitrogen currently um it is within the um Connecticut River Watershed which is impaired for nitrogen um so what we have to do or I guess the long on the sound is um what we have to do on this site is to you know look at our nitrogen removal tools that we're using and infiltration basins to get a 50 to 60% nitrogen removal so I think the storm water controls that have been implemented are paying attention to nitrogen um you know and ALS Al that the vegetation uplift of that will also be helpful Nick do you have anything to add to that no that's perfectly acceptable the infiltration basins provide that as they said the vegetation will hopefully pull up a decent amount of that night yes I have another question on that um um as far as I believe East Brooklyn does speak down to the scantic but it also um possibly and I'm not hydraulic engineer but the question is is that also is in close proximity to the town's public wat okay so East Brook does run it is very close so I'm not super conc ered about that but I am concerned about the fact that it's a cold water fishery so just depends on your both ways are make it important nitrogen coli from the those are questions yeah the eoli question is a good one and and we know we know for aan do something that I think needs to be so many hes already so how would we deal with that I mean if we have it if we have if we have the water leaving the site or being collected on the site tested regularly which we do have a condition for um I could add eoli to that condition I'm having it tested for fos but we could put um I can't speak for Caleb but I don't think this is like that concern is for like large massive Farms but like the number of animals that are on this Farm again I don't know I'm not an expert may not have that large of an impact as others might think that's what I believe K will tell you there just not that many animals they will be rotating as well but some may not always be on site they to other sites they may come back to that site so I just I I'll defer the Cale but that might be okay I don't think this it's not a mass operation am I hearing another question yes one animal is too many is my concern how many animals are going to be on this prop what is I'm not I've heard there's going to be this this and this what is the thing picture that's the part that Caleb would have spoken to us about so we'll have to wait till the 17 to ask specific questions about I want to ask him questions about the fences and about the numbers of animals and about how they manage the rotation those will all come up on the 17 aost one comments uh the commission and the a have made several comments about how there's Wildlife so there is existing Wildlife on this property and we're only taking up half of the Acres there will still be Wildlife presence so that Delta between what is now and what will be there that should be taken into consideration I'm not sensing off the whole property there is existing animals on there that I'm not it's also true that if it was a a farm farm without a solar there would be some but there's just a there's a flow speed increase that happens with the panels which is a concern you were talking about rip w things and that's part of it is trying to catch that speed of flow as it comes off the panels into the fields if he was a farmer you couldn't say one animal is too many so you just have to take that into consideration all right and then the last piece of this one was letter D um know suggesting a condition a monetary condition um for a future erosion event I'm you know I think you need to talk with legal counsel about how that works I don't know if you have we actually have a town bylaw that applies to that and we're going to use it okay we will have in the final Bond um a section that's for um storms and Wastewater is that during construction ority this C that's imp perpetuity that covers like um when you're 10 years in and the climate has gotten a thousand times worse and suddenly we have a yonga storm and it washes away half of the BW which has to be restored the bonding money would go towards that otherwise it's just held Until the End um in a bond and the planning board will also want a bond and so that'll get combined together into one big amount um we did in that list of items ask for an estimate for that part of the bond for the Wastewater storm water part of the bond um and then we'll basically my understanding but I have to talk to Brian about how this works is we submit that as our part of the bond and then they'll consider it when they actually draw it so if you have if you can get an estimate that would be a really good we can agree there's no major changes can I can work on okay all right and then um the last one was to talk about how storm water works or how this whole facility will work um when considering a frozen condition um you know Frozen conditions aren't something that are regulated or um you know Mass D doesn't require us to model what Frozen conditions look like um the difference between the existing site and the proposed site is that you know if this if the site was completely Frozen and we did have more we had rain while everything was frozen we have these basins and these basins have been designed with an engineered Outlet structure in the event that they fill up so it's not just that you know once these basins fill up during a condition like that water's going to break out over you know the entire burm it's designed through a rip wrap Spillway um and I think that's you know the safeguard that we have in place at this time um this isn't you know modeling your Frozen conditions isn't something that we typically do as part of um our hydrologic analysis but it was a good question so [Music] okay um last paragraph I have is just reiterating why the grass is so important and I know you're sick of hearing it from me no I'm not sick of it okay that's important question yes I want to go back to number three where the letter says that River Front standard has not been met because of some sort of storm water item can I have some clarification on what we're referring to that's going to be the um mounding analysis okay just I think once we meet that we're going to be okay all right yep so everybody's clear because saying it doesn't comply or it doesn't meet the standards kind of direct okay so he does could be a so he does that he sends that to you and you'll let us know if it's adequate is that still within your peer review yes I can do that y okay thank you yes first want to make it clear speaking on my own behalf not s a couple storm water questions number one is that in the the store submitted 23rd 2023 April 22 it says turbidity Benchmark monitoring for discharg says this development is not required to provide turbidity testing and sampling based on current classification of receiving water you point out no sorry has that been altered I I I could double check that the reality is the idity monitoring is for groundwater you're pumping groundwater say you that's for like a construction project any book is him that's for a project that you would be doing a major excavation that pump ground Indian Brook he saying he's saying it was a typo and he's going to change itpo over 20 different cases in their in their documents where they put the wrong address the wrong town wrong uh location I could do another one they say the storm water report they say that snow removal within the driveway should be PL stock pile for all snow events with greater six in of snow accumulation a designated snow stock Mile in order to provide clear access Frank anyone know one of my favorites is if there's a fire that says tall Grand go fire right another one is if you have to shut off the grid do it at Tom ha road which is also G so can you check through for all the typos problem is these are not typos they're not grammatical erors they're not spelling areas they cutting paste to show the lack of carelessness disregard and and uh uning about the specific location and the typ me that's message have be very careful of what these people are saying I can point out the other 20 if you have time looks good Judy may I respond to that comment yes because again we've been up with the commission for two years we've been through peer three peer reviews for nois spent what 20 20,000 perer review the documentation we have delivered thousands of pages of documents of the commission so it is well within the right for the individual to make the comments but take a few uh you are correct they are Legacy notes and to then compile those Legacy notes and say that the applicant because of these Legacy notes in thousands of pages P documents that they show not they don't show care I don't understand that logic they don't show care you spend that kind of money you would have someone at least be able to Sir there are thousands and thousands of pages and I take responsibility I personally take responsibility for not being there you don't have to take responsibility Nick was the one who signed the things that did again I I certifi propel why this documented under my directional supervision the problem is you're asking the town to accept LGE solar facility in an area that we all know is environmentally sensitive run up and that and you can't even get the town right and you can't even get the location right that's a problem that's a credibility problem for you not for me I don't care how many documents you submit it if you ever went to court of law that with documents that were incorrect like that the judge would throw it out you say get out of here and come back you know my business sir that's not a factual statement Judy I I I would like to I respect the gentleman as individual to make his confidence as a member like where he's allowed to do so I disagree with his statements sincerely think we'll go through all of the all of the papers before the next before the 7 or whatever they are negligence errors what and furore if there's another application there are eight applications and I would bet money that there are multiple mistakes in multiple applications throughout this town so to nit Pig I understand that this project has been controversial but we have done our very best to put our best ever forward throughout the last two years so it's this hardly to have it g okay yeah for the record majority of those items have resolved can't hear you a majority of those items have been resolved in the revisions I believe the gentleman was refering to just turn initial same items it's not about resolving typographical errors or grammatical errors or spelling ER it's about substantive things that you promise to do and you don't even have the right Street or the right look in brook or the right location or the right I know on you had the wrong town you had Glen Dale instead of H you the point is what credibility do you have when you see those things document that people are depending on for the safety of their water supply of their environment of their sanity when so that's my point and I think you need to really think a l about that okay John I just have one question I'm sorry I gota back number one I believe um that was culbert we spoke about the beginning yes so um if I could ask and I haven't reviewed the plan the invert we talk about the is it going to be a smooth ID orated ID inside diameter smooth orated it does have an effect on Nick it's smooth it's smooth than you and and I would note that we haven't made a final determination about whether that's going to be a culvert next to the property line or a bridge that goes a bit into the BBW I still strongly favor the bridge I favor The Bridge K what do you have a do do you prefer the bridge or the I prefer the bridge I think we just took a vote doesn't work that way who's there who said that who is that I don't know Anonymous I don't know who's SP who's um speaking hello all right um so we'll ask for the bridge and we won't include any W intrusion in the uh you don't have to change all those calculations because it's only about I figured it out and it's only going to be a few squar Judy I would ask that the commission uh I believe P said there is a significant CS to make a bridge I I so to make this decision I would ask that the commission um P that into consideration making that very good decision well honestly I think the planning board may make the decision for us and send it back anyway I agree so I think it might save all the the going back and forth if it if you just do it I would ask the commission allow the planning board to make that decision about the waiver and if I have to come back we'll have to move the whole Ro any is that reasonable John I know you can't speak for the planning board but you have been on the planning board and and I and I did help frame the I'm going to say this again the 100 foot order should be S you should should not be invading it was specifically put in when we wrote the bylaw to protect the residents around specifically says in a residential area which this is proposed okay that 100 foot not so for the record it's a 50 foot clearing setback well there's two and 100 foot structure setb that's and we're asking for a waiver so we don't have to fill and disturb a resource area I understand the town's position but the way D will look at this they will see that there's an alternate pathway that doesn't require a direct disturbance of a resource area I can that's ask time Bond about this but they would possibly appeal the commission's decision to require us to fill Wetland when there's a known pathway that does not require I will disturbance to a resource I will send a question to Mark Stinson and ask him if if de has a preference but didn't he already say that he would not violate any Town zoning yeah I thought so no he doesn't he didn't say that I that I had set that discussion separately but D didn't say they wouldn't violate any Town zoning and they didn't say they would demolish any Town zoning what what the says is they have nothing to do with zoning so they will ignore it so it when we were talking about the no disturb Zone um I got a letter and they said you know uh Mark said they would they would um Wipe Out the no disturb zone or they would you know it's they just don't consider it they don't take any Municipal laws or any zoning into consideration in their review it doesn't mean they would make you get rid of it or take out everything that is in there it just means they don't consider it at all it's not because can you imagine if they had to consider every towns for 300 and however many towns it is um each separate Municipal law so they they just don't they only take state law so for us to fill a wetland for the state regulations we have to comply with the performance standards which we have to document there's no other way to gain access to the Upland area in the Westerly part of the site I I understand that I understand the argument but I will I am gonna I use I use Mark as my consultant so I go to him I ask him the technical question Hees take action against the decision that the commission renders you know Mark is okay with it and you get something of writing from Mark then I wouldn't say we're more than happy to fill the Wetland but we'll move the driveway and do what the commission we're trying to come we know Finding boards no we understand but I mean there has to be balance right with we have to prove that there's that's the only way so I can't put that on paper and say this is the only way when can ask for the waiver for that section whatever is 200 feet that we would have to clear in that 50 foot Zone to avoid a direct resource area in that that makes sense I I understand what you're saying I'm not sure that that that's the advice I'll get I'll just find out know but we did do a sketch as requested of what it could look like take a look you put that talking about it it's not final like guess said it's just a sketch what am I looking for it says a sketch of it's up top right there sketch yes so that is essentially what we' be looking at so that black dash line is the 50 Foot what's the maximum span of that sort of bridge that you can get in other words how how big an opening I'm trying to figure out where you can put it in the wetlands it takes some reasonable compromise of land loss so for the record it's a bridge it's a three-sided open bot three sided open bottom culish so what's the span that you can get for the flow area for the flow area I believe those come in 10 to 12 foot widths it's detail we can zoom in on the uh top left corner there I think it's 10 or 12 I mean I presume they come in various sizes well it I think anything wider than that then would turn into a bridge quadruples the cost it's uh it becomes very very costly you know for something that would need a wider span you can see on the bottom of the the the detail there you would put two together yeah so I think 10 to 12 feet is the max span which is plenty openness for that channel you know so you know when we're looking at how big we would make this opening and we would use the screen Crossing standards to provide the required openness which is a ratio between the open area so like the cross-section area that's open and the length and I believe if you go down it's a little bit more detail there I go the stream Crossing standards I think it can't be more than a ratio of 082 so it's uh shs here okay guess my question is if you had let's say three or four ignoring clost would it be less disturbance to the Wetland we're still gonna have to dig that whole area any have to you got to put the footings in we need about three foot wide concrete footings which are set on six inch of you would you would disturb it in the beginning but would nature then take its course and fix itself oh I mean yeah there would be a wetland disturbance and we'd replicate Wetland area um you know the goal here is to we're not spanning the Wetland we don't span the wet you span the stream well I understand I'm trying to see if there's a way to span the wetlands a little bit not a cost effective BL not a cost effective could you pull that down it' be like an 80 foot long structure just doesn't make sense okay I'm not engine so you're saying you would have you put in footings so if you zoom in where that blue line is that's about where the channel that's the stream and see those like little hatched uh logs the plus sign top plus sign so the this these would be the footings right no right here that one this one zoom in that one there plus sign right there well six plus signs that one there that make okay now pull it over so these would be footings and then You' have you know essentially crane would come in and just drop that once you kind of dig those out um and set that set those on crushed stone then frame would come in drop that one piece so the digging out isn't that whole span from there to the edge of the wet lenss it's just those two but we would have to then fill these are retaining walls because to have right so right before we had the the cul the pipe which was at the same elevation as the stream channel now we're like four or five feet higher so we have to ramp up to this to get to that openness which is I think I have at least 30 36 or 42 inches roughly of open space excuse so you have to ramp I'm sorry to interrupt is there a way on Zoom the people watching and be able to see this sketch because they're only seeing they're seeing the crowd yeah they see there a way to fix I know okay I'm amate I thought whatever we were looking at they could see that's that's what I thought too share yeah you share that so the reality with this you know things that D well I feel that D would take into consideration you have now you have a 2,000 squ foot Wetland disturbance you have a lot more permanent structures the retaining walls are longer they're higher um you have direct burial with footing you know it's it's you know it's it's a question well we'll ask d i that's the only answer that I that I can give you we have to ask Jean do you have an opinion about that she still there it t to made easier you make me host I'm here I was muted sorry um I wasn't really sure what we were talking about for a lot of it okay this the bridge that at the northern Crossing where it goes against the northern property line yep it goes right up against the northern property line and we have a sketch proposal for a bridge that would be moved out of the planning boards setback Zone essentially and I see that sketch we have that yep okay um do you um Nick's argument is that if he sends that to DP they're going to make him put it back at the northern property line do you you know more about what D Rejects and doesn't oh and I may ping Melissa on this one too she knows D really well I I don't I don't know what they would do honestly I really don't I'm sorry yeah I don't think I do either oh okay thank you um is anybody have any more questions for Jean because she's just hanging around here and she'd probably like to go home I a question yes it seemed like the rep from Ty and Bon thought a critical piece was keeping that grass healthy yes who is ultimately responsible for taking care of that grass and making sure that is it the Solar Guys farmer that's a good question animals is it Caleb who's ultimately responsible for that gr the applicant the the the applicant of the company that that owns the project be responsible the grass you I will be responsible for all of the inside as long as I own the company and for all this fence and on plan anything inside that fence area is my responsibility so even for the whole length of the project you you don't do it yourself you hire somebody is there is a landscaper too so Jonathan the land owner the next is landscaper professionally and we we will hire somebody to do professionally and monitor is and submit reports to the commission Nick does this there's a variety of people that that can be used there was a question back there I can be very tricky see people try and grow grass and it's not easy but the commission will make me because they won't they won't sign off on my project until I on any of your other projects have you had any trouble getting the grass to over time over several years don't clear in November but if you don't clear in November and you clear like in the spring and you do have growth then no I don't see never had a problem not if you were clearing an appropriate time I have cleared in November and then nothing grows because it gets cold and then that's not smart but if I if I cleared in April or May June July yeah it grows everything GRS that would be part of what the monitoring would be for especially that first year to make sure if there's a big storm is it staying is it washing away you know if there is the number of animals that are on it too many because that can also make it sparse etc etc all those things uh somebody back there had a question over there okay I drive by a lot of solar Fields unfortunately I never see great vegetation underneath that it m looks like blcks and weeds to make um so I'm not sure how you're going to get this grass to grow but my other question is the uh you said we were going to have to use a train to put those Post in is that what you said how with those oh the racking yeah that you were just talking about thatd the C Bridge are we talking about the cover or the or the need a crane the panels like just like a regular Astro crane you know traveling eight wheeel crane um to to pick it up and put it in it'd be too heavy for like a a large escavator to pick up can you hear what he's saying no not really he said it would be too large for a normal excavator so they would have to bring in a crane that would put it in so does that contradict what you said earlier that you have to bring in a crane I'm thinking of a crane I've seen them they're pretty big but earlier you said you weren't really going to need a lot of big machinery oh that was just for the riverfront restoration my concern was were they going to bring large equipment in along the river they're trying to restore and be tamping it down at the same time as they're fixing it up this has a road that goes right up to that bridge fix road so they can come in on that road right pretty much behind it there's a lot of wildlife back there that I'm you know concerned about so if you want to ask Melissa about her thoughts on the culbert and going through and filling the Wetland when there's a viable route to the north Melissa she may be able to provide some insight Wetland performance standards do you have comments so you know similarly you you've got to demonstrate avoid that you've voided minimized and finally mitigated um avoidance altogether is you know in the context of the wetlands protection act is the preference um especially since it means you're not you know further encroaching upon another resource area um you know if there are you know whether or not there are extenuating circumstances could be a consideration of that particular Alternatives analysis but in the context of the wetlands protection act avoidance would be the preference because mitigating and mitigation essentially requires um one: one replacement at a minimum and it needs to be successful within two growing Seasons um not to make light of growing grass but that's a more significant commitment to replicate the functions and values of a vegetated wetland than it is to just grow grass so alteration in the buffer zone versus direct alteration of a resource area is uh you know doesn't have the same effect on functions and values okay any other questions yes yes Dave um so I think the gentl to order started to answer the question of how many animals and then I didn't get the exact answer when do we find out how many animals but they are the agricultural guy was going to be here this evening yeah he was unable to connect so we're gonna ask for him to come back on the 17th to a answer the agricultural questions but J isn't he just their Consulting yes with the applicant answer that question how many animals he's GNA have I don't think that Jonathan do you have any answers to that you haven't talked about how many it might be we have but because the project ch you get a rough idea are we talking tens 20s 30s dud I tell you that we need one sheep per acre to do the grass C so I'm G to have say 20 sheep on there that's a number I I can't specify other numbers uh I'm happy to get back to commission today ask for but if you want sheet it's one sheet per acre okay thanks that that does help it gives me a sense so is it just sheep or no sheep cattle and chickens so they produce x amount of per animal per day and then I guess the is going to calculate how that may or may not run off into the scantic river well we were talking about that the the the issue is not to have it run off into the scantic river the issue is to stop it before it goes anywhere near the river so the idea is to have it stopped by the basins and the and the grass and the other sorts of uh BMS or whatever and not it there is no plan to have it go into the river it should go into the ground and then into the river and filtered through the ground but yeah it is an issue if there's too many animals that that could theoretically happen because they could eat too much grass Judy fa said the animals right now in property right are causing nitrogen and all other things to go in river right now on a continuous basis have been done for the last 15 years there's been no regulation of that there no I there's no no number of how many animals or there this has been happening continuously those are squirrels now there are a few farm animals there now is what he's saying don't you think the panels kind of alter the flow yes they do yes I a little different than Cent Environ okay anything else Jean um Melissa yeah we're good yes okay I just I have a question for the girls for um I was wondering did you guys um I'll take into consideration any of um Dr aredian um recommendations slash um uh comments about um at the last me that would be Jean because it's storm water I didn't get the beginning of that we were not wondering if you considered uh do Mr gan's uh comments uh she does make a comment in the peer review about other input um and I think she said it go ahead as I recall he was quite concerned about um the basins storm water basins that they um uh kind of disagreed with you guys yeah we I think we disagree on the curve numbers like the final how the final condition of the site will shed water um but he also did bring up the points about um the infiltration basins and the groundwater mounding where Bedrock is and like that that we did note in our most recent round of comments for the applicant to review and respond to okay and have they reviewed and responded no she just asked them tonight oh okay so they will do that they will send it to her and she will see uh if she's satisfied with that oh and how Emil that she will tell us and then tell us at the next at the next meeting yeah she's only contracted for this one meeting but as a favor essentially she's going to do that extra review and send it to us do have a question yes as you know the area that we live in is is very Rocky so this may seem like a strange question but is is the property going to be I don't I don't know what the word for it is but is it tested for how much Rock yes they do extensive um both coring and test pits um test pits are kind of like those perk tests okay that you do when you're building a house only they did a whole bunch all over the place and they did coring to see what kind of soil it is which also answers some of those questions about where the Bedrock is how where the clay layers are that don't let the water travel through and all those sorts of things that was mostly considered um in the anrad review last year when we were talking about which soil was where and what kind of soil it was okay because we're not just talking like Boulders we're talking no this there's a huge section of this property that has um clay Stony soil um High uh high levels of of uh impermeability in some sections okay so if this were to go through all of that would be tested prior to anything going in yes but it's already been all tested would listen to three years of drilling Rock no no it wouldn't be useful for them to drill Rock because they're not putting in anything that's that's a big structure that would take that for a foundation and they can't use it for drainage so yeah I'm not saying it's not there I'm saying they they don't have a reason to go down to it to bedrock but what about the the conduit did you say they would be six feet yeah underground 10et if leg there I can't be different if there's if there's ledge or bedrock at 6 feet then I'll maybe go to 3 that sense Y and for the like three trli it'll be no more than two weeks and they pre-drill and then drill a foundation scre yes Rory um you said you manage and control everything within the fence CL sir okay so regarding the livestock grazing who's managing that we will have uh a contract with the landowner to manage that he has so he will be moving the cattle the she property have a service agreement to manage the life throughout the life of the system okay another question that contentious area where where you're invading the bucker to the neighbor because of um environmental concerns is there no other way through the property owner from a different direction to the to the back to access that of the solar I wish unfor there's not B oh you you're proposing they go on to Jonathan's property to do that I think wrong but you with the yeah what's what's north of this Crossing is a butter property but not Jonathan's it's hey what about to the to the eat I mean there's there's no other access point through any of the owner's property unfor know there's a big Wetland going right down nor paral that kind of like five between East and east and west and so if there was we would definitely taken it but unfort I see no alternative route yeah could you pull up the main map the front okay so here's here's what might be in somebody's mind if you went aray one I think is south and then you went around all the way by Eastbrook and you went up into your extra array I don't think that's possible because you end up in river right IE that one yeah that one I go to the front so just all the way up right there good okay so theoretically If instead they went down the road see that road that's there now isn't going to be there they're taking it out the that South uh loop so what what if you went we're trying to get to here right we're trying to get here and up here and what is going on is so here's the brook River Front Zone and then we have the Wetland which kind of goes up if you hit that minus a couple times scroll down so if you follow my finger right so the wet Ling ties into the brook so off the property so we show it it comes up and then it goes down and then it comes up again and then it comes ground meanders all the way down all the way to the brook yeah so the answer is no there's no space to get around to there that's the only place that's why we have it there if there was another place we' go for it but there there really isn't question would be it was so contentious to cross over the wetlands why don't just eliminate that solar P so your hardship cutting out too much the project that it just no longer becomes we have to um I could find the thing to read to you but basically all of the performance standards have to do with within uh viability within reasonable viability um if if he can't figure out a way to do the project that's viable then it would be his choice to not build it but our our thing is to evaluate it within viability it's a funny um wording of the question I'm looking for a very particular piece here when when they have to do their Alternatives analysis the alternative analysis is they they had to submit all the Alternatives they could think of including buying other land in somewhere else in hampon um so that's that's for Riverfront disturbance and yes that's but this is this would only be Wetland disturbance but basically they do come down to the same question which is that they you're looking at either doing a viable project or not doing a project so our job is to see if enough conditions essentially can be added to it to make it allowable from our Wetlands Viewpoint and still be viable from their Viewpoint and that's why people have have said you know feels like we're giving into to them or we're negotiating with them and in a way it is a negotiation we're saying can you shrink it down here and do that and still have it be viable you have to remember they already took out a big chunk of it down in the lower right corner if if they decide that with the conditions we feel we have to have it's not viable they can withdraw the project but our job is to put in put all the conditions on it that we feel are necessary to protect the wetlands and that's all we get to talk about we're talking about the bridge mostly because we're trying to respect the planning board which is coming and not make them replan the project three times otherwise we just have it against the Border but I personally felt that was pretty hard on the abuts besides the planning board sacred border property yes Sac Saint set back yes the only problem I have that is said I don't understand said at the last meeting that uh there's a conflict between the property yes there is okay there what what Nick was saying earlier is that by this by the wetlands performance rules and the other standards they should be avoiding that area outlined in Green at all costs and that puts them up there in the no disturb Zone but the planning board has a 50 foot setback and 100 foot setback and if they try to take that into consideration they run across the wetlands there is no rule that you can't run across Wetlands it's just that you have to make all efforts to destroy as little of the wetlands as possible and you have to mitigate any that you destroy all the regulations are like that they're all um I wish that we had a set a checklist and then we could just say meets the checklist or doesn't meet the checklist but it's all balanced between those two things to protect the we that's your it is but we always try to take into consideration the abuts and if you're the person that lives on that property line you don't necessarily want those trucks going right next to your property so there's that yeah if you take it if you if you take it for instance when we have all these reviews of the phone poles power poles going in a lot of them are going in Wetlands what would what would be if we said you can't put the power pole you wouldn't have electricity you have to you have to balance but it's true it's not just but be reasonable yeah it's not just for this parcel it's for any parcel so if somebody's building a house and when the parcels were made some of the parcels are very very small and trying to fit a house in there and not Bey on the wetlands is really hard so we but it's evaluated by exactly the same rules we don't have separate rules for because it's on a residential property essentially but also it's it's evaluated by the same regulations so we often have to uh there's a house on chapen where there was no possible way to move it anything more than 25 feet from the stream and we were not happy about that they turned the house sideways to get it in there but they did turn the house sideways so they turn but a a lot of but it still was in stream it was still in Riverfront it was well in actually in in buffer because it was an intermittent stream but but the point is there's almost always some compromises and so we're always balancing reality like it is a building parcel first versus where we would really like them not to be all the time the company here went like said wow two years we've been all of them this long all of them take this long it Tak four and five years I actually went to all the boards I went to the board of Select I went to the planning board and conservation all before I ever a application I was like can you please look at this and if you see something that you don't like or you don't want me here tell me to go away because I'll go away so I public records of each three different meetings all we did tell them all the problems that we saw we did yes but before it ever been application because if I have a talent that really doesn't like me I'm not into I don't want this this is not my goal this is don't want it it pretty clear I'd like to build I neighborhood where like if I had this opposition before I an application I don't know that I would have ever submitted I didn't you did though sir people were coming to the end meetings they were very unhappy and you chose to cut this yeah okay I don't think this is helpful yeah no this so I think at this point if you allow this Access Road whether it's you know up talky bu property lines lower we're still be encroaching on the 25 foot no distur Z correct no not with the braak well we would be encroaching on a lower section of the still the same issue still applies it's just a larger uh area of it okay so be more 25 foot no disturb um before we leave and we're getting really late here um we need to uh talk about the boundary markers um because technically the way that we normally do it we would be having them foot boundary markers all the way around that Center area and the question is um do you want those beef giant um PVC posts in there around that entire area do you want an alternative uh how do you I've written the condition but I haven't made the specifications yet is there something smaller that could be but permanent well that was my thought can we come up with something permanent that's smaller that's not so I'm just worried about that many big old things going in on the other hand it is the rules so right is this construction or post construction it's it's the second that the light site is graded at that area and you do it control barrier and we could do something we could put orange they have like a bright orange erosion control fence which is very no we're not talking about that we're talking about permanent boundary markers so the permanent boundary markers we require normally is that at every foot every 50 feet and every turn you have a post that's either like a lolly column you know those big metal columns or a piece of PVC that's equivalent to that size concrete concrete filled with concrete that's that sticks 18 inches minimum out of the ground and stays there forever forever essentially forever unless there's a new lineation that it has to be moved so these are permanent Wetland protectors so to speak but under our normal we have this specification for every single thing that's built but I'm saying that the normal requirements that we have I think will be bulky and a lot of holes there'll be a lot of them and maybe we need to think about a skinnier alternative that would be equally permanent could you utilize the fence and put placards on it that say Beyond this area is a fence isn't Perman not permanent but it will be permanent to the installation is permanent permanent fence will be wood H yes the inner fence will be wire B to make this is forever okay when when somebody wants to use a fence on their own property like say it's a square area and they just want to put they have to put those posts in as some of the fence posts did you want me to go get one yes please now I'll mail it to you I have it right on my Des okay do you want to yes options there so they basically have to be post or post the conservice fence post permanent but not wood because wood rots off so if we change the fencing to metal posts in that area could we kind of double up some because we do have fence that kind of goes on the we're looking at this part here those you know it it skirts the whole AR the purple line yeah for the most part because at this part we are you know right up on the 25 foot uh no disturb Zone up you know up through here then obviously when we get back here we could do more of the post just to show them Jonathan do you have any input about that most the time we're talking about no it has to be 18 inches out of the ground the point is to stick up so that 10 years from now if somebody's mowing they don't mow into that area or whatever find it on GPS also yeah may not be here in a year may not we do we do require you to Mark each of the posts that's required with the GPS uh marker that way we can go back and make sure nobody switched it around but if you yeah I will leave it till the 17th but um you can try to come up with something that you think you I'll send you our requirements and you can try to some people put in um Stone post is expensive but it's much prettier um yeah you know so you are allowed to propose an alternate is what I'm saying within our normal rules so if you can propose an alternate and the folks will think about it there's going to be a that's what I just show we could it's very bendy for if you go behind the police station the well they're not into they're not going to be doing that right now anyway yeah no it's not till everything gets approved but we just need to have that right okay well if you police station they're every 50 feet the place that Wetland back there still have time Bond here yeah um I'm T this is time Bond's last meeting so it's your last chance to ask a question okay and we will send you those or Nick will send you those materials thank you Melissa and you have been very very patient thank you thank you good night you bye okay we will um see everybody on the 17th are youing I move that we close the meeting second all okay the hearing is closed minut you're not GNA CL we can't we have to vote um I I move that we continue this meeting to the 17th second all favor all those opposed I move that we close the meeting second all those opposed thank you thank you Rory did do that one yeah I think it just we'll just get it Go the agriculture thing and that