pursuant to Governor Hy's March 29th 2023 Bill extending several Co year policies and programs by allowing virtual meetings to continue from March 31 20 203 to March 31st 2025 this meeting of the Norton Conservation Commission will be conducted via remote participation to the greatest extent possible specific information and the general guidelines for remote participation by members of the public Andor parties with a right Andor requirement to attend this meeting can be found at the end of this agenda members the public attending this public hearing SL meeting virtually will be allowed to make comments if they wish to do so during the portion of the hearing designated for public comment by raising their hand and virtually or press no in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time via Tech technological means in the event that we are unable to do so despite best efforts we will post on the Norton Cable website www. Norton media center.org an audio or video recording transcript or other comprehensive record of proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting thank you Dan um participating tonight is our U various members including myself julan C chair um Vice chair Lisa carosa is not able Cora that is not able to attend tonight we have also Dan Pearson Mark Fernandez Tama bestest Paxton H H sa is that did I get that right Paxton H as good as it needs to be all right uh and then uh we also have our director John Thomas our assistant um Megan har and a new member I believe Joe you're a full-fledged member signed in and and uh sworn in on all of that is that correct yes sir all right so Joe caral welcome and uh join the freay um so um our first item of business uh is not technically a hearing it concerns um the American chestnut foundation and the desire for um uh at least uh several members and probably the whole commission to embrace that by having some chestnuts um American chestnut trees planted here now there is a there was a narrative that was um I believe it was circulated it may not have been but there was also a slide presentation presented uh or available on the um through wheel drive uh so I don't know if everyone has had a chance to review that but I can summarize briefly if um if they haven't had a chance to review it what's the preference no preference should I just read what um what dominic um I I should mention that um the volunteer who's who's willing to plant these on various designations conservation areas uh is Dominic cruset he lives in North adbor he's uh planted several stands of uh the American chestnut um uh in various towns including North adoro uh and um Easton um and I just to summarize he's going to plant four or five was that a question anyone okay four or five plants um and the initial site will be um uh read is uh e Reed um and uh they will be marked as American chestnut hybrids uh they will be protected with small cages against rabbit and deer damage until they become large enough to um be resisted to that um there was a question about the possibility of these plants introducing BL um but it turns out the blight that kills um the American chestnut uh which was actually introduced from China in the 1880s um it it attacks a lot of trees a lot of species of trees but the only one it kills um is the American chestnut so um it's the the blight is pretty much present everywhere it's endemic here now and um the American chestnut does not become subject to the blight until it gets old enough for the bark to change from smooth to cracked and it's at that time that the uh BL can take hold and and ultimately um kill the plant but it does not it it kill the the the tree but it does not kill the roots so there are continued shoots that are put up for a long time um and the intent is that over time there will be resistance that will develop um and the American chestnut which is noticeably different uh both in genome and in the um in the chestnuts themselves will again be able to thrive in um uh American forests and that that slide presentation is is much more comprehensive and a very helpful um for additional information so do we have any questions about the um the overall program by the American chut foundation and uh just planting a few locally I still I still have a few questions here on this yeah um and I just want to be clear on this I'm fully in support of this but they do have a couple issues I want to make sure that these species are not planted within our landscape or any landscape where landscape can be I I know the plants are not accepted under the national operate society as a landscape type plant or open planting in this forestry plant and uh I would I personally would like to see it planted in a tree fall Gap or a light Gap within the forest as so that we would not have to ever worry about it once it does become disease and worry about take down in other issue um then it at being a reforesting species um I feel it would be best placed within our forest and not with are Escape because as they take injury I am aware that this is also a main reason for where disease can enter well please clarify for me the difference between the a landscape application and uh forestry because I was under the impression it would not if if I'm correct in my thinking about landscape that it would not ever be used for uh as a landscape correct I'm just concerned that it being planted if it's planted within the landscape not within the forest being in a light Gap or tree fall Gap in the forestry situation that we will have maintenance as it does become disease and creat suckering uh very common I can easily point out four or five situation where we have American chestnut in town that are in a suffering situation all right but where would we give me an example of a landscape uh spot it would be I believe it'd be more easier to describe the forest within the forest where a tree fell so it had a competitive situation where it couldn't out compete um similar size species yeah so John you um I mean we walked several areas and I'm assuming none of those would be defined as a landscape application is that is that your sense as well um I mean it's hard to say I mean in an area which is fringes upon a field and a and a forest is that considered forest or is that considered landscape um I guess that's kind of what I would want to know what the definition of the two is because my understanding is that the area that the individuals looking to plant with plant these trees are adjacent to other trees in the vicinity of Fringe Forest so I guess my question is you know what what is the definition of landscape versus Forest um if we were going to go into the middle of the woods and plant I guess that's Forest so then anything else is considered landscape is that my bearing of what I would gather from that my concern is just if it's on the edges that it's going to create the mten nightmare um providing you know if it's in the edges where they'll be mowing or anything like that you know we know that these species are going to become diseased it's well known that they're going to be up diseased at usually we see it around 15 feet of height so these areas would be in an area which obviously would be mowed around I think that was kind of the suggested area because of the easy access to the area and also the availability to kind of maintain these with within cages uh to start so I guess my my biggest thing is you know in the event that they are becoming problematic obviously you know if you plant them now it's going to take years for them to establish themselves and if they become a nuisance you know we could easily have them either cut down or or taken down because I think the area that's being selected is an area where we could easily get a machine and and Fa these trees if they become a nuisance so um for us to be able to maintain them I I think fire trees is is you know it's not going to be that much of a maintenance nightmare um but moving forward if we were to plant you know more than five maybe 15 or 20 then I could see the the potential Hazard an issue obviously you know this there's a chance these trees might not take uh there's a chance they would uh it'd be you know it's an interesting kind of concept I'm willing to you know pursue this and see how it works and if it doesn't work then we can take it under consideration and have U you know highway or a company come in and and take the trees down if they become a hazard and and just to add to that none of the areas that we u considered are in high uh traffic areas I mean it's not like uh it's not like there's High human visit or traffic in in in those direct areas so I don't think it's it's a potential hazard in excess of any other tree that can sustain weather damage or you know disease damage of any kind so I think it's it's uh that's not a going to be a big issue do we sorry to interrupt but do we have any kind of like a a written contract with with this um organization doing this work so that we have that kind of clear delineation about what's our responsibility and what's there or no um this is a vol totally volunteer organization it was started in I believe it's 1983 uh and they have volunteer projects across uh the entire Eastern United States uh ironically U our prior director uh uh again um was in inquired at the same time of the um uh American chestnut foundation and was and was referred to to Dominic so um and uh so there's a fair amount of interest in in conservation commissions um in in doing this yeah I mean I'm fully supportive of that um I just curious to to Joe's Point yeah but one of the things um that Dominic pointed out is if you walk in the landscape you will find um American chestnuts that have reached the sufficient age to actually um begin to Blossom um so there are those that are reasonably resistant to reach that stage um and depending on how much sunlight they get so um uh this is not necessarily going to be universally uh resulting in trees that just die after a period of time and that's the whole point of the project is to find those that can can resist the blight and a preferentially select those so Joey are you okay with that uh I am like I say my personal belief is they belong in the forest and not well I I think we're in agreement there that U that you know we're not going to select an area uh where people frequent it a lot and there's a lot of Maintenance associated with the ground so I I think we're not in disagreement at all and to add to that I wouldn't I wouldn't be uh against creating more Forest uh area at e read either so less maintenance and up keep of the fields all right so um f the questions I I think we can you know open this discussion up to anyone who has a question about it but um and if there are no further questions we just need a simple motion at a vot to approve uh allowing um a few plants to be put in on uh lands that Norton Conservation Commission has jurisdiction over uh Mr chairman I'll make a motion to uh approve the uh uh Chestnut plant thing as suggested or as outlined or second so we have a motion made in second and just to be sure no further discussion uh if not not we can consider a roll call vote beginning with Mark and Dan all right all right and Joe and Paxton hi hi dama hi and I'll throw in and ey the motion carries our next item before before we start I'd like to actually um there's the gentleman here um Nolan uh who came in last week I was going to actually put this on the agenda but he came in um he has had some uh issues with flooding um with the most recent rain events that we've had and before he kind of engages with a you know discussing with a consultant H the potential um improvements to the property um he was wondering if he can basically have a discussion with the commission on whether they would be amendable to some work that he would potentially be needing to do within the designated flood plane he lives at 9 Daniel Daniel Street um and he abuts The Waiting River obviously we know that the waiting River has been subjected to a lot of um issues with rainwater and also uh high discharge rates and there's been extensive flooding uh down gradient of barrowsville pond um I don't have screen sharing capabilities anymore because I gave hosting abilities to Megan um but there is um there are some pictures in the um the Google Drive and also a um a file which kind of outlines his property showing the flood plane and some images if you go into n Daniel uh Street um and you can see that the the flooding and uh uh river waters have really almost come up to the edge of his foundation of his house so you can actually see on on the map you can actually see that the um the flood plane elevation kind of goes to the back of his deck uh this is an imagery that I generated through GIS software um but the the images themselves um those are kind of a little extensive you can actually see the images here so you can kind of get a sense as to uh his current uh conditions and yeah that's a good picture right there um but that's that's his yard out back um and as you can see it's completely flooded so um so the the the main issue is that he's trying to get a sense and and gauge from the commission to see if they would be amenable to um you know working with him um I guess with work within the flood plane and obviously a permit would be required uh to kind of save and kind of um shed the water away from his property but uh the work will require some some some GR and also require some um maybe a retaining wall or something of that nature but that all needs to be engineered um but he wanted basically a sense from the commission to see if they would be open to this kind of uh you know route before he would start uh the process with engaging a [Music] consultant John thank you I don't know if I'm allowed to speak you can yeah open discussion oh thank you so John toly put I really appreciate everyone on the commission I'm sorry if you're my son in the background he's 15 months and just yelling for dinner um so I appreciate that it's nine Danielle Street not that I don't think you had it right but I think you might have been saying Daniel but it's Danielle Street and exactly as John said um you know you saw the give me one second I'm gonna head downstairs so as as joh said you know you could clearly see in the photos um when we bought our property in 2018 um you know obviously the waiting Rivers right there we were um we inquired about flooding from the the prior sellers they told us it didn't really flood kind of took their word for it and then you know over the years the backyard has flooded um pretty bad but it's typically been around like November or April and it kind of just kind to deal with it but you know now that my family is growing I'm having children and with the rain we've seen you know over the past you know month and a half it's it's by far the worst I've ever seen it and so for for me it's a couple things that come into play one um you know I'm a 15-month old and if if God allows it I'll have more children and I'm I'm terrified of you know little children not listening to their parents going in the backyard to with the flooding there it won't let us build a fence to even keep them away from the river you know even if we were able to fix the flooding uh which is kind of terrifying uh and then three you know we just put an expensive deck on our house and the water's now flooding up to the footings flooding up to the down stairs uh fortunately our house is like 5et up on this like Hill so you know as of right now it's not a problem from the flooding on the foundation of the house but you know with the way that things have been going and the climate changing and getting warmer um know I I only can imagine and guess that it's going to get much worse um there's really from what I can see two major choke points and you can see them really well in one of those photos uh the main is from the left side um where what I believe is conservation land that's now essentially a tributary um where as the river starts to get a little bit of you know depth it starts flowing directly through there and funnels right into the yard and then uh twice in the past month we've actually seen it in one of those photos you could see come through where we have an arbor um and kind of make a second connecting pathway um so I imagine you know obviously through the work of an engineer kind of schedule out a game plan about how or what we could do to potentially stop this but one of my biggest concerns is you know an engineer is not cheap and the last thing I want to do is is hire an engineer to come up with ideally a great game plan and then have you know the the commission determin that we're not going to allow the permit making the plans move so I was hoping to come here get a feel for you know what you might be thinking about or whether you take a little bit of due diligence to look at and just get a feel for you know is it going to be money well spent can we come to an agreement of what I can or can't do before obviously proceeding with with trying to rectify um well I can I can comment and then uh maybe John can can fill in or whoever else um the Wetland protection act is is kind of uh very concrete and it in other words it lays out what can be done to be consistent with the ACT um and if you can come up with a plan that will U be consistent then we don't stand in the way and so the your answer is is going to be really from the engineer it requires if if if part of your project requires filling a portion of the flood plane in one area the requirement of the ACT is that compensation other words excavation in another area at the same elevation has to be provided and it's not clear that your your lot would allow that or some similar excavation somewhere else to compensate so it's really not I mean if if your engineer comes up with a plan that's consistent with the ACT we can't stand in the way of it uh and if we were to stand in the way of it then you would appeal it and DP would would allow the the the prit so it's really more more uh and let let me also comment that the amount of rain that we've had this year is in no way typical I mean this this is unusual and even in the context of global warming that doesn't mean this is going to keep happening again and again and again so um you know that can go into your calculation as to whether you want to spend a lot of money to address a problem that might come up once every five to seven years or not so so did that help in terms of understanding what you want to do yeah I mean it sounds like I'm GNA have to hope the engineer knows a lot about those laws because I I certainly do not um let me just comment pretty much every engineer does because 53% of Norton is Wetlands which means they have to be consistent with you know every project has to pretty much much uh be designed according to the standards required okay I mean if it just comes down to conforming to the law then if the end I'm obviously not going to hire an engineer that can you know tell me he can either try to work around that or at least be cognizant of it so but that's what they do sure that's what they do uh at least in this town because they have to okay no I guess that that's pretty helpful then I guess it's kind of just start interviewing some engineers and taking a crack at it and see kind of what they can come up with uh yeah and I'm assuming you can get a like a quick look uh you know just to have somebody uh present them with this is the problem is there solution before you sit down at your computer and I think they can eyeball the situation without a whole bunch of cost and tell you yes or no John do you have anything you would to add to that or anyone else for that no I I think you know no one came into my office last week and I think that's really it is you know the engineer needs to be intuitive and be able to design something that you know is going to require you know potential fill but then offsetting that with mitigation just like you said and that's that's really it and if if everything works out and the compensatory storage uh outweighs the uh potential fill that's being place then for instance the commission has a an easy way to uh you know give a swift approval uh based on the design so that's really it is just making sure that the compensatory storage mitigation is larger than the extent of fill and I think that is something that is a possibility it just needs to be demonstrated all right so just that that's extremely helpful thank you so guess I one last question is that if an engineer can't prove all those things then I'm kind of just stuck and you know Julian to your point kind of just hope it is a once every five or six years thing and you know just kind of deal like more or less deal with it yeah but um I mean I noted your lot has um it seems to be tighter than than I joining wats with regard to the the flood plane it coming up fairly close to your house oh definitely yeah none of my neighbors to the left or right of my house have remotely the same type of issues and um you know I think it's it's been something that has just compounded over time right I think that that tributary that leads from the river through the wetlands like if if you know as it started to flood and flood and flood in years past and you know nothing was done um not to mention you know and I I I couldn't prove this but you know kind of fingers crossed that nobody else further down river has done anything kind of without a permit you know that could have exacerbated it and and I have some reason to believe that that may or may not have happened but um you know I think it's something that's is compounded over time well one thing that that you may want to look at is there are natural events like trees falling that can partially obstruct the river um and those things can be cleared I mean is that is that a fair statement John that when when you have natural events that that obstruct the river that can promote flooding you're allowed to clear some of those obstructions yeah provided that there's a permit that goes along with those that's definitely something that we could obviously you know when you're working within a resource area you need a permit to do any sort of activities within a resource area so you know that's that's kind of the limitations that we have is that you know it's not s we're not going to say that it can't be done and it can't be allowed we're saying that basically there needs to be you know we just need to have record that it was being done sure and is that is that like me personally clearing it because like am I like I guess I don't know if I can like scale down the river into people's backyards and take like a a look and see if there's down trees or like w through the water and see if there's something that is maybe buried I mean is that something on the town or like how do you go about doing that so it also depends who owns the property where the river is and that I don't think you own the river so OB obviously that's not obviously you would want to reach out to the owner of that property which I think is um uh part of the um the H well the original owner I can't remember who it is but I know it's under open space preservation so I have to look into that and see whose responsibility is but you know if there are any obstructions we'd have to basically take look at those uh and make sure that they're I mean I haven't been out there obviously but I'm saying if there are any we'd have to identify those and see the best practice and kind of game plan for removing those sure so I guess my my question is is that like on me to like go to houses that bought the river and ask to take a peak or is that something that I like request the town do because like the river own by the town I'd assume so we can take a look at it I can take a look to see who owns the property um this week and I can get back to you on that one but um you know as we move ahead I would say that you know I would that's probably may be part of the problem but from what I I I don't know I haven't been out there I'd have to take a look to see if there's any obstructions along the river if there are obviously that becomes an issue and we need to clear those up somehow um but if the flooding issues I mean we're having flooding issues all over town and some of them areas are not obstructive we're still having flooding issues so you know my my whole point is it might not be an obstruct it's probably just the excess of rain I think we've gotten about 24 to 25 Ines of rain over the first U you know since today right right so I mean that's that's kind of it the first first three months of the year and we already at 25 inches I mean I think last year we had a total of 72 inches during the year and that was the most ever recorded in town so would like just go on record is like I I can appreciate that but but I I think as I said in my my earlier comment I bought in November of 18 and it is flooded every single year multiple times throughout the year like not to the degree in those photos but you know I don't know 75% of it like to the point where it's still like extremely dangerous I can't build a fense like it's a liability on me and you know so even if it like isn't raining as bad as it has this year it still floods which is like not great it's just to the extent that it's flooded this year is it's where it's now hitting like my like physical property to where I was like d like my hands were tied I have to come in and do something I've been a resident for for almost five years um for over five years um so I think regardless of the rain it's still like a major issue right but uh so I think if you can have a u an engineer just come out and look they give you a quick idea as to whether it's feasible to to move F around and provide compensation or or not okay and again I I just want to be clear that like if the engineer can't do that because it involves doing work on property that I do not own and or is conservation Wetlands Etc then like I I am just deal with it is kind of the answer I'm not saying it's you guys saying deal with it but like that's kind of the answer well I I mean there are a variety of things like you can certainly protect the footings by making you know barriers around very local structures that so that they're not damag but um I mean the best place to start is have an engineer take a peak see what they say I would I would call one of those Engineers I put on the list for you and and have them come out and take a look at the property and see what they would recommend and just call them and let them know that you you're looking for somebody to give a sense for work in the flood plan and they're going to need to do compensatory mitigation and what their experience level is um there's probably a couple Engineers on the call tonight um you know that have experienced doing it as well so I just want to you know I would just reach out to them contact them and uh see if they can give you a quote to kind of get a sense of if it's if it's a feasible or viable project for you okay well I appreciate everyone's time all right thanks all right so we're on to um the agenda with new public hearings first uh up on the um on the list is file number 250-1 1151 300 South Washington Street and it concerns uh a proposal for construction of an indoor self storage facility associated with t parking and infrastructure do we have a representative for that yes we do um for the record Mr chairman Eric Das registered professional engineer with strongpoint engineering representing the applicants and you probably have screen sharing capabilities so if you have a plan you can throw it up there I believe I do just half a second and I will get it up you should be able to see this plan is that correct we do if you can magnify it a little bit okay um so this is from the plan set um this Zooms in on the work portion of the site but I will get to the entirety of the site um this this is kind of the easiest way to get our bearings about us so this is on South Washington Street right at the city of Taunton line uh between South Washington and Interstate 495 uh a lot of you may remember this we were before you for an anrad on this property toward the end of 22 um and the commission did Issue an oad um it defined a bordering vegetated Wetland that's shown over here which is the B series and another Wetland that runs actually off the property along the shoulder of the interstate um and just to make things a little more clear and tell the whole story this is a GIS overlay from the um notice of intent that we provided uh just showing these are actually the gis Wetlands here um there is a priority habitat mapped on this portion of the property we're staying well away from it we're not touching anything within that habitat mapping uh the entirety of the site is within the three mile River Watershed HCC and most of the site including the entire work area which is right here where my cursor is is within a zone two um which is going to have impacts on our required storm water design thresholds and things of that nature so just to keep in those items in mind as we move through um going back to the plan so again this is the existing conditions plan this is the the portion of the site where we're proposing to work um after we went through the oide process we obviously went through a a great design process we've done test pits all over this site uh pretty good sampling to support the um storm water management design and what we find is that we do have reasonably good and pervious soils on the site but as you would expect being surrounded by Wetlands uh we do have reasonably High groundwater so that factors into our design um just to move through the plan set and talk about the proposed conditions let me go here to start with um so this is our proposed project uh what we are proposing is a three floor interior self storage building uh footprint is 22,500 square fet which gives us about 68,000 Square fet in total [Music] um all of our work if we go down to this sheet showing the grading and the drain design what you'll see is the all of the proposed work stays outside of the 25t buffer zone as is required by policy in Norton but we do admittedly in some of these locations get you know right up to the 26 foot Mark or so um couple of things that we did in considering this um in considering this plan so this particular use designation doesn't exist in the zoning bylaw the next closest is a warehouse use so if we were to build this out with the parking requirements for a warehouse use we would be required to have 85 parking stalls um it is much more than we need practically um they do fit on the site but it is a lot of impervious area in buffer zones which means obviously more filling more disturbance more storm water management concerns etc etc so one of the things we did in in the planning well not even the planning stages um but we work very closely with the planning board to secure a special permit for a parking reduction um what we're proposing now or in fact have been approved for with the planning board is a reduction to only 30 parking spaces so we position those parking spaces as far away from what I'm going to call the more valuable Wetland the bordering uh vegetated Wetland B series on the western portion of the site um than the Wetland that results from the runoff along the interstate we put the bulk of those parking spaces over here um outside of the 25 foot buffer zone and then we would have a few more spaces on this side um we actually tried to eliminate those but the planning board felt that they were uh germains of the project so we put those back in um the total disturbance on the site like we talked about is um completely outside of the 25t buffer zone of the entire site we are disturbing about 32% in total uh 39,000 roughly square feet of that is between the 25 and 100 foot buffer zone um to talk about the storm water very quickly we have two surface infiltration basins and one subsurface infiltration Basin and a storm water depression or a rain Garden that we're proposing in the front of the building um the storm water infiltration Basin closest to this Wetland complex takes only uh rooftop runoff that's the only thing that's being directed to that location so the water coming into that um is clean uh which is a a bonus uh or a good thing considering its proximity to the Wetland um the subsurface infiltration Basin is taking storm water run off from this portion of the parking lot that I'm highlighting here with my cursor um that structure that catch Basin structure is proposed to be a water quality unit uh that will filter out any um TSS and other contaminants uh before it enters the subsurface infiltration Basin and then we get a a minimum of an 80% um TSS removal within that Basin and then the surface Basin on this side obviously takes the rest of the site essentially from this point over uh discharges to this catch Basin where we have the same thing we've got a water quality unit in the catch Basin to clean things up before it gets to the sub cration basing uh the design shows that these basins infiltrate almost entirely though we did equip them with an overflow an emergency overflow spill that is secured with rip wrap um because this is in an area of permeable soils and in in a a zone two we are required to have a higher threshold of water quality treatment we do meet or exceed all of the requirements for water quality treatment and groundwater recharge in this design um we did receive today a proposal for peer review uh for the storm water design which I can't find a reason that the the app applicant would not go forward with and I believe that is from bat Brennan's office who you're all very familiar with uh so certainly that'll be looked at very closely um and the only uh the other I'll say about this plan is one we are proposing a septic system just uh we had originally when we conceived this project we were the understanding that there is SE uh sewer in the city of Taunton right at the city Town Line but is not true uh it is actually about a quarter to a half a mile away so what we propose to do is just go on-site septic we have a very low usage from this sort of uh use there'll be a bathroom that employees um and some attendants may use occasionally but the the flows from this are very low uh we position the septic on this side of the building because these two test pits that you see where my cursor is here and here have the greatest depth to groundwater for the purposes of the notice of intent we have shown the leeching field within the 100 foot buffer zone uh it's actually mentioned in the notice of intent that it will be our goal when this process goes to septic design that we will remove the leaching field as far out of the 100 foot buffer zone as we possibly can uh but we wanted to show it this way sort of so all bases were covered um in the event that we're limited to how much we can move it because of soil conditions um the other thing is we do have have um Town water in South Washington Street is my understanding the status of that water main is unknown it may need to be inspected and activated we are working with the water department on that currently but we have no reason to believe we won't be connecting to town water um and then the last thing that I'll talk about just briefly is we have provided a pretty thorough um erosion and sedimentation control plan uh including barrier erosion controls all around the perimeter of work barrier controls prior to discharge the storm water infiltration structions uh uh infiltration structure excuse me um construction um stabilized construction entrances etc etc uh and just from our prior work in Norton we know that uh especially Pat Brennan's review looks for certain details regarding dewatering and construction phase uh requirements for inspection and monitoring so we went ahead and through all those that apply right on the plan on this preemptively uh so hopefully save a little bit of time and back and forth in peer review so um that is the overview of the project as I said um I I understand that this will very likely need to go to peer review but I'm glad to answer any questions that you folks have about this so we can incorporate all comments at once hopefully um and the last thing that I will say uh is that the planning board in addition to issuing the special permit for the parking reduction they did Grant site plan approval on this project subject to it being approved by the Conservation Commission uh both with an order of conditions in the issuance of the storm water permit I want to bring that up because it's as you know a little it's not the typical course of action for the planning board um in Norton but I think that they were very very comfortable with this project as presented uh so they felt that they could they could do that in this case so Mr chairman I'm glad to turn it over to you and answer any questions that you folks may have all right um any questions from commission members I'm not sure if John I had to set up late I I think he probably did to um address another meeting so um I have a I have a question yeah go ahead Tom um just about the the fact that the sewer it's now going to require a septic system you mentioned that there will be a connection to Norton Municipal Town water but that does not also includes sewer access that is correct so it is what we understand is that there is water in South Washington Street that caps basically at the at the city of Taunton toown line um the closest sewer to this project is actually in fact I'm going to zoom in on my Locus over here doesn't really help me uh but it is actually all the way down here on mil Standish Boulevard in the city of tarton so the only way we could get to there at that point would be to install a pump station on site and pump it about a quarter or a half a mile to the city of tton which is just financially impractical and infeasible uh when we can um easily accommodate a septic system on this site so how many employees roughly uh would be involved with a an operation like this I mean it doesn't sound like many no um in fact I I should have brought the archit I should have loaded up the architectural plans with me but essentially the lobby area is proposed here where my um cursor is we're only expecting two at most three employees at any given time during during a shift uh during the time that this is open very likely no more than two um and again the other than those two people who would be in there uh consistently throughout the day the only other use for septic would be the occasional toilet flush from somebody using the facilities when they come to drop for a pickup so this um does require go ahead uh my question is snow storage on site yes can you hear me we can my question is is snow storage that is very good question uh originally we had had snow storage put all the way over here where these parking spaces are um in the front over here and up in this area here obviously snow storage went away way when we added these parking spaces so the discussion that we had with the planning board is this uh first we've added notation to the plan stating and it's right here that snow shall be stored on site in containment are in containment areas outside of the 25 foot buffer zone and when the site reaches capacity it's on the applicant to basically carded off site and dispose of it in accord with all state and local Federal uh state and local regulations uh what I'll add to that though and it's also something that we talked about with the the planning board our it generation data for the number of parking spaces that we need you can look at this type of use two ways um One Way tells us we realistically need six parking spaces the other way tells us we realistically need nine parking spaces the proposing 30 so all of that is to say that there is very likely an opportunity that we could be sacrificing some of these stalls as we get more familiar with the demand on this site to snow store snow on the paav areas but away from the storm water inlets which would just give us a little bit more capacity on the site could you show me where the storm water inlets are on this site again yes so we have we we only have two we have one in this location here and that feeds this subsurface infiltration Basin so if we were to store snow over here we'd obviously maybe want to push it down to these couple of parking spaces down here get it as far away as we possibly can um and then the other Inlet is over here so again if we were to store uh store snow in this portion again we'd want to stick it as far away as we could from the inlets to the catch bases any U questions uh either from members of the commission or from anyone in the audience and if not uh we clearly need to continue this because of the uh pending um storm water uh peerreview so um our next meeting is on the 22nd I suspect uh that's going to be too soon for the the peer review but is that the preferred date or the next one after that is the 6th of May um if possible Mr chair I'd like to put it in for the 22nd and if for some reason we're approaching and it doesn't look like we're going to be ready in time I I'm glad to continue it to the the uh May 6th at that point if that's okay with you y that sounds fine sure so unless there are further questions or discussions a discussion I think we can consider a motion to continue this hearing I'd like to make a motion to oh sorry sorry Joe well Joe got the motion and Dan got the second so okay call um Mark and Joe how do you vote hi hi and Dan and pxton hi hi and T hi and I'll throw in an eye so the motion carries so we'll at least entertain a motion to continue on the on the 22nd otherwise we'll see you then Eric right thank you all so much for you time appreciate it you that thank you um so next up um is actually three hearings um concerning the same large parcel uh but is file number 1152 followed by 1153 and 1154 um concerning Z Crane Street Lot B C and D do we have Julian I need to step away from this I have a conlict okay so uh Joe is noted to be accusing and um do we have a uh representative of the applicant for this project yes right here it's Evan Watson W engineering representing the applicant all right so I think you probably have screen sharing uh capabilities how don't you know there we go all right okay we ready to go uh yeah take it away okay very good thank you Mr Sharon members of the board again Evan Watson W engineering with W engineering and um here you might be recognized this project we were here a few months ago with a um anrad where we delineated the wetlands and we're following that up with our notice of intent permits um so this is the cover sheet basically shows the four Lots uh these Lots were approved by the plan board with a form a plan house that's been recorded um and the three lots that are in jurisdictional areas are lots BC and D um part of the an or the oad that was issued it did ask to have um the Wetland evaluated for ver pool and other habitat um so while I was putting together the permits for this it was a little too cold to have that done but I um have talked to our Wetland specialist Brian Madden with LEC and it's on the schedule to get out there this week um now that things have warmed up and um we can expect to see um anything any movement um Bal pool wise so up through the plan um and again you're right that there are three separate filings but I think it stands to reason that we kind of go over them all at once you you could just um uh expand that a little bit is it's a little bit far away sorry my screen's relatively large it looks big on my side so um is that better okay great um so exist ing conditions here we have um a bvw in the middle it's connected there's a a culvert that connects it to Downstream Wetlands here and then on this side we have the three mile River um so we have on lot D we have a buffer zone to the wetlands and then we're outside for the most part of the 100 foot Riverfront but within 200t River Front on this side um there have a small portion of natural heritage area over here on the West Side uh North being to the left um we did file with natural heritage we're still within the 30-day review period so I haven't heard back from them just yet um we also conducted test Pits on all the Lots um so we could properly design any septic system um so because we have the Topography is all up and down and um you know all very pit and Mound there's lots of hills there's some very steep slopes on the side Etc um we will have to do some grading to make these Lots um a little more livable as such we have filed a special permit with the sling board um because the amount of land disturbance um exceeds their threshold so we we'll need a special permit for that so that's been filed uh but we haven't had a meeting them just yet um but this just shows all the grading that's necessary for that for that permit so this is a prior um gravel excavation site is that uh your thought there has been in the past you could see this uh Gravel Road that comes here from the farm um I don't exactly know it may have been I think the state or somebody came in and took some of this material to use for road building building sometime in the the past I don't know exactly when that date was but yes this this was all mined out through here you can see the very steep slopes and then once they had their fill they uh gave up and just left um this sheet here um basically shows the results of our test pits um and shows some erosion control [Music] details and these was some crosssections uh again this is more relative to the um Earth removal perit thing let me get to the next page um so this sheet here shows the location of the Lots I think I have yeah there's a significant in your screen changes there we go yeah sorry I was looking for another sheet where I had highlighted the the lines but that's on the individual sheets um so what we've done is we've placed the the three houses here uh all the houses are actually outside the 100 foot buffer zone um which is here here and there um in here we've also Incorporated some uh storm water um just by doing some grading we created some depressions um along the driveway uh in each case so that um we can meet the storm water standards uh which are necessary for your storm water bylaw and there will also be infiltrating the roof infiltrators um so that's the project as a [Music] whole and I can move into each individual lot um so do you want me to present all three at the same time and then ask questions or would we like to go for yeah I think that will be um okay I mean one of the one of the the issues is assuming that large Wetland functions is a veral pool I I think maintaining a a buffer of vegetation is going to be key and right now as the entire site treed is that um the the case or or not yeah with the exception of the the existing gravel road that runs through the site it's treat um so this is Lot B um replace the house obviously the the way the lot is set up um there's no good building spot uh in the front along Pine Street so the house is set back in the woods um you can see our tree clearing line and we've provided grading to to leave a mound from the abing property and then we've done all of our work outside the 25 foot buffer zone uh this driveway is a shared driveway again which is uh subject to the special permit that we filed um we show a drywell or the roof runoff so those have been designed to accommodate the 100-year storm um this is all a soil it's all very good well draining soil so um we'll have an easy time handling um storm water from perious surfaces through infiltration um and then same thing here uh the driver there's a little low spot right here which can take um a runoff will'll go into that and then I provided up height just as an overflow um in case we get you know something more than the 100-year storm or this Frozen conditions and it or something like that just to so we can overflow through a pipe and not necessarily through the driveway um the septic system um we received comment from again through the special permit um septic system he said it looked good we haven't filed for our septic permit just yet we're going to wait to get some additional input from this board and the planning board um but he was okay with that and that these all comply with title five uh we did receive a comment from the water department who is concerned about the the long um length of any proposed Water Service to Pine Street um so I haven't met with him yet but we might talk to him and it might be the um PR ofie that we end up putting in a well on these sites that are way out back but um we we'll get back to you on that as far as where that what is what is that length the distance yeah I can check so are on the order of a th000 ft or no no this is about 15 ft to the intersection and the house is about 230 ft from the the road so not crazy long but you know long enough where he had some concern with a regular service well I I guess I don't understand because uh I mean I have a thousand foot run with a with a 2in line and there is no problem yeah he he wanted to make sure that we had an adequately sized line um versus just putting in our 3/4 inch line so okay we'll be talking with him about that yeah um and then you know in Norton we they they dissuade us from using Chambers so we have a pipe and stone style leeching field with a two chambered tank as required and then we have infiltration Chambers for the roof ront off um we do have a r control plan at the limit of work and we have a to silt fence with straw Waddles all right just as a note the preference is that the the straw Waddles don't have a stake through them they're just the stakes um because that disrupts their their their function but um so that yeah um thank you all right so that's that's um Lot B yes Lot C is similar as it's on the same Shar driveway uh back um in the woods uh along the way we do have a um small little depression here which will serve essentially as a rain garden and I did again put it overflow um just in case you know something greater than the 100-year storm comes along we have a a little catch Basin with the rim raced up above the bottom so that um any you know emergency type of flow would be able to flow into that um and get into the Wetland versus so washing through the driveway um aosion control here this lot again the driveway ends up being um Rel you know the grading for the driveway ends up being close to the 25 no disturb but the actual house lot we're able to stay a good amount away I think we're about 50 feet away from the Wetland for most of the the lot a septic system in the front and then a a roof infiltration here in the back uh we able to keep the house and the septic system outside the natural H Zone as well as outside the 100 foot buff right here and just to be clear the details are the same is what I described on Lot B um and lot D is a little bit different um we did Lot B and C we received a file number without comment um watt D we did receive a file number as well but they we were just reminded to um Quant quantify the amount of disturbance within the rearfront area so um start out back here where the house and septic is outside 100 foot buffer zone roof infiltrators we do have a small little Wain Garden type feature um to pick up impervious area from the driveway with an overflow um to C water where it goes in the existing condition to this depression um they comment about oops sorry quantifying the amount of area so the total amount of area within the River Front is about 8,300 Square ft and we're proposing to um alter about 14 less than 1500 square ft so that meets the performance standard of um new construction within RF front area uh being that we're outside the 100 foot um it's across the street and that we have less than 5,000 square feet of impact or 10% whichever is greater all right um all three lots again I I provided with calculations to show that we meet the the storm War standards and the uh standards of the T Norton bylaw and again I know we have to um still come in with our evaluation of the Wetland and hear back from natural heritage so I'm not expecting that we um get approval tonight but I would like to take the board's input and um if there's anything that you believe we don't comply with uh the act of the B law you know please let me know and we'll make sure we can address those items yeah unfortunately um our director John Thomas had to step away to another meeting and I I kind of need his input one of the comments was that um this project likely will require some level of peer review with regard to storm water uh meeting storm water requirements although John is it needs to definitively um uh speak on that now did did he in your discussions with him suggest peer review or or not he told me everything was perfectly fine no I'm just kidding he um we did not we didn't enter in that he did send me a comment that um we did need to have the evaluation of the Wetland but I haven't heard anything else about um third party review or anything of that nature yeah well he he is the um responsible for storm water evaluation here in the town so um he needs to give us definitive comments and and we're we're um awaiting the uh more thorough evaluation of that Wetland area with regard to whether it's Vernal pool so we will need to continue this but before we do that we're going to open up to general questions and first question Julian I I just had one quick question about the um about the driveway for Lot C which you said comes right along the 25 foot buffer is there is there no no other I don't know less impactful way to put that driveway in so we're we're also trying to keep a buffer uh between the existing butter and and the project um so I was I going to leave obviously the board's more concerned about the Wetland but I think where I placed it I'm right in the middle of the frontage here and I by placing it here I'm able to provide a buffer to the ab butter and to uh comply with 25 foot no disturb Zone through here um you can see there's this pretty large Hill here and there's a a valley right there so placing it here gives me a good opportunity for um a storm water control in this location and then also to um keep this this mound here and keep trees on Etc to to screen the um the other butter but that that's why it was placed that way all right uh any other questions from commission members J you've got a hand up uh right we were we were going to get there very shortly so if um no other commission members have questions U Mr is it tenor or Tor yes sir Jim Tor I'm one of the on lot D but I also served in the zoning board so I know that that driveway is a common driveway and it is a special permit um it's not by right it's only by special permit right but that that the the decision on that doesn't involve conservation so that's something that they'll have to get cleared through corre but it but if it doesn't get approved then that has to become a two that driveway can't be Calon they'd have to move that over and it would be in a 25t buper so just de uh so uh any comment on that enan what has there been feedback on the approval we haven't received feedback from that yet nope but with when we file for the special permit uh for the Earth removal we also uh included uh our application for the um the Shar driveway so um that's going to be brought up at the plan board um relatively soon all right perhaps another another another issue that will need to be resolved before we can close um so any further questions or comments from anyone uh Julian yeah so uh I just looking at my notes and I think the reason John had requested a peer review for the storm water was because the four laws proposed um I believe constitute a for that subdivision uh instead of single family um and I think that makes him qualified under the storm water handbook okay uh I don't know if how you want to respond to that Evan um and I don't know if you want to have further chats with John Thomas about that um I just think that's part of uh some of the comments that he wanted the board to uh discuss no certainly I can I can talk to him a little bit more about that generally a form a um isn't necessarily considered a subdivision um and we do have three lots um here which require notices of intent so it was a little bit of a gray area I don't mind you know if um and again we didn't receive any comment back from DP about requiring um the storm water checklist be sent to them they they were okay um um so I did do a report that fully complies with the the Massachusetts storm water regulations so you know if if that's the decision that's perfectly fine you know I value his opinion a lot so um you know I'd be happy to talk to him about that and see what you'd like to do for peer review or not all right and so that yes clearly we as I mentioned before we need input from from John as to how that will be addressed uh as well as the the uh evaluation of the Vernal pool evaluation so if there are no further comments or discussions we can Mr shanon can I ask one for a question yeah if if it is um John's perview that this be sent to peer review would that be something that he could initiate versus having to come back to the board to request a vote and all that type of thing how's how do that work uh I I it's my sense that he can you know initiate that himself because you know the criteria will be established and and that's part of the process so I don't think we need to have a formal vote for that okay great yeah I'll look forward to uh talking to him this week about it then uh and there was a hand up I don't know if we addressed the the the question or not um Mr Dion had a hand up do you want to go ahead and uh ask your question thank you uh can you hear me we can all right Neil Dar I live at 171 I'm in the middle of all this right in the center there I know we didn't talk Evan didn't talk about lot a but I wanted to mention that lot a has a also a potential veral pool on it which is right across the street from the certified ver pool uh and then maybe you can address where that potential I'm not 100% sure but I'm I'm expecting it might be this small depression right here or um so I know when um I went out on site with Brian Madden our Wetland scientists I asked him to specifically look at this area um and any other areas that you know have depressions throughout the site um so he took a look at that and there was no um indication that that um you know was a v pool or had any type of wetland um characteristics at all I could get some more clarification from him if you'd like um you know I could because he'll be out here evaluating this area and I could certainly ask him to do some more evaluation on this spot as well all right my my door is right in the middle just knock on a door all right well that that will help um clarify that if if they can that all right so I think we may be uh ready for a motion to continue and uh I'm assuming our next scheduled meeting which will be the 22nd of April would be your preferred um um time of review either uh if you have to if everything isn't complete uh we can certainly continue it again at that time very good yes I'd like the board to consider continuing please so moved second so we have a motion by Dan and seconded by Mark so roll call vote uh beginning with Dan and Mark hi hi and Paxton and Tama hi hi and Joe I I missed you I hope I didn't oh you have to recuse is that correct Joe we are recusing okay excellent um so I'll throw in an i and the motion to continue uh passes so um Evan see you next time thank you very much thank you you what was the date on that continuance the our next scheduled meeting which is April 22nd thank you um so um and just for clarification We There are three different trial numbers that are included in this U motion 1152 1153 and 1154 um so we are now um complete finished with the new public hearings and moving on to uh continued public hearings um and again we have a project which has two separate file numbers but we've been discussing as one project 250- 11129 and 1130 uh Lots C and D at zerom Mansfield Avenue do we have a representative of that applicant we do uh Jack jacobe 144 Bank Street attorney for the applicant but I'm going to turn it over to Dan Campbell our engineer to uh uh make the presentation uh good evening Dan Campbell level Design Group on behalf of the applicant um last time we appeared uh before the commission we had um one minor modification that we needed to work out with uh your peer review consultant um that my modification was complete and if I was able to uh share I can certainly show you what that was um and then Janet did approve and sent back to John uh the following day which would have been last Monday I believe um her approval of the project you should have sharing capabilities I do now so um Lot number c is where the modification took place although as you've seen we have Lot C and D together on the plans as a whole um the lot number c plans it was the leftand side if you remember last time we spoke of Lot C we were talking about the water flow that was coming off the building to the top of this wall um P hang on just a second your your pen is there and now it's it's a a BL screen I'm not quite sure what happened are we back now you're back yes all right perfect sorry about that um it was the water on this building for lot SE coming to the top of this wall that the peer review consultant was a little concerned about um so we added um the SW at the top of the wall we added a small depression and the final modification um in uh in the review was this 6in pipe that is level basically just providing the water that would have come off of here come around and come down to the wetlands so that it never enters the neighbor's property and come straight along the back to the wetlands itself and that was the final modification um that the p consultant requested of us nothing else about the plans as they were presented even a month and a half ago has been modified uh just to clarify because I've seen and I don't know if this really is within our jurisdiction but the original project was three 24 unit buildings all right and then uh on this you have on on lot D a 24 unit building and here this one is a 36 unit uh building is that that's correct okay because on another plan you had 224 units so I was just the the original the original project was as you remember three separate applications three 24 unit buildings um through discuss with the planning board the planning board was concerned about lot D which is our lot at the edge of reservoir and Mansfield f um the Creed cover um as well as as the adjacency to the edge of the wetlands so we withdrew lot D both from the planning board and from yourselves uh oh sorry lot E from the planning board and from yourselves and lot D and Lot C were modified um D was modified to to uh basically contain an extension of the parking lot and lot C was modified from a 24 to a 30 unit building all right but as I understand it uh the single outstanding issue was um the potential problem of dumping overflow water onto the ajoining property that has been resolved correct so I believe we can close this hearing tonight so uh any questions from the commission and any questions from anyone in the in the meeting so if not we can consider a um a motion to close as a joint motion um 250 file number file number 250- 1129 and 1130 some approved second so we have a motion made by Dan seconded by t uh roll call Dan and pxton had vote all right hi and Joe and Tom how hi hi and Mark hi and I'll I the motion cares I I believe Joe has to abstain because he wasn't here for the other ones yeah um I yeah I think you're right because the only way he could participate is if he reviewed everything which is kind of a big deal so all right we'll rep I'll withw my vote oh well we'll change that to an abstention all right uh Mr chairman how would you then be proceeding would you be asking uh John to draft something and take it up at a future meeting or would you be acting tonight uh the he would be drafting an order of conditions and we would be considering it our next schedule meeting so that means that we would be finished for tonight and we would uh uh listen to your deliberations in two weeks uh yeah yeah I mean that's a standard practice that we just wanted to confirm because a few weeks ago John had said that he might have a chance to draft uh some conditions for you but I guess he's been busy uh yeah we don't have those on our agenda tonight okay just wanted here uh and and just please understand we're on with the planning board tomorrow night so I don't want to misre represent any situation to them well uh I think what you can represent to them is that the public hearing is closed well the hearings have been closed the peer review points of discussion have been resolved um and the next meeting you will have an order conditions thank you very much all right very good our next item is file number 250-1 1143 360 uh South Street conning construction of a 35,000 square F foot Warehouse with parking lot do we have a representative of B applicant yep uh Mr chairman this is Carlos scy with C trying to turn my camera on how are you very good thank you uh with your permission i' like to just walk through the project it's been a while since we've been in front of the Conservation Commission with this project and I will share my screen good can everybody see what I have in front of us yeah you you'll have to increase the size a little bit if you can sure I'll uh let me provide the the high level overview and then I'll zoom into the project a little bit to to provide an overview of the work itself uh so the stud itself uh is along uh the the roadway here we have a proposed uh Warehouse uh with a small incidental office space proposed on the project here uh we're in front of the Conservation Commission late last year uh about the proposed work uh and one of the issues that came up was the original delineation of the wetlands at that point it had been some time since the original surveyor on the project had identified the wetlands uh we were asked to refresh them so we engaged uh a wetland consultant ecosystem solutions to provide uh a new wetlands deline ition survey uh along the outer edge of the wetlands here which bordering vegetated Wetlands uh just to reaffirmed the previous delineation uh and adjusted a few Flags uh in certain locations to account for small changes uh since the original delineation a big part of what they also looked at was uh whether or not the former waiting River had in fact been uh blocked off uh from passing beneath the railroad tracks uh and traversing through the site uh the female flood plane uh maps and and uh flood insurance studies did reflect that that had been blocked off uh with the 100-year flood plane north of the railroad tracks uh and that was confirmed that the site investigation identifying that there was no longer a hydraulic connection for uh the waiting River to pass through the site uh so that was confirmed uh and that it is bordering vegetated Wetlands here that we have along the edge of the project uh and then there was also a email that we received from the conservation agent uh identifying a few things to take a look at as well uh consistent with one of the previous applications you heard earlier this evening the Tomy year didn't allow us to identify the presence or lack thereof of ver Pooles uh within the site uh other than identifying potential verles in some of these areas uh so I think that is an area that we're going to have to look into a little bit more with the Wetland consult as the weather is now turning uh I think you'll probably find a number of applicants in front of you that are going through that process now uh so we did update the uh the plans to reflect the revised Wetland delineations uh we confirm that the leading River no longer flows through the site uh based on peer review comments that we did receive from pgb engineering uh we also included some additional edits and modifications to the storm water design which included confirmation of uh a mounding analysis beneath a proposed recharge system that identified that the appropriate setback from the groundwater table was provided uh as well as providing some supporting uh analysis as related to essentially the equivalent of a water uh tributary area budgeting to those areas that would be potential vable pools uh just to make sure that uh by reducing the surface runoff to M the match the peak rate criteria from the storm standards uh but we also introduce sufficient recharge that I replenish the groundwater table in such a way that it would feed those potential B pool areas as well uh so attacking it from both the surface water as well as waterotor recharge uh so we did uh some of that additional work uh we understand that there is a little bit of extra work that needs to be done as it relates to verifying some degree of certainty some of these V pool areas uh but we're happy to look at that uh in a little more detail uh so we understand there's some outstanding issues we don't anticipate the action tonight uh we also look forward to receiving some feedback from the peerreview consultant just confirming that the comments were satisfactory addressed uh we welcome any additional comments uh and just as a quick refresher some of the work that was being proposed on the project included clearing uh of this previously undeveloped site uh we are providing uh Zone and compliant parking F we do have the project in front of the uh planning board uh it's been taking a little while to get them to open the hearing on that uh but we're hopeful that that process will happen shortly uh and we'll be able to be in front of the planning board to receive any comments along this way as well um the site design is done in a way that we're minimizing the work within the 100 foot buffer zone we are uh proposing all of the pavement in the impervious areas uh is staying as landward as we can of the site uh and then of the 33 and2 Acre Site uh we're only developing a little under 5 Acres of the site uh so we are keeping 85 uh% of the parcel as open space or vegetated areas as part of the project uh we do have passenger car access uh for the parking the employees at the Westerly end of the entrance uh in accordance with the planning board regulations and guidelines we have a wider entrance in throat uh for the uh vehicle loading as well as the storage for the the vehicles um and incidental uh equipment uh in the area here at the Eastern end of the site uh retaining walls proposed along the edges of the work to minimize the amount of overall disturbance of the site uh and also maintain the 25t buffer zone around the perimeter of the site uh we do have a full St aut management uh plan prepared uh ultimately based on the veral pool uh criteria you know one of the the questions was about uh potentially shifting some of these stor M systems outside of the 100 foot buffer zone uh to provide additional setback to those veral pool areas that's something that we'll have to take a look at depending on the feedback on one of the potential ver pools that was identified in this area uh just to adjust the storm War system in that respect and then on the easterly edge of the uh we have portion of the roof areas as well as the trench strains running through a subsurface infiltration system uh in this area as well uh if needed based on presence of vernal pools in these areas uh we may have to rotate and shift the stormw system uh to pull it back a little bit further from the wetlands areas uh to stay fully outside the 100 foot buffer zone um and as far as a utility design standpoint uh we did work with uh some of the comments that we received from the fire department uh so we added some additional uh fire hydrants around the site to Pro provide some enhanced coverage of the building from a utility standpoint uh we do have a septic system very small uh septic system proposed as part of the project uh with some of the uh additional delineation changes uh and again verification of the presence of the veral pool uh we may pull the storm water system a little closer to the building a little further away uh from those Wetland areas to provide enhanced separation there uh we also do have a full landscape plan uh being proposed around the prary of the site uh we are revegetating providing uh ever green buffers uh and shrubs along the frontage of South wster Street uh to provide natural screening and vegetation from these areas we're also uh introducing perimeter Landscaping uh to reintroduce buffering along the Westerly Edge uh and also introducing additional Landscaping that we have uh within this portion of the site uh to provide further enhancement and screening uh to provide a visual buffer from the public right of way uh so again very high overview of the project uh we do welcome uh any follow-up comments from the board uh from the commissioner or from the conservation agent uh or the peer review consult as well uh so with that uh welcome any comments you may have so uh unfortunately I mean it's been a while since we've reviewed this and um I guess my question is I believe this required a peer review is that correct or not correct there was a peer rview performed uh and then we did respond we provided a memorandum summarized in all responses to the peer riew comment uh letter so that should be in your file I believe that was provided uh early last week uh happy to walk through some of those comments but they mostly focused around the the design of the storm water management system uh and then just the questions about the Vernal pool habitat or potential vernal pools uh were raised by the the town's conservation agent so normally uh John would be able to participate in the meeting but unfortunately there was a conflict and he's currently uh participating in in another meeting so um I think we have to to wait with regard to potentially closing the hearing if there are no further issues uh potentially a draft of the order of conditions can be completed and we can close at the next meeting and um and then act on the draft right now I I you know we need his input and and can't get it um but first are there any questions from any members of the commission and if not uh any questions from anyone in the hearing so you know to to my review You've addressed everything that needs to be addressed but I think we just need the input of of John to U be sure that there's nothing that he felt needed to be addressed there's there's really nothing in the notes that he provided so um uh but I just I mean he received additional information on the third I just have to be sure he had an adequate time to review everything so I assume continuing this will be acceptable uh yes we're we're fine if you need an email or any sort of documentation requesting continues uh if veral is okay that's acceptable to us as well all right um so further questions or discussion we can consider a continuation for for file number 250 1143 360 southwester Street um continued until our next meeting on the 22nd I can make that motion moved oh okay I'm second all right we have a motion made by Paxton seconded by Dan um and roll call vote starting with Dan and T all right hi and Paxton and Mark hi hi and Joe I think again you'll probably have to enter an exstension because um um because of being a new member abstain and I'll throw in uh and I so the hearing is continued all right thank you very much and that d again I missed it is the 22nd of um April it is two weeks from today okay very good thank you very much you're back okay uh so our next um item on the agenda is file number 250- 11144 concerning a 14 um lot subdivision on resir Street um do we have a representative of the applicant Mr chair my name's uh Ned Quan I'm an attorney in Milton uh 26 High Street in Milton representing the owner uh developer and I'm joined by uh Cameron Campbell from thebert Salah Associates cam is the project engineer I think the matter was continued from a couple of months ago for the receipt of a peer review uh uh of the project and obviously Cam's preliminary comments with respect to that he has filed those comments and I think he's ready to uh present uh with respect to his response to those comments and then we'll open up obviously to any questions or concerns that the commission may have so thank you and uh Cameron you probably have screen sharing capabilities y I'll put that up [Music] now can you all see that not quite yet there's always a lag all right y so I'll just run through it quickly uh just to refresh your memories because I think the last time you saw it was in January uh this is a 28 acre piece of land that's fully wooded at the moment and we and it has Frontage along the Norton Reservoir and Frontage on Reservoir Street uh it was approved moved for a 14 Lot subdivision uh previously which sorry which is here and we came in front of you with uh the storm water design and uh we had peerreview comments from uh Whit and horley and I know we uh I know the peerreview comments didn't our response did not get to you guys until I think today so we were looking just to present this and then with the uh with the notion that we were going to be continued to the next hearing uh for the chance for the peer reviewer to review our comments our responses and for John Thomas also review as well so the the project is 14 single family lots with the potential for three of the lots to have duplexes with a special permit and get to the main site plan so here's the the main grading it's basically the roadway you come in off of Reservoir Street and we have a little bit of fill along a bordering vegetated Wetland to the Northeast and then it follows the grade to the best we could do and then wraps around to the rear Loops back around and comes back out to Reservoir Street there's three major Wetland areas uh within the development the Wetland associated with the N Reservoir at the rear there's a wetland in the at the front Northeast and then a wetland off to the South and there's a potential Vernal pool in this area which we are remaining 100 feet away from all uh all roadway and drainage I know there was a I know the one of the major comments from the commission previously and the peer reviewer also uh brought it to light was we did not include any uh impervious area for the Lots themselves in the storm water design so we went ahead and uh recalculated the storm water including a 20% impervious area on the Lots on the Lots buildable area because if you remember uh this this particular development has a significant conservation restriction uh being proposed along with it which 60,000 foot Lots if a couple of them are 80,000 and the lots are being restricted down to 20,000 ft buildable areas or 30,000 ft buildable areas in the in the larger three larger Lots so we took 20% of that buildable area and assumed that it was impervious and included that in the storm water design to accommodate uh potential house houses being developed in the on sites and the storm water the way the storm water designed could hand actually could handle handle the impervious as it was we made some minor changes based on the peer review uh comments with they asked for more detail on there's a constructed storm water Wetland down here we included a detailed profile of the Wetland and then there's also a rain Garden down here at the front and there's another we also include another detailed profile of that as well on the plan set which is in the detail sheets and then sorry and if you go into the rear there's a detention Bas here that we've also had have a detailed profile of we are looking for a waiver on the norn storm water management standard 10 AI which is it requires you to uh retain the first inter run off on site due to the soils on site the soils are mapped CD soils with that high groundwater and there's some areas of ledge this site does not lend itself well to uh groundwater infiltration it's more just but as it is now it kind of just runs off and goes into the wetlands hence while the wetlands are there it doesn't really infiltrate into the ground very well and we're looking for a waiver on that because it's we we met it to the maximum extent practicable we with the detention Basin and the constructed storm water wetland in the rain Garden they'll have infiltration but as much as they can based on the soils on the site uh we do have five pre-treatment water quality uh s Chambers uh one is here there's another one here another one in this location and then two out front which for every set of catch basins and pipes being directed towards the storm water basins they go through a water quality treatment unit prior to entering the basins to further treat for TSS removal and to meet that 90% TSS removal requirement for the uh storm water regulations and also to meet the 60% phosphorus removal from the storm water regulations there's another and then in the front there's a water quality structure here and here prior to going into sedimentation basins and then at the rear there's also a large there's a large water quality filter tank which will have uh it's a 8 by 24 tank it's got a I think 50 filters in it and it's to treat the final uh outlet from the detention Basin to give a final treatment to meet those regul those TSS removal phospherous removal regulations prior to it being released to the Overland to the norn reservoir the peer reviewer did ask for a detailed uh calculations on sizing all the outlets that we have uh and we provided those in the comments they have they haven't had a chance to review them yet and I would like to point out we are encroaching two of the outlets if I can zoom [Music] in to the back two the Els in the front portion of the site due to Elevation slightly encroach into the 25 foot no disturb there's one here there's a proposed retaining wall along this portion of the road to uh not encroach to have the grading not encroaching to 25 foot no disturb we have a there's a new proposed double covert underneath the road here that will direct the majority of the storm water runoff coming over land and pipe it under the road so that doesn't flood out the road and the properties and it the outlet uh rip wrap encroaches into the 25 foot no disturb and then as well as the outlet for the constructed storm water Wetland has a small Outlet rip wrap that also encroaches into the 25 foot nister there there's really no due to Elevation restrictions on site in the height of groundwater the those are the limit that we're uh stuck to and it's really a minor uh disturbance with just an outlet rip wrap that'll be all the rest around it will be revegetated along with with along with the disturbance you just have a new rock rip wrap Outlet to protect from scouring of the outlets so to keep suon out of the wetlands and I also like I know Mr carish I you were concerned about the abing property I believe when with the storm water design if that is correct I was and since then I've looked at I've looked at theing property and and noted that um the house built there is basically built on complete fill so it appears not to be at risk yeah it's about 5et it's about 5et higher than what the wetlands at and then the Wetland actually has a hydraulic connection out to the reservoir so in order for the water to get to that house it would it would be significant flooding of the entire area and it would you'd essentially need 5et of water to get to the house and we're also we're also decreasing any Peak flows we're also yeah we're also decreasing any of the peak volume Peak flows going to that Wetland to so that it doesn't have a large amount of water going to it at once that'll cause it to flood uh based on required by the mass storm water handbook at that point those are the major changes it was the peer viiew was mostly for the storm water management system uh there were some technical uh questions that they had which we've answered along with the outlet sizing and whatnot and then they asked that we send a copy of the operation and maintenance plan over to the highway department because our goal is to have this road accepted by Norton so if the town does accept it then they would eventually they would be responsible for the maintenance of the storm water along with all the other Utilities in the roadway so they asked if we would send over a copy of the operation maintenance plan to the highway department so they can review it to they so that they're satisfied with it and we've done that uh I'm still waiting on a response uh from their review all right um are you up for questions now yep you yep I'll answer anything you want uh so basically all of these houses will be on slabs is that is that the thought uh it's not determined yet uh they I don't I'm not sure what it's it's based on what the developer who buys what the person who buys the lot wants to do uh there are and it is within the Water Resource Protection District so there are uh limitations what you can do but the new construction nowadays A lot of people are building within the groundwater they just have some pump or French drains and it's but it would be under building department review prior to any sort of building permit is p well I mean here you're you're presenting that you the site is so problematic with regard to infiltration that it can't tolerate the the first inch of rain I I can't imagine you know even having a call space uh and and I'm very familiar with this area because I I live uh literally down the street and and it's all underlaid with ledge there's very little uh T yeah I did I did five test pits out there and I was able to get the the area has a little bit of soil I was able to get at least eight feet down on all of them really yeah it's just it's just really tight dirt it's you uh it just doesn't lend well to the water leeching into the ground it just runs off a with a higher groundwater table due to the fact that it can't leech through the soils if I may Julian um yeah I think your concerns were echoed by uh um John John Thomas at a previous meeting I think this is ground we've been over that this is uh an area that is prone to flooding um well well certainly during this these repeated large storms uh there's there's standing water everywhere there's water running down Reservoir Street for literally a week at a time so and now as I understand understand that this this project requires um a sewer line being extended is that correct yes it requires a sewer line coming down between Acre Road and Elm Street it's about 1300 feet there'll be a gravity line from that point to the front uh right corner of the lot here and then it'll be a for sewer throughout the development we're currently I currently just got I got the peer review for the extension uh couple weeks ago I haven't gotten to it yet and we're working with them on the finalizing that as well um all right now um unfortunately our director is not um able to to everything was called away to another meeting so this is going to require ire a continuation and U and the the planning board has completed its it's review is that correct they approved they approved the 14 month subdivision we still have to go I believe there's a special permit for afford affordable housing that we still need to go through but the subdivision itself is approved they voted in plan voted in October to approve the subdivision um we do have to do file for special permit to address the affordable uh component issue we do have to provide 10% uh of the units as aord I think we have to do at least two given it the 14 Lots we're also um pending review at um within the town and at the State Environmental office with respect to the proposed draft of the conservation restriction and the language of the Restriction needs to be approved by the uh executive office of energy and environmental Affairs uh I don't have a resp have a status on that to report um so those are those are a couple of other uh outstanding issues that are um obviously significant to the project but remain to be remain to be addressed the other the other issue that I had not previously heard was um requesting a a waiver with regard to um the the storm water uh retention of the first inch and I think uh John is going to have to comment on that uh what you like me the comments on it now well you you you have appeared magically reappeared magically so so yes that that um that is something we need to hear about so what would we like to hear about that it's a local BW requirement to um meet the one-inch threshold and given that the area has been subjected to a lot of uh precipitation events this season uh and last season and knowing that Reservoir Street floods I I think um it should be taken into consideration given the potential problems in the future of the area and I would like to state that this development as it's graded has no runoff flowing to Reservoir we're at kind of a high point on Reservoir and Reservoir kind of pitches to the left and right at the front of the lot and we collect the roadway gets collected prior to it ever reaching Reservoir Street so all the run off on from this roadway will go into our storm water drainage systems so I guess my question is is that how much area would would be I don't know I guess what what would be required to meet the 1 in uh threshold uh I don't have the number off the top of my head it'd be an inch over all of the impervious area on site so it's essentially the same volume of the water quality treatment area it's just it would have to be retained on site which these soils don't meet the minimum infiltration requirement for uh the state standards and the state standards allow for a detention style system like this with uh C and D Cs and ledge at the surface this meets the state standards it's just the local BW that we don't need right so the other thing to take into consideration obviously it hasn't been finalized yet but the um the Welling protection acts being uh I guess revised to accommodate climate resiliency and yes um also the Massachusetts storm water handbook is going to be going through Vision uh kind of procedure as well obviously it hasn't been approved yet either um I I guess my my whole take on this is you know we we have just dealt with an issue over on Barrow's Court um that anyone in town will be able to to basically talk about um that was built in the 70s um and it was done by the standards back then it was everything was installed for the standards well unfortunately you know 50 plus years later we've had some issues in flooding has persisted and become a problem for the residents and everyone else uh I'd rather kind of set up some sort of system now that's not going to impose those sort of impacts in the future for the residents that may occupy this area here and also the areas that border Reservoir Street so you know I I don't know if you know that's something to take into consideration um but I think you know meeting the one in if you can basically show that you can meet the one in threshold that would be the preferred alternative um and I think you know it's just something that needs to be evaluated and what the alternative would be I can't tell you that I think the you know the peer review consultant's going to say that you know this doesn't meet the bylaw um you know it needs to be modified or or or changed um because what they do in their evaluation is they look at you know the storm water handbook and then they look at our local bylaw um so unfortunately you know I can't say anything more to that I just think it's just something that needs to be investigated uh and it needs to be you know flushed out as to kind of um you know meeting that so that way you know this this project would be something that meets our current standards as as it pertains to storm water and I I would say the the detention Bas out those are all designed with a foot of extra storage PR the standard and to meet that infiltration to retain it on site you would essentially take the the outlets are designed at the bottom of the basins so that they drain out of the Basin to meet that uh standard you'd raise up the outlets to provide storage at the bottom that doesn't get go through the pipe originally but you'll end up having standing water in the basins for a significant amount of time due to the fact that the soils don't drain don't infiltrate water so you end up creating a hazardous situation and mosquito breeding grounds and whatnot with just standing water in the basins consistently after large storm events sounds like there's a little push pull that we need to work through uh John on that and U you know we'll spend some time addressing that and um being properly respons to the best that we can yeah I mean from my perspective I mean the peerreview consultant's going to going to be able to provide us the engineering you know backing and everything like that when it comes to meeting certain thresholds obviously you know I don't know if you know this would be something that you know because it's storm water related uh the storm water authority been willing to wave um and that's that's just kind of our standards and unfortunately we've never waved that threshold everybody has met that threshold uh since I've been here and I think since the uh bylaw has gone into place there has been no waiver for that so I mean this would be a unique request and a unique um Grant if that was you know something that the swim Water Authority would be willing to do I'd have to talk to them about that obviously um but you know that's something that I would have to talk internally with them but my my my inkling and my understanding is they probably not be um you know willing to grant that waiver so I I honestly think that it's probably in the best interest of this project to try to pursue um you know Alternatives that would potentially provide that and that's all I can say more to this topic so I I just you know I'd like to see a design that tries to meet that yeah and we I the the storm water the peerreview did originally they commented uh based on the meeting the uh infiltration and they they their comment was essentially we originally had uh impervious barriers at the bottom of the detention Basin in the rain Garden to prevent any groundw water infiltration into it uh because we don't because they don't meet the two- foot groundwater separation we're a foot off of the groundwater and they requested that we remove the imperious barriers to infiltrate to the maximum extent practicable based on the site conditions so they asked that we just remove the inferious so that it will infiltrate as much as it can based on the site conditions that was I believe that was elment number three from them for their standard three requirements I mean I I'll let the peer riewer com M on yeah on this moving forward with this new design I think we sent it over to them today I believe Megan sent it over to them today um they they'll get a response back um you know and if they provide a recommendation saying that it's okay to wave the one inch threshold then we'll take into consideration but obviously that's for the storm water authority to approve or deny yep thank you so it sounds like um this further questions or discussion that we would entertain a motion to continue and I'm assuming that would be until the next regular scheduled meeting on the 22nd yeah that yeah our goal was to go to the next uh to the next meeting on the 22nd to allow the peer reviewer to review our comments all right Joe I have a quick question uh sure Joe the work that's being with the proposed work being done within the buffer zone in the Wetland in the front yes uh the it is actually yes you're talking about the two spots that violate the 25 foot correct with the rip W uh and I guess the question is in this circumstance John is this something that we are going to allow or request um a modification so as it comes to outfalls um within 50 ft of a resource area they're allowed um obviously the the Basin itself is not allowed um within 50 feet of a resource area um or any sort of infiltration device um the outfalls are allowed um but it is acceptable um obviously the the area of work will be minimal uh that they're doing that but obviously there's no really room for placing them anywhere else um but I I'm going to let the peral comment on that those are are those new outfalls or those the ones that were previously under the old plan so the two down here were uh previously under there we and we this covert underneath the roadway is new uh it collects the Overland runoff along here and uh we sized up the peer riewer asked us to size up all the outfalls with provide calculations for them all which we've done and then just shown the proposed size on the plant so this one at the top is newer so I guess if we were talking of disturbance within 25 ft other resource area I'm sure there's going to have to be the removal of vegetation so potential minor Mitigation Of plantings and things could be could be a a feasible request from the commission for allowing for that to happen I would I would presume so I I don't see it as being a major issue um but obviously it's something to add to the to the U design uh and also the plan moving forward I would also prepare um having with the with the plan um visual barrier posts at least along the uh 25t buffer uh in the future SP spaced about 50 feet apart um because we we that's typically what we're requesting uh for any work or any sort of disturbance at the we can we can add that to the plan okay thank you I think if there are no further questions we can consider a motion to continue so moved second uh so that was motion by Joe and seconded I think Mark got the second by a few millisecs so roll call vote starting with Mama and Paxton vote hi hi and Mark and Joe hi hi and Dan all right and I'll throw in an ey so the motion carries so we'll see you guys again on the 22nd thank you for your time thank you very much next on on the agenda is request for certificate of compliance file number 250-17 concerning the Manfield airport education management project so John um so what one had the um moved uh for a site visit um the site visit was uh wasn't able to be performed so um it needs to be moved to the next meeting ah okay so it was a little too wet to uh there was a lot of potential things that happened um obviously we've had a lot of events and things I haven't really been able to schedule many site visits so I apologize but um I W I rescheduled it with Mark um to kind of go out there and take a look at the the vegetative uh management plan that they have so I'm scheduled to go out with them um this week and kind of try to figure out um you know what the extent of work was and make sure that for instance they're in compliance with with their original perm so yeah I I mean I think there was a a veral pool that we wanted to be sure a lot of debris didn't go into right that was I think the key issue but other than that I don't think there's going to be a closing or anything else so we have to worry about U uh doing a certificate compliance for so I'm assuming uh a Market's okay if we take a little more time next meeting yeah abolutely so my name Mar G Associates with the engineer consultant for the airport I was aware that I want toce [Music] myself commission [Music] so yes on site to have to to for okay sounds good so we'll T that item and our our next item are orders of conditions beginning with Zer EDD street so um so uh so John as I understand this uh color code uh yellow is were those were those questions or is this just something different from our basic layout so everything that's highlighted documents the changes that I made that I want the commission to take a look at so that's that's really the it ident makes it basic your life's easier so I'm trying to highlight stuff so you know everything else everything else is berer plate yeah I noticed that and I was going to I was going to say that um without this degree of organization it was it was kind of like a confet cannon coming at you um and this is this is uh really a good job I think I've mentioned it before that it's very helpful and review like I like I said I I did it for the contractors versus versus the commission so um it's it's mainly for the contractors to follow but I think everybody can be happy about it and I like it um so I I noticed the other permits and approvals is is that a new totally new thing because uh I think we've occasionally mention that but is this this going to be a new regular that that has been in there uh since the start of the new change um but I've just highlighted it so that way people know that for instance it's in there um because obviously there's been some questions uh from the fire department and uh some other boards that have not the applicant has not sought final approvals from um so we may potentially see an amendment uh come across our desk for this zero ready project if it were to be approved and issued this evening um but that's really out of our hands um because applicants are responsible for ensuring they receive all permits prior to any sort of construction efforts it's part of the general um code for any sort of issued order conditions but we also make it known within our local um Order special conditions so when you issue this um I'm assuming that the the purple background doesn't um go on the final copy no all all um all highlighted versions of that will be removed and it will just be a blank uh white canvas but are you saying if it's been overlooked previously that maybe that needs to be in a different color font um well the issue is that we have is most of the time it's black and white anyway that gets printed and recorded uh so regardless whatever font we we send over when it gets recorded it comes up black and white but is um is it worth trying to emphasize it with maybe underlining or I mean we can definitely underline some sections we can italicize I Know Dan Dan Pearson likes to italicize things so we can definitely do that well I don't know if italics will will I mean what you what you want to to convey is that this should not be overlooked and I think underlining it might be a way to do it we can definitely do that I mean anybody else have comments about that so maybe I mean you you'll have to try it and see how it looks it may just get a little too busy uh any other comments on on z80 Street orders uh because we only have a couple of highlighted sections and everything else is um I I see you have a metal book Dam issue in there question comments if not we're bump bumping up against motion time I'll make a motion to [Music] approve at what comms the draft for um for Eddie Street Ed Street F number file number 250- 11136 and do we have a second sorry can I just ask just one quick question I should have asked before yeah sure just um I'm just curious what we look for for when when it says provide a letter affidavit outlining responsibilities and ownership another B in like who is reviewing that and and you know what kind of just considerations they go into the affidavit that's provided so for instance it would be the landowner or HOA so for instance whoever owns the property um I don't know who that's going to be at this point um but whoever the land owner is at the time of for instance it my guess is it will be Sam that's going to provide a letter to affidavit who's going to outline who's going to have responsibilities of the ownership of the dam and maintenance responsibilities um so it's basically it gives us a understanding a general understanding of who's going to be responsible for the maintenance and upkeep on that and if we have that we use that and that get that's going to eventually be part of the permit application so that way in the future if anything changes we can say well we still have this affidavit that says X Y and Z is the owner and operator of the dam then for instance they're still responsible until someone else basically chimes in and says well now we are the sole owners of this because I don't know what his plan is for the pond and the upkeep on that um so he needs to basically provide that before the close out of the project thank you and that'll probably come in after pxton the subtext is the subtext is that any Dam structure carries with it substantial responsibility um because of the risk of failure if it's not properly maintained so when you looking at Future properties if there's a dam on it you may want to be fully aware that if if you buy the dam you buy a lot of responsibility yeah I don't on find the property again so we had a a motion second well nevertheless uh so we had a motion by Kama and then we were looking for a second we got a second from Mark and we're going to say that with regard to I didn't get that um but with regard to the the making the other perit in approvals potentially more prominent we're going to leave that up to to you John as to whatever looks good on that for the intention of being sure it doesn't get overlooked um so with that said uh roll call vote beginning with t and P hi hi and Mark and Dan hi all right and Joe do you feel comfortable voting on this one or do you want to abstain I'm G to abstain okay and I'll I'll vote I so the motion carries and um the next one up is 38 Charlotte Avenue this is the house on wut where there was a lot of discussion about compensatory storage um and just if I may Julian yeah um uh if Megan if you use this for the um the minutes uh Charlotte is spelled has a spelling error what is the correct spelling there uh C HR l o tte uh yeah I saw that afterwards I was like oops where we looking the the is uh 250- 1146 Charlotte Avenue that's on the agenda it's in the title oh oh yes okay but on the actual [Applause] order uh shl it seems to be spelled correctly is that uh is that right because it is spelled correctly on on the copy I'm looking at all right here again um I mean I have no comments other than I it's very straightforward um so John we have D's boiler plate and now we have our boiler plate all of which is in white um and then we have a couple of specific items correct most most of the items in here pertain to compensatory flood storage the elevation certificate because the house is being constructed or a portion of the house is being constructed in the flood plane so mainly all these um parameters are to outline local conditions as it pertains to work within the flood plane so um that's mainly this one um I kind of took most of the language from the previous 74 King Philip project that we did uh and just outlined similar uh requirements uh prior to construction and then also um uh following close out of the project all right any questions comments if not I think we may be in line for a motion uh make the motion Mr chairman to accept the uh to issue the um order of conditions okay for file number 250- 1146 do we have a second second uh so motion by Dan seconded by Mark uh so T and Paxton how you vot hi hi and Mark and Dan hi all and I'll throw in an eye and I'm assuming Joe will do an abstained on this one okay very good all right um so our minutes of March 25th the only comment I have is um the zoom once the meeting occurs the zoom link think becomes irrelevant is that correct uh I guess it does yeah and then how about the Google Drive Link does that get preserved and can be reaccessed in the future or does that disappear as well the Google Drive L stays stays okay so I guess the only so we don't you're right we we don't need the zoom uh the zoom link um it it does help the person uh writing up the minutes because he or she can go back and uh um there's the you know the link but you're right about the meeting the meeting video yes yeah okay well that should stay because anybody can just go review it then that stays on YouTube uh indefinitely Or as far as as far as I know it gets recorded and it's on YouTube for I mean I think we have meetings dating back to when they first started for for having these meetings online so my understanding is it's it's on there for good um I don't know how long that's going to last but we do have recordings in the meeting minutes to supplement the actual recording yeah so so that should stay and um I don't have anything else on this oh you you got uh in in the under the old business and discussion you you did put an insert here oh yes that's right yeah so I don't know if a you read a statement and I suppose I could have just tried to copy your statement but well I think um the the um the key link we already put the American chestnut Foundation has a very explicit um slideshow that explains exactly what so I think that's pretty much the extent that it should be in the minutes oh okay all right oh so you you just read something from the uh the American chestnut Foundation uh no I think what I read was a a um a text from Dominic which would be in that's five minutes to the extent necessary yeah that's that's what I that's what I had meant when I said insert here I meant the uh text from uh uh Dominic but I think we can eliminate that that's okay any other questions comments motions uh I'll make a motion uh Mr chair to accept the minutes as amended second uh Paxton that was you the second that's correct okay so motion made by Dan seconded by Paxton roll call vote Dan and Tom how vot all right uh and Joe you actually were observing this last meeting I don't know if you want to throw in a an ey or in on the minutes I he's gonna have to obain because he was yeah he wasn't a member okay all right we can throw that in as an exstension and Mark and Paxton I I said I as well okay and I'll say I and Carries so our next item is report from staff okay so I am sending in chat a link obviously it's on the website for the town uh town uh Hall has posted some information on the significant rainstorms that we've had over the last three months so far this year um it's kind of crazy that we've had about almost 25 inches of rain in a three-month span um but it's here and we're going to try to do what we can to mitigate for in the future um but there's been a lot of flooding a lot of um lot of high discharge rates of a lot of the streams here in town so um to put it lightly Norton's underwater um but besides that um you know everything's been fun been out and about doing inspections um having to go through all my boots probably three or four times a week so yeah they're on rotation now is there anything to say whether is is it expected that this will continue to be a heavy rain year I don't saw forecasting very well so unfortunately the Summers I looked at the almanac uh doesn't look good looks like we're going to have another wet summer um I think this might be the worst uh year that we've ever seen precipitation last year we had about 72 Ines in total uh for the year um and in 2010 we had the most significant rain in one month that was 16 in uh January 2024 war was the most we've ever seen here uh in Norton and um and then in March it was the second highest we've ever recorded um so we're we're set up for having a very difficult uh wet season and wet year um I can't can't let you know what Mother Nature is going to do but obviously it's going to be problematic for us moving forward especially with a lot of these uh projects and Designs going off the you know 0.7 have been coefficient for inches of rainfall per per hour um because you know we're getting these three and 1 half to 4 in rainstorms over a 24hour period and you know it's really putting a lot of stress and a lot of uh I guess impacts to the drainage systems uh for sites and also the town as a whole um we've been kind of having a difficult time um managing and try to play catchup with a lot of these old systems that may not have been uh created uh efficiently from the 70s and 80s so we're trying to play catchup here and it's it's been kind of difficult um for the highway superintendent his team and myself to take a look at a lot of these areas so we're doing what we can we we think that we may have found a solution for Barrows Court um they did all the work out there so hopefully you know during the next significant rainstorm we can kind of get a better sense as to whether that system is working uh or there's an improvement to the existing system but you know we've had had significant flooding over there that we're trying to alleviate so um but that's one of a few areas in town that have been kind of subjected to this issue well I I think that this may be a right year you know there's no way to know if this is a flip um or we're becoming Louisiana right and I know the state lead into kind of a couple other things to talk about the state's looking at it from a kind of preparing for the worst kind of scenario so they're trying to revise their uh the WPA regulations to focus on climate resiliency and trying to find ways to improve infiltration but also try to find ways for applicants to um you know arrange their designs in addition to that the states working on revising the storm water handbook again um and I don't know what the coefficient going to be for requiring for infiltration I mean I know that for instance right now it's 0.8 or 0.77 in um but we in our B we have 0.8 but then for instance we were we asked for old previous development to meet that standard new current development has to meet the 1inch threshold which is you know additional restriction um so moving forward is that if the state increases the coefficient of rain we should probably re-evaluate our storm water byw um in addition to that to try to also um help the Our Town out because you know I don't know if it's sufficient if we're getting three and a half inch rainstorms you know and that's new new Norm then some got to some got to get we got to make some improvements with these new designs and stuff but unfortunately you know a lot of the development here in town was has been created majority of it it's only going to be towards the new project so that's where it becomes difficult for us to try to help maintain and manage this um a lot of the existing roadways that we have they've been problematic um there's just there's just a lot to take on um and unfortunately the town really is at at at an all-time kind of deficit when it comes to budgets and everything like that so um I actually just came from the finance committee meeting and um basically you know they're they're looking at different directions on the town to go so I basically told them to strike all the requests um for articles for the DS we currently have um we we don't have any money for the spending for the annual ODS um the operation in of dam office of dam safety inspections um but we'll get that on a budget item budget line item moving forward uh to pay for that and then all the maintenance and upkeep we currently have about $55,000 in our Norton Reservoir account for repairs and maintenance and emergency purposes and then we have $44,000 in our chartley uh dam for um repairs and maintenance of that one as well so um we'll work towards using those and kind of tapping into those as needed um continually and annually um but at the same time you know if in the event that we are handicapped or have some issues with water and everything like that you know we'll have to talk to the town about ways to mitigate uh the damages and things of that nature this certainly can't be sorry you both were talking at the same time um I think if this becomes a regional issue Julian if this becomes a regional issue the the state and probably federal government eventually will begin to head through crial resources to to help I would anticipate that would be the case I haven't heard of anything as of yet um but if I do hear something I will let everyone know I definitely think that if if it is a regional kind of issue the state and also the um feds should be um providing some sort of emergency funds uh available and it should not be something that we have to you know file for a grant for and have a 50-50 shot at it should just be a given that we're given a certain amount of money to um you know have to assist us with emergency repairs and kind of things of that nature because every grant that I've submitted since I've been here we've been denied um so unfortunately you know I I just don't know what you know I know you know it's a competition kind of thing when it comes to Grants but um at this point you know I feel that Morton itself is you know we're we're in basically that that red zone of uh rainfall events and it seems that we have been subjected to some of the highest rainfall events this season um so I'm hoping the state you know does their analysis like I did on precipitation and understands that hey you know Norton may need some financial assistance um but I I can't you know I'm not the state I can't um you know I can't have a plan moving forward with what the state decides uh when do you foresee the new guidance uh from the state coming out for like the handbook and everything is that 20125 or yeah so the public comment period for the wetlands protection act for the climate um portion of it is the comment period is the end of this month I foresee maybe them potentially turning that around in three months and getting a draft or final draft ready for that to be basically submitted by probably um beginning a fall late summer um that's what I would anticipate with the stormw water handbook there's 900 pages of draft that needs to be kind of you know reviewed by engineers and public comment period that might take a little bit more time uh so that was probably next year um but maybe the WPA revisions could come out this year late this year uh but you know obviously you know we'll see what the state says and I just had a second point I was just wondering maybe uh if we could create a agenda item next week um at the end of the meeting to just maybe revisit the idea of you know additional buy raws for uh um just like um know the buffers on uh maybe possibly increasing the buffers I know we talked about maybe trying to uh increase that again I feel like just with with this ring like you know in terms of the public eye it might be the best thought we have uh you know if this is a high rain Year again to be able to bring public awareness to uh maybe increasing that soon I think that's a great idea pxton I think our our goal would be to potentially have something for fall town meeting um I would need to have a draft you know I guess worked on or basically generated um to discuss and everything like that I mean Dan Paxton I mean obviously you two I think have been kind of um you know spear heading this this local bylaw kind of um you know potential kind of new thing so I'm going to let you two coordinate and talk about it um and obviously maybe I can come in to a meeting and and kind of discuss kind of where we're at but um if you guys are free you know this month probably be a good idea to kind of game plan and strategize on how we can make that work um but you know thinking fall would be a date you have to present it to the public or would that be or would that have have to happen before that so we need to have a draft ready for review obviously the the board the Conservation Commission needs to vote on it and and basically on a draft at least and review it so we would need to have a draft probably for a late June early July and then have something in front of the town uh quickly thereafter uh to be on for the for the fall town meeting and I think that's in October when is the next open space committee meeting uh the next open space committee meeting Megan uh the next meeting I believe is uh the 17th of April oh okay well anyway um yeah maybe I can I send a you know if we Sorry I Know Dan you're talking go ahead I just if if we make a document uh could that be something that is shared in our Google Drive just a a kind of rolling document um for a possible plan um for whatever this might look like yeah on when I get back to the office tomorrow remind me um to put it up on the Google Drive we have a draft that I've kind of looked through um and kind of took out a lot of the um I guess other information that probably would be more difficult to to I guess digest um we've kind of made it a little bit more streamlined and I guess vague um doesn't have a lot of restrictions but it does outline a template um which gives us the right to initiate regulations on top of the bylaw in the event that we wanted to um so let me do that let me put that up on the up on the Google drive tomorrow and I'll just let you guys know that it's available and uh we can talk about it you guys can look through it and see if you have any recommendations I've written too but I don't think I would put it up there yet [Music] okay so I've already spoken about the um 2024 significant storm events um I can't that's the link that I gave to you guys in the in the text or the chat today as well it's on our website um and then um conservation local fees obviously we have the ability to administer additional fees on top of what um we currently have for um um for the state fees and those local fees those would go towards it wouldn't go towards anything for conservation because we don't have a conservation fund but it would go to the general fund which then could be um used and basically put back uh and given to conservation at a later date um it's been a discussion item uh as part of the kind of situation we're in um to evaluate ways to um you know have a um a steady flow of of of of funding and fees for additional things that we may have overlooked um with permits and whatnot so um it's something for us to consider I'll send over another kind of draft for the the fee structure I've looked at other towns as well some of them are um let's say um very high uh with what they charge for permits that we you know um you know issue uh I think some towns charge an extra $4,000 for notice of intents and things of that nature which I think is excessive um but you know I'm not I don't think that's needed I think maybe like $200 is okay with if you're filing a noce of intent versus and that's just like and then $100 for residential $200 for commercial nothing you know crazy but yeah I saw some other towns um that were charging about $4,000 for uh notice of intent projects subdivision projects and the like so I thought that was a little excessive so we're not going to go to that that level but um you know I'd like to keep it you know just a little bit more than kind of what we have with a big zero for local fees so that's something for me to work on uh for the future also if we're going to do a bylaw we can put the fee structure into the bylaw at some point too um just to kind of give everybody an update uh for the Rose farm status now obviously I just want to make this known that Joe carvalo is now currently a member of the Conservation Commission so he will not be able to comment on anything uh during the public forum that relates to um uh Rose farm uh and I just wanted to make that known uh because he would be the the person that's involved with second nature Farm as we pursue this we're currently um compiling an RFQ um to present to the town um for the purposes of this this project to basically go through the procurement process and procedures to uh engage in having um that piece of property Rose farm being leased out for farming purposes so I just wanted to keep everybody in a loop as to kind of where we're at with the status of that once we get that all set up and once we sent the or a few out then for instance we can kind of get a sense from the engagement from the public and also I mean the engagement from potential um Farmers uh within the local vicinity or we're interested in um pursuing this we'll probably get a one month de line or less um I'd like to do two weeks if we can I just have to double check to see kind of what the request is I think there's a timeline that we have to put this RFQ out for I just need to figure out what that is uh but then for instance once we have that then we can basically U engage to see who potential would like to lease the land for those purposes and then set up a lease agreement for those those uh potential Enterprises or Enterprise and uh then move on from that with finalizing a lease agreement and getting that on the books for this year so guy asked what it I mean if it's disclosed that Joey is a member of the commission and also has a certain role in in the Rose farm use why can't he participate in the conversation What what is the what is the thought as to how it would be corrupted I don't I don't quite get that I just I I basically because nothing's set in stone as of right now I don't want to I don't want the general public thinking that Joe is um joining the board uh for the sole purpose of you know pursuing this endeavor that he's looking to pursue I I I think Joe is actually really interested in um you know being a part of the community and the Conservation Commission so I I understand that like you know I don't want to basically go through the conflict of interest or infringed upon the conflict of interest threshold um so I I think it's in the best interest of all parties involved uh to basically keep things separate um and when is this public excuse me when is this public forum then what's up well you mentioned that he would not be able to participate in any public forum about it um yeah you know I think I mean there's there are two sides to this if his role as to what he wants to do is not discussed publicly is is not discussed openly then they can say look they were hiding this so I don't I don't quite you know my view is as long as it's all all the cards are on the table everybody can join the discussion and with everybody knowing what rules are invol I mean we see this with everybody particip participating in town government you know it's just we're all citizens here and I think it's anyway you know I think we'd have to get specific uh but I I you know I have never been a fan of well because you uh are I mean even the idea that there's a project next to me and I can't comment on it to me is you know anyway I'm I'm I'm I'm kind of getting in the weeds but no and I I I understand where you're coming from I mean where I'm coming from is that ultimately the cards are is that um there's going to be a lease agreement that's made up and it's going to be drafted and there's going to be a transference of money that goes and happens with that police agreement and Jo Joe is going to be a member of the Conservation Commission but also the Lei of conservation land so I want to make it known that for instance as it comes to the transfer of funds and the money and financial situation does not basically interfere and that's where I think it's important because before we even get started with discussions of this like it basically for him to not be a part of the discussions because the commission's going to basically bring up well how much do you think the those farm lands worth you know when it comes to renting it out for uh to a farmer and it's going to be up for discussion and I don't want basically Joe to be the one that basically is dictating or you know I guess advocating of how much the land he thinks is going to be worth because ultimately he's going to be the one that's basically going to have um you know that contract in front of him and he decides if he wants to sign it or not I guess that's where I'm coming from is I don't want there to be any sort of conflict of interest when it comes to a financial kind of situation that's going back and forth between leasing a property and not leasing a property does that make sense I don't know if I've well yeah now I now I but but all right he may have to abstain on the vat but um you know I'm not an expert on the going rate for agricultural land rental so NE neither am I and that and that's where Joe might be the best of valid information so he might be but I don't think he should comment on that in a public form as to what the good going rate is because you know that could be considered a conflict and I I'd rather um you know try to keep both parties away from that line where there could be COI I I understand but uh somebody's going to have to come up with a number and I don't know where you're going to look for that and I will come up with that number I will find it okay and I will make sure that it it is based on research and me calling other towns who may have similar interests with um lease agreements in other towns so I know one in Easton that I'm going to reach out to so I need to basically get that number from them and see if uh the potential uh Le see would be willing to arrange something similar to that okay so I'm going to basically say that this conversation is is good and we're and Joe can now uh come to the uh back to the [Music] meeting all right but we won't blame him if he doesn't are we are we we're essentially done aren't we or so I I wanted to let everybody else know that we've I don't know if I we've also we've also shut down e to3 for the season so unfortunately we don't have the funds um to um keep it open and afloat and also have the upkeep to rent it out or look to renting it out uh we don't have the staff or the Personnel to uh try to rent that property out uh to make the at least break even with the $5,000 it takes to up up up upkeep the property so we've shut it down for the season um we'll be looking in the future to potentially reopen it unfortunately there's a lot of things that need to be done to the property that could require improvements um but it was a financial decision that had to be made because we just don't have the the funds nor do we have the Personnel to um help us with maintaining the property okay so that's all I have this evening I don't know if anyone else has any other questions I understand it's going to rain again yeah don't remind me unfortunately um I think April April Showers being May Flowers right but I think may may showers is in the forecast too I think it's going to bring uh many frogs Yeah that's that's one discussion I wasn't um you know able to attend this evening but I hope um there was some discussion about some projects that I missed about vernal pool season so um hopefully that um got addressed uh yes uh I think Megan can get you up to speed on that great and so anyone else um otherwise uh I would recommend potential adjourn d uh I'll make a movement uh to adjourn at uh 929 second All rights up thank you guys everyone have a good night have a good night stay dry recording stopped