 Okay. Hello, everyone. Welcome to the Amherst conservation commission meeting. It's September 22, 2021. 704 p.m. It looks like we have everybody, which is exciting. Right. Yeah. Hi, everyone. First item on the agenda comments from me. I think we have a couple of questions. I think it seems like this meeting. Was going to be really full, but we have a couple of continuations from SWCA. They're two hearings. So we should be able to do it in like a semi reasonable amount of time if we stay focused. Go team. So with that, Dave. Aaron wasn't sure if you had anything to add. Do you have any last minute additions or updates? Or Aaron or myself. I have a few updates. Now we have a lot of time. So we can talk. No, I can go quickly as, as usual. One exciting note is we do have a new recreation director in town. His name is Ray harp. And he's from North Hampton and he's been involved in athletics and, and sports and, and education for, for over 20 years in North Hampton. And, and I was part of the search team that arrived, you know, at, at, at Ray as a great candidate. So he joined us for the first day today. And it's going to be really exciting. And, you know, I talked to him about recreation areas and conservation areas and, and potential synergy. And so, so it's really exciting to have a new recreation director. So that's, that's one new thing coming, coming our way. So you'll hear more about Ray. Let's see a couple of other quick updates from the field. We are beginning to mow those areas that are specifically not in, in box or, or, or would turtle habitat. We try to avoid those areas until after the first frost. So you'll see Brad and Brendan around a little bit. They've got a lot on their plate during the, the remainder of what's left of September and October. So we're not going to be doing a lot of mowing until November. And we'll just play it by year and see how the, how the snow in the winter goes. We get a lot of complaints, I will say. People love the field habitat. They love walking through fields, walking their dogs through fields. So it's always, it's always a bit of a, a mixed bag there. In terms of other, other things going on this Saturday is the Fort River cleanup. I don't know if any of you have heard about this, but it's organized in large part by the Fort River water supply. I don't know if any of you have heard about this, but it's organized in large part by the Fort River watershed association, a group that I've been helping out for the last couple of years. That is Saturday morning. I think it's around nine at Groff Park. 930. 10. Okay. Wow. Yep. All right. So you can sleep in and still help the Fort River, whatever. I will be at Hickory Ridge. I'm, I'm, I'm doing some cleanup there. So if anybody's around and I want to stop by and say hi, or get your, your hands or your feet wet or dirty a little bit by all means. That we want to bring it at Hickory Ridge. Can you get to the creek without like bushwhacking big time right now? Or is it pretty? Do you mean see the, see the Fort River? Clean up. We can bring, you know, little. Some of the cleanup at Hickory is even kind of in the bushes. You don't have to get right down in the river. I don't think the fort is running pretty high right now. And it's pretty deep in that section. So I don't know as we're going to be getting, I know we're not going to be pulling anything out of the river. We're not going for golf balls. It's actually a fairly clean section. There's no, no, as far as I know, no tires or a big waste down there, but there's just things in the bushes all over, you know, when, when that floods stuff comes down the fort and plastics and other stuff get mixed in the bushes. So it's still a beautiful place to go. And, you know, I think you can bring littles and, and see the river and, you know, so. Okay, cool. You use your best judgment. Yeah, yeah. Speaking of Hickory Ridge. We are beginning to do a little work there. The cleanup will happen. We're beginning to meet with the current owner. The closing is now scheduled for late October, which is good. We actually have a date. Plus or minus the 29th of October. So we're beginning the, when the lawyers start getting serious, then, you know, something's going to happen. So that's looking promising. We're just mowing the edges of the by two minutes pathways, you know, the old cart paths that were there. Nature was kind of taking over those. So they, they brush out a little bit along the, the by two minutes pathways so we don't lose those to, to the, the overgrowth. Let's see what else is going on out there. Sweet Alice. Parking is all open down there on Bay Road. I think it looks really nice. They've got a few things to touch up down there. They're going to put in a little more split rail fence, Brad and Brendan. We are working areas working with me and a couple of other staff on the trail improvements that you all, that went through the commission. And those trail improvements were, were, were getting bids on those right now. So some of them will happen before the snow flies. Some we might, some of the more complex ones to the south might wait until the spring. I think it is a Kestrel event. Happening at their office on 10 three. I'm not sure if some of you might have gotten invited. It's if your members of Kestrel is kind of a membership event. So they can show off their new, their new office. And Aaron and I will both be there. I think I'll be there for the whole day. And Aaron will be there for part of the day. And we'll kind of meet and greet and mingle a little bit with, with Kestrel members. I will also, I'll send you out in the invitation to the next event. I wanted to bring to your attention. Unfortunately it's during the week. So it's tough for people both with, with children, school and work. But on 10, six Kestrel and the food bank are celebrating the Zala project. And you remember, we participated in that in a small way. We protected 20 acres. Out of about 200 up in North Amherst, the Amherst side and the Hadley side of the, of the line, the, the downline, I'll send you out an invitation. It's going to be a nice event. Lynn Grismir is going to speak briefly at the event. I'm going to speak briefly at the event. It's mostly the food banks gig because the food bank helped protect over 170 acres of land there. And they're going to own and manage the agricultural land on the Hadley side. And they're going to be able to manage the, the Amherst side. So I'll send you that event. If anybody's around on 10, six, there'll be a fun event with lots of, I think they were even trying to get the governor. I don't know if they're going to have any success with that. What else? And then the Robert Frost trail work as, as permitted through the commission is, is continuing bog bridging. We're beginning to shift over to the bridges that were approved. We've got a $15,000 donation from the guest will trust to help with some of that work. One of their donors is, is very, um, uh, a strong supporter of the Robert Frost trail. So that's really nice to get that money to, uh, pump into those projects. So a lot of stuff going on. It's kind of the race against winter at this point. Um, and trying to get as much done as we possibly can before the snow flies. So those were five or six quick updates. And I will get you some information on the Zola event. Um, Dave, I have one question. I, so the, um, stretch of the KC trail between Southeast street and the rail trail that goes over the hot brook. I noticed that Brad and their team has been doing a bunch of clearing. And I know that it's, I'm assuming it's related to eventually replacing that bridge. And so when I get questions, I've been saying, you know, it's permitted work, but I was wondering if there's any update on like, are they shooting to do that this fall? We're not really getting low flow. Yeah. No, I think we lost the window of opportunity there. Um, I did respond to some neighbors concern and some user concern there. And I think they were legitimate. Um, Uh, we did do some trail clearing there. And then. Brad did a little hardening and unfortunately he used what I think is probably the wrong size rock. Yeah. So what, if you go down there, you can see that I think it's like three inch, maybe something like that. He's like three inch, like inch and a half. Right. So we're going to, we're going to kind of cover that with a smaller stone. And that way it'll be easier to walk on. Um, the bottom line is there won't be, that bridge is permitted to be, that was permitted a year or more ago by the commission. Um, but Aaron has been working on that. I've been working on that, Brad. Um, it's a conundrum. It's a, it's a difficult site. It's a perennial stream, uh, rare and endangered species. Um, and a big ticket, uh, a big price tag. So we're, we've been, Aaron's been doing some. Um, I'm not sure if you've seen it before. I'm not sure. I'm just imagining we had the town engineer down there a couple of times and then we're still grappling a little bit with the design. If we change the current design, we'd obviously have to come back through the commission. I don't think it'd be a radical change, but we're just trying to figure out. It's about a. I think it's about a 25 to 27 foot span there, something like that. So it's not an insignificant little, little bridge and it needs to support. So I think a year and a half ago when we did that, we underestimated a little bit. What would be needed? I think we're in the price tag of 30,000 plus to actually do that. So that's not trivial. So I don't think there will not be a new bridge there this fall, but we hope we'll get one in in 21. Okay. Great. Question for me too. Uh, what, what's happening, Margaret pond and the dam, uh, Dave. Oh, that's a good question, Larry. My favorite dam in all of, all of Amherst, my favorite tiny, tiny, tiny little dam. Um, but I probably get the most questions about that dam. Um, from, from the neighborhood, they love that dam. Um, we did have some damage to the dam during that last, uh, you know, we've had a very flashy, lots of flashy storms in 21. Those will continue. Um, the town engineer, I've been communicating with him. He had some suggestions for us on how to. Beef that dam up a little bit in terms of the, um, a lot of the trap rock, um, uh, the various sizes that we're kind of armoring that dam washed over. You probably seen it. Right. Um, so we need to come back and really take a look at that and say, what are we going to do with these? Um, I've been seeing a lot of, um, a lot of the, these, these over the past few months to kind of bolster that dam because these flashy storms are going to continue. So. I, you know, it's holding water now. It's been a very wet summer, but it's not a perfect situation down there. If I honestly, if I had my druthers, I would take that damn out and free up that stream. And, uh, Yeah, we would not. Have this conversation. be invited back to Margaret's bond or to pond view circle, but that's that's ecologically, that's what I firmly believe we should do there. As you said, eventually, it'll go away. Well, not if we armor that dam, that thing will be there long after we're all gone. Dirt coming in and so forth, it'll just Yeah, it will fill in. Yeah, it's it's it's the sediment is filling that pond eventually. But we will take a look at making it safe. We've got to make it safe. If we keep a pond, it's got to be safe there. Dam's got to be safe. Alright, any more questions for Dave? Alright, thanks, Dave. Aaron, do you have any updates for us? Yeah, I just wanted to say quickly piggyback on what Dave was saying on Zala that ever sourced completed construction of the the wetland creation project on Zala. And so the vernal pool has been created and BVW has been created and that project is is is done and they're going to be installing a sign which Dave and I have approved. So that we fabricating that and installing it and then kind of more to come after that, I think as far as that property, but just to let you guys know if you want to go check it out. And it looks great. It looks great. I didn't want to steal your thunder there. And I thought about including that. But I was like, you've really overseen that not me. So it looks really good. They did a wonderful job. And it's going to be a really interesting to watch that pool and see what finds it next spring. I'm sure a lot of herps are going to find it next spring. So Dave, are you able to show us the sign that you showed the dog park committee that's going has has the commission seen that yet? I can't. Sorry if I'm mixing up things, but the new sign that's going under the common school sign. So yes, I can show it to you in a very non technical way, if that's okay, because I gave it to Brad and I gave it to Brad and Brendan today to put up. So I think I mentioned you before. Whoops. Yeah, I think I mentioned you before. What I'd like to do is do a pretty comprehensive new sign program for for conservation. And I think likely we would do it for recreation areas too. What I'd like to do is move away from kind of the old kind of folksy signs from the 1970s, which are hand routed and really brand town property with our our shield, which I think everyone's familiar with. If you if you go if you're in town and you go to the new Kendrick Park playground, which is, you know, in the center of town, there's a beautiful new sign there with kind of the the colors that we want to use in all of our signs throughout town. So I asked Angela if she would just mock one up. And and we could try one out, we don't have the money for all of these signs yet. And I'm going to do this in a really kind of non technical way. I don't I don't know if you'll be able to see this. Sorry, I just have it on my phone. And can you see that? Move it up a little bit higher. Oh, I see. Looks good. Underneath it, it says conservation. Like, yeah, it says large shale conservation area town of Amherst with the town seal. And we'll there's been no sign at Larch Hill for a couple of years. And so we'll just put it up there, give it a try. You'll see it up there in the next few days when you go and buy take a look, see what you think about it, we can change funds, all of that. But the idea would be to try to get some money and do something similar all over town to really let people know what is town property, both conservation and recreation. To be honest, there has been a little bit of confusion as to what does Kestrelown in town? And so I think part of my rationale here is, you really need to let people know that it's taxpayer dollars for the most part, that do maintain these areas and their own, and, and, you know, they're owned by the town under care and control of the concom, but they're for all the people of the town to enjoy. So, so, okay, well, congratulations on on Zala and Ever Source site here. And that's fantastic. So I think the next thing was a review and approval of minutes. Is that right? Yes. Yeah, we have three sets of minutes. So it let's do the there's one way back 10, 23, 19 minutes. Thanks, Aaron. So we're just looking for a motion. I move we approve the minutes from 10, 23, 19. Second. Real brief. Is that the one? There's one of them that has Laura and I as staff present, but we were actually not there. Oh, okay. I can make that one. 10, 23. I can make that. I can double check in. Um, I guess. Yeah, one of them says staff present. It was both Laura and I and it doesn't that's not correct. Should be absent on that one. I'll make sure to make that adjustment. Oh, I saw. Okay. So Larry, did you have a motion? What? What do you mean? I didn't move it. You did. You did move it. Okay. Do we have a second? Yes, we had a second. Okay, sorry. All right. Sorry, voice vote. Larry. Hi, Roy. I think I have to abstain, right? It's okay. It's okay at this point, because they're at this point, we couldn't even I don't think really have a quorum. We're just trying to get them posted because they're they're overdue. All right. So, Michelle. Oh, you're muted. Good. Can you hear me? For now, yeah. Okay. Was not muted. Hi. Okay, lecture. Bye. Anna. Hi, Laura. Okay, sorry for that. Mental break. I always used to have to use teams at work and switching from teams to zoom is like hard for my brain. So I can see anyone for a minute and I lost focus. All right. Next one is February 12 2020. I'll make a motion to move the except the minutes for February 12 2020. We got a second from Anna. It's okay, Laura can have it. Okay, voice vote. Larry. Hi, Roy. Hi, Shell. Hi, Roger. Hi, Anna. Hi, Laura. Hi, and I'm an eye. And then last set is 825 21. I move we approve the minutes for 825 21. I think we Michelle. Alright, voice vote Larry. Hi, Roy. Hi, Michelle. Hi, lecture. Hi, Anna. Hi, Laura. Hi, and I wasn't there. So whatever that means. Stain. Okay. Um, conservation land use application. Do we have any? We don't have any today. Okay. And so it looks like you wanted us to do a CPA recommendation next. Am I reading between the lines on that correctly? Yeah, so that Anna would Anna is or was our CPA liaison and they just want us to make the town manager would like us to make a formal motion to appoint our liaison with CPA. Okay, and I know you guys discussed this at the last meeting, which I was not at. So was there, can somebody just catch me up quickly on is that something you want to continue to do? Are we looking for a new CPA representative? I'd love to do it. And presumably we'll be able to do it for the next few months. Okay. So do we feel comfortable appointing Anna? Yes. Okay. Okay. Great. Can I make the motion? Yes, please. Yeah, I'd love to make a motion to appoint Anna to the CPA. All right, and we have a second jump in. Had to jump in before you were finished just because there's a such competition, the hot market is a hot market. All right, voice out, LaRoy. Michelle. Anna. Hi, can I vote on this? Laura. Larry. And I'm an enthusiastic I. Thank you. Thank you for doing that. And could I just add one thing it reminded me that I did not mention the CPA process is actually beginning in earnest this year very early, extremely early. And so I didn't want to surprise you. We actually have not developed in our department any proposals yet, but we have until a week from Friday to do so. No surprises. I think we will put together probably two to three proposals, mainly having to do with trails, bridges, and likely put in one for Hickory Ridge as well. So I will get those to air in soon after the first of October. They're due on the first of October, perhaps at your next meeting, we could review them together as a group and talk through them. And then it'll take the the CPA committee, you know, probably two months or so to go through them and vote on them probably before the holiday sometime. So it's a very normally in normal years. The proposals are not due until December this year. I don't know all the background on I might recall, but they decided to move the deadline to October 1, which is a little challenging, but we'll do the best we can to meet it. David, would the with the dam fit into that category? You mean you thought of a restoration to remove all the dams? Not with restoration. I don't think so, Larry, because CPA dollars have to be spent on land purchased with CPA funds. And Margaret Spond was donated to the down and it was not purchased with CPA funds. So that's a tough restriction. But that's part of the law, the CPA law. Okay. Thanks for that update. And thanks for doing that, Anna. So we have two minutes before our first hearing. It looks like Aaron, do you think we can do these certificates of compliance? Quickly enough? Yeah. Yeah, they're both. I mean, the 31 Bayberry, the house has been there for, I mean, I'm guessing probably since the early 80s, they're just looking to clean the deed up on the property. And I've been out there that was there's really nothing surprising going on out there, very stable ground. 70 Moody Field Road, very stable. So I think issuing complete certificates on both is completely fine. Okay. So it looks like we're looking for a motion. I move. Oh, sorry. Go ahead. We can do one motion for both, right? As it's written. Yeah, okay. So I move we issue a complete certificate of compliance for seven Moody Field Road and 31 Bayberry Lane. Second. Okay, voice vote, Larry. Aye. Fletcher. Aye. Anna. Aye. LaRoy. Aye. Michelle. And Michelle, try one more time. Not muted. Aye. For some reason, it's like not picking up when you first say. Yeah, I have a slow connection. Sorry. I don't apologize. We got it. Laura. Aye. And I'm an aye. All right. So did you want to fit anything else in in our one minute? Um, well, I'll I'll just do I'll come back to the one other slide on other business, but just to let you guys know, we have a lot of major projects underway in town right now. And I just wanted to kind of quickly touch on just a quick bullet bulleted list. And this doesn't cover all of them, but like faringbrook is is mid process and hopefully will be wrapped up in the next week. East Levitt Road waterline project is midway through. Mass DOT paving project on route nine and one 16 is set to begin. I'm going to be inspecting erosion controls very soon on that one. The solar project on the landfill just kicked off the Eversort structure replacement there. I want to say about halfway through town at this point. So there is a lot going on in town as far as monitoring is concerned, but thankfully, we just crossed Potec off the list. So or Zala. So just lots going on in town. And I wanted to let you guys know that. Sarah. All right. So what do you think? Hearing? Okay. So let's see. 731 when we just get my public hearing. All right. So let's see. Are you bringing anyone in? Alan Weiss, I'll pull in. And then let me think, I think it's just Alan, unless anybody else raises their hand that they're here for that hearing and want to speak. Okay, I don't have control over who's who I can't and now I want to give me I'm going to make you coho. Sorry about that. Yeah. Can you hear me? Yes. Hi, Alan. Greetings. Let me open this public hearing. So this hearing is being this public hearing is now called to order. This hearing is being held as required by the provisions of chapter 131 section 40 of the general laws of the commonwealth and act relative to the protection of wetlands as most recently amended and article 3.31 wetlands protection under the town of Amherst general bylaws. And this is a request for term determination from cold spring environmental Alan Weiss for Ben Demerith for septic replacement within the buffer zone supporting vegetation wetland at 30 Harris Mountain Road. And I understand that this is just straight up a replacement of a faulty system and definitely an improvement and better protection of the resource. So Alan, if you're comfortable with it, I think really a quick overview, maybe eliminating it to three to four minutes just because our agenda is so tight tonight. That would be really great. Yeah, thank you Alan Weiss cold spring environmental. I think most of you folks have know me. We're working on a septic system repair and I agree completely it's a much improved situation over what's there now. The property rather unique in setting is kind of fun. It's kind of funky. But the reality is it's got resource areas that we have to contend with. The leach field is proposed to be about 80 feet from an intermittent stream on the southern side of the property. And a the rest of the system is pretty much beyond the 100 foot boundary. There was no way to really bring it uphill or away further from the stream just due to the offsets and slopes and things that we normally contend with when we do a septic design. The current system will be decommissioned. It's in a rather precarious position on a slope heading to the north beyond the fire pond that exists there and it is in a obviously it's also in the buffer zone but the proposal is to work with that in the context of pumping those to the leach tank and septic tank and using flowable fill to decommission them in place and then straw and mulch and seed so that there's no major disturbance at all around the old septic system. I would say I agree completely that this is the best alternative that we can come up with here and it's rather straightforward. Okay, thank you, Alan. Aaron, did you have anything to add or any comments to share? I will just share some quick photos from the site visit today. Just give the board. These are in your box. This is a picture of the fire pond. The septic system I believe is in this vicinity right here. Existing septic system. The house is if you're looking at the fire pond, the house is to your left and then so this is turning this is the this is up on the hill and this is where the new septic system would go so it's up on the hill pretty far away from from the the pond and the BBW and then down the soil a little bit from that. I believe is where and maybe I'm getting this mixed up that is the tank above. There's the leach fields going where you where you are now. Yeah, okay. Yeah, so the tank above and the leach field below. Right, right. And that's the opposite. That's looking south and east west from the driveway area. Right. Yeah, and then this is so if you're you're sort of in this direction, you're sort of facing the Mount Holyoke range. It's kind of like up against the Holyoke range. So you're looking uphill. So thus so leach fields kind of facing the Holyoke range. And then if you turn to your left to the east, there's a stream coming down here, but it's slightly upgrading. So there's the the paved driveway and then there's a topographic mound there and then the streams on the other side. Yeah, effectively, the paved area axis divide in addition to the siltation control that I have on the plan. Yeah, based on the proposal seeing the site, I really don't have any concerns. It's a very straightforward, septic replacement project. And as far as conditions, I think really just having erosion controls in place and then stabilizing upon completion are really the only the only issues or concerns that I would have. Okay, Erin, what inspection services and Ed Smith have already basically moved to approve this? Okay, thank you both. Any further questions from the commissioners? Okay, and then if you are in attendee of the meeting and you have any questions or comments, public questions or comments, please raise your hand and we'll allow you to speak, not seeing any raised hands. So I'm going to assume we're okay. I don't have any concerns about this. So unless anyone else has any questions or concerns, we need a draft motion. I'll make the motion. So a motion to issue a negative determination and the wetlands bylaw box three and a positive determination under the local wetlands bylaw box five. Only conditions being erosion control and stabilization after it's complete. That's right. Okay, perfect. Thanks, Laura. Got a second from Laura. Okay, voice vote. LaRoy. Michelle. Larry. Hi, what's your hi, Anna. Hi, and I'm an I. All right, Alan, thank you. Greetings. Good night, folks. Be well. Thank you. Good night. All right. I think I just kicked Alan out in a friendly way. Okay. Next one, a notice of intent. Oh, this is for 300 North Pleasant Street. And this is a new hearing. So I think we have Bucky Sparkle in attendance for this one. I think I saw him. Did you already move him? Yeah. Bucky and Joel, I believe are both present for this unless there's anybody else who wanted to speak. I just promoted both of them. Here we are. All right, I see Bucky and Joel. Anyone else in any other attendees that need to join here? I'm going to assume no. All right, let me open this hearing. The public hearing is now called to order. This hearing is being held as required by the provisions of chapter 131 section 40 of the general laws of the Commonwealth and act relative to the protection of wetlands as most recently amended and article 3.31 wetlands protection under the town of Amherst general bylaws. So 300 North Pleasant Street. Again, my understanding is that is this is a vast improvement and reduction in impervious cover site. But Bucky, if you'd be willing to give us a pretty brief, you know, three to four minute overview, that would be fantastic. Happy to do further by my name is Bucky Sparkle. I'm the civil engineer for the project. The the applicant and owner Joel Greenbaum is also here tonight. I'm happy to drive in but also I can talk over over your magic mouse work. So if you'd like to just go to the next screen or if you would like me to share. So these are the people who are involved. Here's the overview. So I'm going to basically run through this quickly and then we'll get to the pictures because the words are fairly important in this case. We've got little over 14,000 square feet of EBW on site. We are within 200 feet of Canbrooke as well. The project is to remove an existing building that we're hoping to save. It's not really saveable. We're basically building the same thing back in place with a small extension and a deck. Also removing a lot of parking area and putting back less parking area. We're going to reduce the impervious area on site by over three and a half thousand square feet and 3100 square feet of that is in the buffer itself. There's no work in the BBW. We're moving the pavement back an additional 13 feet from the existing conditions. All of the new impervious area is within the footprint of the existing impervious area. We are also adding there's no BMPs or stormwater on site. So we're adding a water quality swale that's going to capture virtually all of the surface runoff from impervious surfaces and slow it down, detain it, infiltrate a large portion of that. And I'm realizing and this is what Mark Stinton mentioned in his letter today that limited projects don't exist if you're in the buffer area. So I guess technically this is not a limited project because we're not into any resource areas. All right Erin please the next slide. Thanks all right. We'll take a look at the existing conditions first. That's sort of the upper square and just to get a sense the I'm so used to driving these presentations. The blue line on the left is the BBW right and then we have designated the 25, 30, 50 and 100 foot offsets from there. So those are all upland. The red area is the impervious area that is currently within the buffer. All of that is coming out and a smaller footprint is going back in. The tree line designates is designated by the green and there is a grass area and and smaller vegetation between the pavement and the tree line. So if we look at the proposed conditions we scrolled down a little bit. So we have you can see it so these are different scales because I did want to show the entire project. So the top drawing is at 1 to 20. The bottom project the bottom drawing is 1 to 10 so they're you know they're scaled by 100%. If you look again at the bottom you can see the blue line designates the BBW. That was it's been delineated multiple times most recently by who do we get word Smith was out there and I know the drawings are different scales but you can see the the light green shaded area in the bottom drawing used to be parking area and is all being converted to grass or in the case of the far west side of the site a water quality swell you can see that sort of boomerang shape that's a one foot deep relatively shallow side slope so mowable water quality swell with infiltration wick bottom. So the entire site just drains right right straight down the driveway right through the parking lot right toward the heavy now so we're going to capture all of that including the roof runoff and putting up some vegetation and as I mentioned all the disturbance virtually all the disturbances within already disturbed areas and we're reducing the impervious areas significantly. Those are the high point highlights of the project so if the commission has questions I'm happy to talk about it. Thanks that was a great quick overview Bucky appreciated. Erin do you want to share any photos and give us your input? Yes so let me see so this is the parking area now this is looking from the parking area back and you can see like this pink flag the bvw is basically bisecting this this lawn area here and then this is you can see it extends through the back and then this is on the north side of the existing parking area. So my primary concern on this one for my initial review was basically you know water related and also because there was an existing foundation drain which drained directly to the bvw and initially they were discharging it fairly close to the bvw and so the concern was basically I wanted to see that water captured and treated and infiltrated before it got to the bvw and so on speaking with Bucky about that that's when they incorporated the water quality swale and pulled back the outlet from the foundation roof drain so that it discharges into the water quality swale. So I think a pretty straightforward project and I mean I don't want to so there's the one elephant in the room is the fact that the tan brook is within 200 feet of this site so I just like to just address that for one second. They're not asking for us to designate the stream one way or another so I think that's an important consideration here and the other consideration is the improvement over existing conditions so even if we were to assume that the tan brook was perennial and that this was a river front redevelopment project the standards that they'd be required to meet would be an improvement over existing conditions trying to make efforts to reduce impervious surface as opposed to creating more impact and in this case they are reducing impervious surface and they're you know pulling the impact away from the bbw so I do think that this is ultimately going to be an improvement over existing conditions and what's there the water quality swale will be set up I don't think that there's any water issues on the property right now but with all the rainstorms that we've been having I think that this is a good mitigation in the in the case that we do have more heavy rains in the future that there'll be a system there to capture it and treat it. Okay fantastic and this was also you had your initial kind of not concerns but just feedback that you wanted a water quality swale but then also there was no butter comment that this water quality swale addresses as well so correct correct so just so everyone understands um Joel did you have any questions or comments or anything to add I'm seeing a nod we didn't hear you but I saw it looked that looked like a no thank you okay thanks um commissioners any questions or comments quick one what is a water quality swale is there anything in this swale or just a swale um there is something in this swale it is something earlier than I didn't hear it yeah it is detailed on the plans the the bottom of it is um it's relatively narrow but it's six inches of sand with a single layer of geotextile beneath that is another six inches of open graded stone that's wrapped in geotextile that way the sand ultimately gets clogged it becomes vegetated you can rake that out yeah if you have to shovel it all out you can pull up that single layer of geotextile and still keep um the the stone intact and um silt free because the top layer has a tendency to get clogged so I throw in two of them you throw that one away when it gets when it stops working um five years 15 years from now I don't know but someday so that's that's the idea so the the swale itself is a foot deep it is 11 feet wide it holds about 426 cubic feet of water when it is totally full and it's designed to just drain back down into the earth after some hours maybe 24 hours if it's a wet spring situation or frozen ground all right thanks okay um just a quick pause for Barbara Pearson I see your hand raised we'll get to some public questions and comments in one second let me just actually yeah can I just jump in one more time sorry yeah absolutely with that swale would it be more beneficial because I know you said you want to mow it would it be more beneficial to like do some type of plantings around it I know you need to get access in there in order to clean it to maintain it which is totally understandable but do you think it would be better to like plant well if this were designed more as a rain garden for the plants themselves we're doing some of the work of biological digestion where they were doing transpiration you know liquid uptake and sending it off to the atmosphere I the plants are then very important and part of it in this case grass lines swales are great the grass is a nice job of filtering if you get shrubby type of plants then you end up with you know root bases and then open area in between so the grass is really part of the filter system all right just throw it out there cool thanks yeah good question thanks letcher I think also yeah I think it depends on your water quality concern to fletcher and that the reason I didn't hesitate with a grass line swales because I mean most likely it's going to be turbidity and like sediment coming off of of the driveway right and so you know a filter fabric and a grass tighter grass matrix is going to be better at filtering that if it was you know some sort of nutrient runoff concern then I think a planted swale where you actually get nutrient uptake might be better I'm working forward to when we have TMDLs for our waterways and that just gets rolled into the the design process I'm kind of kind of excited because that's the more interest some of the more interesting stuff but it's it's not really required and of course for this project we don't have any standards that are even you know just do the do something you know make it better but not stormwater standards don't apply in this project but we're still definitely making a lot better with the reduction in the previous area capturing a few hundred cubic feet giving the sediment a place to actually deposit several improvements okay yeah thanks seconded thanks Fletcher and Lucky any other questions from the commission clarification okay it looks like we're good so I we can take some short comments or constructive comments or questions from the public so Barbara Pearson I see you have your hand raised so I've allowed you to talk if you want to ask any questions yeah I just wanted a clarification please when I was looking through the materials today about this particular project which is not too far from my house it was it I thought it said that they were asking for the designation that Grace Creechie had gotten of the 10 book book as intermittent and I didn't understand why it needed it and I was hoping it didn't need it yeah so I can take a preliminary try at that and then Erin if you want to step in again to repeat what Erin said earlier we are not designating Tanbrook either way as part of this project whether or not Tanbrook is perennial or intermittent it doesn't change the fact that this project is a net improvement at the site so we are not addressing that in any way with this with this project Erin so so they don't need it I mean they don't need it in so it's not going to be I was just surprised at why it was there and since there was no good reason it's good that it's not there yep absolutely yeah that's a great question Erin did you want to add anything or clarify anything yeah so there's really unless they're looking for having a request for determination or to confirm resource area boundaries in this case they're just looking to approve the work so there's really no reason for the commission to take a stance on the status of the brook and even if it was like even if it was designated riverfront area the the improvements that are being proposed as far as removal of impervious and moving further away from bbw would make it completely permissible under the riverfront standards so and that just to clarify so it would be become a riverfront improvement project if Tanbrook were designated as perennial so what was correct even if Tanbrook were perennial this would still be an improvement and less potential damage to the we're doing a better job protecting the resource regardless of the designation of Tanbrook thank you that's a thank you for being here Barbara and asking that thank you for joining us did you have any more questions or follow up on that no I I mean it'll come up for the next project but yeah but I didn't know yeah no you answered more than I needed I'm you answered it right the first time thank you great great so I'm gonna disable you from talk to for contributing vocally right now and then it looks like we have another comment or question from Shirley Shirley welcome you should be able to unmute yourself to ask any questions okay um I like the plan I'm glad that the swale was added and that the gutter runoff is going into it I do have a question about the lawn it looks as though the bvw line runs through the middle of moan lawn will that section of the bvw continue to be moan after the driveway is pulled back Bucky I'll let you feel that the intention as this property has a very limited yard area the intention is to not change the existing condition that we do have to get landscaping equipment back there to be mowing the swale anyway which ultimately will probably become a bvw in and of itself just by its own nature it is definitely the applicant's preference to to continue the use of the yard as has has been historically the case okay that's what I wanted to know it's not usual to allow mowing of wetlands but perhaps it will function better as moan I don't know anyways that's up to the commission I hear what you're saying Shirley I think the issue here is that it's a relatively small area and they'll have to get in there anyway to mow the swale so that it works in the way we want it to so my input on that as a commissioner would be that I think the net gain of having that swale maintain properly is much outweighs the small loss of the small area that's mowed inside of bvw but that is that's my input and commissioners if anyone has further questions or input on that I would encourage you to speak up I think it's important you know it's also we're not losing anything just a continuation what's already going on I might have more questions if there was any loss but to your point there is not yep thanks for that Lurie yeah and I totally appreciate your question and where you're coming from on that Shirley but unfortunately if these water quality swales become overgrown and are not maintained then they really do nothing they just overflow and everything right into the wetland so right I agree that it does have to be maintained yeah okay so also to Shirley's sort of to Shirley's point some of a couple of the conditions that I was going to suggest besides our sort of our standard state and local boilerplate one of them was going to be some sort of permanent demarcation and again that really depends on where the commission feels comfortable but if the commission is going to allow them to continue to mow sort of in the existing extent of lawn then I would recommend that we place monumentation at the extent of the current lawn area so that it's clear that that area cannot be expanded any further from where it already is located and then the other suggestion is just to have an on condition for ongoing maintenance of the swale required in the order of conditions so that they have to maintain that in perpetuity since that's located on the property as part of the order of conditions thanks for bringing that up Erin that's something we should have talked about and that's something we often do is the demarcation and the existing mow line bucky I'm sure I know that we've been through this before and projects with you in the past we've often done boulders because they're just hard to move and hard to ignore but I know in other sites you know owners per you know applicants have chosen to put in fences and things like that is that something you're open to and commissioners input on what demarcation we would prefer would be would be great here I think that the drill drill has a few options I also like boulders there once they're there they are very hard to move you put in a fence a you have to dig a hole and in this case that would be you know an additional disturbance we put a boulder down you know that that does alter things under the boulder a little bit it'll be a different ecosystem under that I would invite Joel if you have any thoughts if you would have a desire so Joel the idea is at the back of the grass yard where transitions into wild growth there needs to be some kind of demarcation to prevent further expansion of that yard 50 years from now when you and I are probably not talking about this property so do you have an idea of what you love fence boulders sometimes you can do heavy shrubbery but there's already shrubbery well I don't install a fence I think it's unnecessary any type of a a post in the ground on the corners perhaps I mean you really can't mow it anymore then it's already mowed because there's all kinds of vegetation around the edges which is quite pretty the birds love it so I don't know we're not going to mow anymore than there is already there's also the option of placing some rebar markers which are really unobtrusive fake of some sort yeah yeah those are fine they have like a little wetland marker on the top and just place them in the ground and drive them down and those those can serve the same purpose yeah I understand the concern I mean it's that particular lot even though it's a huge piece of land doesn't have that much open space and the open space to the west of the driveway is very very pretty you know it's all closed in there's a lot of birds down there and I quite enjoy it so I'd like to leave the grass the way it is but I have no intention on making it any larger so if we could do some type of a steak rebar ribbon whatever that would be the best thanks for your input Joel thank you yeah so it sounds like the compromise point is rebar and Erin maybe you can follow up with Bucky on like exactly what the specs are and those specific rebars that have the the wetland demarcation top piece uh so surely that also kind of addresses your your common and concern about that mowed lawn area yep it's still top okay great um so attendees does anyone else attending have any comments or questions not seeing anything okay so commissioners last chance any other comments or questions otherwise I think we're moving towards a emotion with some conditions here looks good okay looking for a motion I feel like Anna's going towards a cheat sheet I was I was I was but my I think we decided to reload with my cheat sheet on it I moved to approve the order of conditions DEP file number 089-0692 for 300 North Pleasant Street with the conditions as discussed including the rebar with the wetlands notation was that the only condition and the state and local boilerplate that we always do and then uh ongoing maintenance of the swell please yeah including ongoing maintenance of this well thanks Anna second yeah we got a second from Larry okay voice vote Leroy Michelle hi um Larry hi Laura okay Anna hi Fletcher hi Laura are you there she wants to step away I'm an eye okay thank you Bucky and Joel thank you very much it's good to see you again and I'll be back Erin nice to meet you you too take care guys thank you okay all right so great work everyone next item on the agenda this is an anrad for 52 Fearing Street this is a this is continued from a past meeting so I don't have to to read to open a hearing so let's see attendees first let's just update everyone on what's going on with this project we so if you recall we were doing a third party review of the delineation at Fearing Street but in addition to that the heart of the matter is the designation of Tan Brook as intermittent versus perennial so we got yes late yesterday Emily Stockman's third party review letter came in and Erin included that in our files we didn't have a ton of time to review and process that and SWCA certainly hasn't had time to make changes according to Emily's recommendations further one of Emily's main recommendations was that we consult with the state DEP and the town attorney to understand how we can proceed with even just reviewing the designation of Tan Brook as perennial versus intermittent so I've through Erin kind of spoken with Mickey Marcus from SWCA and asked for more time so that we can get input from Town Council and really guidance from the DEP about how we go about kind of creating a defensible redelineation of Tan Brook so after that communication Mickey agreed to request a continuation to the next meeting so that we have more time to make sure that we can proceed in the in this most solid regulatory footing possible for understanding a designation of Tan Brook so Erin did I summarize that sufficient? Yeah, you did and I just wanted to clarify one point about that so the question on the watershed delineation is the fact that when we go into stream stats and place a point at the poor point which is basically there's case law that determines where that point can be placed but generally speaking it's at the furthest extent of the resource on the given property that you can place that point and what that does is that delineates all of the upstream watershed of the stream so that you can then calculate the square area of that right? So in this case what we're really interested in is it under a half half of a square mile or over a half square mile so when there are different sections of the regulations that apply here but one section is that if when you place a point in stream stats if it if it creates a watershed boundary in stream stats then that's one of the sections is to use stream stats and when we draw that boundary we are of the strong opinion that that boundary is not drawing accurately for several reasons and so in stream stats you can actually create a revision directly in stream stats of the watershed however there's a section a subsection of the regulations where you can manually delineate and so that's the guidance that we're looking for is are we supposed to be editing in stream stats what the boundary is or are we supposed to be actually doing complete manual delineation and so we really need guidance on that so that we know that we're applying the correct to section and it um we until we can really process that and have a definitive then at that point we can really carefully delineate to make sure that we're capturing it accurately and so that's that's why it's taking a little bit longer is that choice controversial so yeah so I was going to say Larry said another way the DUP regulation requires that you use stream stats as the delineation and there's a subtlety here and that is within stream stats you can do a manual adjustment to the delineation and our question for the state is how is that how do we justify a manual change to a delineation in stream stats and there's just it's literally it's a USGS tool it's literally written into the state regulation so we're trying to understand how the state if there's any precedent how the state has handled this in the past I mean I have to think that they have to deal with this because any urban drainage is going to have a different contributing area than topographic drainage area and that is that there's probably more water entering the stream at that point than a topographic delineation might imply so we just need we need more help yeah will this be challenged well we have to assume that it's going to be challenged and so we want to make sure that we're proceeding on the most solid regulatory footing with whatever decision the commission issues so whatever the outcome is that we are solid on that because we don't we don't want to be dealing with a superseding order of conditions where DEP overthrows our decision and issues their own we want to make sure that where we are solid and following regulatory guidance in how we issue the ORAD and but that is also so to say we are building you know we're building our own case about how so we're not just looking to fall in with the state but we want to understand what the question is yeah um so with that any other questions from the commission and I want to give a chance go ahead so this like settle tan brook it's um there's no real way to settle tan brook unless there's a USGS um led effort to assess the entire brook to determine its um perennial intermittent nature the problem is the way that the regulations work it's on a case by case property by property basis and that's how it is and so the commission doesn't have any authority to say this applies to the entire stream because we're only looking at everything upstream of this property and what makes this even more complicated is that there's no no blue line on the there's not even an intermittent stream line on the USGS at this point so and I mean just to explain like that would involve just a lot of flow measuring in the stream which takes a lot of time and but that said I mean so depending on this designation it does impact the designation of the tan brook downstream because downstream the flow accumulation only increases so it's still relevant to the whole tan brook okay guys so with that any other questions or comments okay so we're going to move to members of the public who joined us for this hearing so if you have joined us and you're listening in and have any questions or comments for the hearing I invite you to raise your hand per usual lately our agenda is extremely tight so I'm going to ask that we have constructive comments or questions and that you try to limit this to about two minutes if it's getting much longer than that it's not moving in a constructive direction we're going to move to the next attendee so with that Ralph Carlstrom is back so Ralph I'm going to allow you to talk so you can ask any questions or make any contributions yeah thanks so I appreciate the independent study that seems like this was a very productive exercise or step forward and I haven't had a lot of time to look at the report either so the continuation seems like the obvious next step but I actually was going to ask something that Fletcher started out asking how can we make this a little more so could the USGS have listened to your response could we bring in or request USGS or others to actually use this use 10 Brook as a study area to help define it and get it back on the map for instance I think that's important how do we go about getting that to happen and is there a way that you or the citizens of Amherst could initiate that process it's my question yeah so that's a great question I think we don't know what that process looks like and that's part of what we're trying to understand from the state is really how we go about having kind of independent scientific determination in this area yeah so I think unfortunately I'm going to have to say like you know we'll we're going to have to put a pin in that and come back because you just don't know what's done elsewhere in the state I you know yeah yeah but I've already requested it for the record I've already requested USGS do it and we're going to keep pushing in that direction okay and sometimes the academic approach I brought up some work that had been done at UMass but that didn't get to the actual question either so anyway that's that's a great answer thank you we'll keep pursuing it yeah and at the but I mean if the delineation issue can't solve it alone I mean there is another provision in the regulation that is about how much flow is in the stream for how much of the year and that comes down to measuring it and there are a lot of creative ways to go about that in partnership with USGS and the state so we'll certainly pursue all possible avenues to try to get to the bottom of it thank you yeah thanks for that question I see Barbara is back hello Barbara let's see so I should be allowing you to talk Barbara yes thank you I'll try and be quick on that one too I just remember last time that we were at this meeting sort of at the very end after all this very productive discussion about all the different places where it's wrong and how it could be fixed in different ways and there seem to be such a wealth of understanding of the issues I did I hear the representative for the applicant say well I'll go back to my client and see if he's willing to go through this does he get a choice so I remember that exchange that was Mickey Marcus saying like you know we can pay for a third party review for the delineation of the resource but what Mickey was intuiting there is that in order to he was intuiting the what we are kind of discussing now which is it's very hard to have an independent delineation of this without a full like flood study like water engineered watershed study of the tanbrook so I think what he was probably saying is that I don't know that my client is going to pay for a multi-year flood study engine watershed study of tanbrook what we're talking about be responsible for that what would he be responsible for that we're trying to navigate that unlikely I think instead the question here we have we have the resources to understand the delineation but instead the question is how we proceed in a risk like regulatory a way that's on strong footing from a regulatory perspective so I guess that is to say with the expertise on the commission and with our with Aaron we're able to pull together a lot of resources to better understand the delineation but we need to understand how to move forward with the state given the state regulation so I guess what I'm saying is it's not necessarily necessarily necessary to do that engineered study in order to under improve the designation or change that does let me say change the designation of tanbrook but we don't know what that correct process is yet Barbara so we're just trying to make sure we're on solid footing as we move forward with expertise that we have here well I appreciate that and I appreciate but I also appreciate that you remember the comment as well because it was you know after all of that it was very jarring actually yeah we just say no I don't want to do that forget it we're going to go ahead yeah it's not that yeah that is that is not going to affect how we move forward for understanding the designation of tanbrook thank you yeah yeah okay thank you Barbara anyone else I see we have many other attendees did anyone else have any comment or questions for us I see Edwin has a question or comment I'm allowing you to talk Edwin hi I'm Edwin I also want to thank the commission for organizing this peer review and I have to say I don't really understand many of the points that were made in this peer review um I am encouraged to that the question still remains of the determination of the intermittent versus perennial status and it looks like there's at least some of the criteria seem to be closer to qualifying this book as a perennial I just have a very simple question about swales but some it seems to be maybe one or two swales that are mentioned in this and it doesn't look to me as I look at different maps that from the from the SWCA study it looks like one of them is doesn't have anything to do with tanbrook or is it a tributary of tanbrook and another one is a man made swale so could somebody just talk to me about what's going on here I can address yeah I read Emily's report and I know what she's talking about so there's two issues one of them is that there's an intermittent stream that's located within BVW on the east side of the site that is not flagged the intermittent stream bank is not flagged there is a BVW around it is that is flagged and the reason for that is because the BVW has a greater extent of resource area than the stream does so since it's an intermittent stream the buffer is extending off of the BVW anyway the 100 foot buffer so they didn't flag it so the point that Emily was making there was we're not confirming the boundary of that intermittent stream because it's not flagged we are only confirming the boundary of the BVW okay the BVW is more extensive so it captures more area than the stream does anyway so from a regulatory standpoint it doesn't it doesn't matter so much in terms of because more areas being captured with the with the BVW delineation however it's important to note because we don't want to say all bank is flagged on the entire property because it's not so that's that the point about the swale the secondary point about the swale in the SWCA initial delineation that swale was not flagged as being jurisdictional Emily looked at it and she determined that it is jurisdictional so that area will be added to the delineation as bordering vegetated wetland that's a fairly large area as as I look at it seems to be yeah it'll be added to the SWCA plan okay so you will see that on an on a future updated delineation you'll see that and that was part of the delay Edwin is that we just got those comments for Emily Lee yesterday and so yeah I didn't have time to change the delineation already respond to her comments now I used to run a translation agency so I think what we need for the butters and the neighbors is a translation of some of this wetland more technical terminology so that we know what it is that that we're reading we might need that for a lot of science I'll take one of those yeah I know Edwin we got you covered thanks thanks put all our heads together yep thank you that's all thanks thanks for the commission for all your fine work thank you all right okay so it looks like we have one another comment from public attendee Michelle POSP you should be enabled to to contribute or ask any question yep can you guys hear me yeah great thanks so first I want to really applaud you guys for all the hard work this has been really helpful I know that that report just came out so we haven't had a chance to really look at it and Jen maybe you're going to speak about this but do you guys have a sense of a timeline of how long this is going to take exactly what the process is kind of knowing what the parameters are would be helpful and you may not know but that's my only question is timeline yeah there's it that's a great question and I wish I could give you something more definite like I've said where we need guidance from the state to understand how to move forward on solid regulatory footing and we've reached out to Erin has reached out to them multiple times and hasn't heard back so it could be a busy time of year we need to understand what's going on with them separate from that I mean generally this process would go pretty quickly because the applicant wants to have their resource area delineated so they can move forward with whatever their plans are and we generally try to facilitate that in a way that of course protects the resources best we can so generally what would happen is SWCA would respond to the third party review comments and either resubmit a new plan or resubmit a partially revised plan and then we would maybe debate areas where we disagree and that might last another one or two hearings before an approval so that would be typical but when we're waiting for the state's input on how we designate Tanbrook it could it's just an unknown I don't I don't know how that's going to go okay I appreciate the best thing so unfortunately just attending the meetings and checking the agenda as we keep bringing this back up at each meeting is unfortunately the best way to go okay we will do thank you so much for your work everyone okay and what I'll do Michelle too is if we can if we continue again at the beginning of the next meeting I'll I'll say you know this is what we're continuing this again or something like that we'll do our best to help you guys out since I know this is a it's tough to nail down exactly when these hearings will come up okay thank you very much yeah thanks for coming all right any more comments from meeting attendees please raise your hand all right I'm gonna assume that Edwin's hand is still up from his previous comment yep you just put it down and yeah so I think we're okay for now so unless any commissioners have any final words questions or comments I think we're looking for a motion or for Aaron to call up the cheat sheet I was so ready this time I had it pulled up on my own I move we continue the public hearing for 52 Fearing Street to October 13th at 745 p.m. I second that Anna thank you Laura okay um what do you spoke Fletcher hi Leroy hi so hi Anna hi Laura hi Larry hi and I'm and I all right next another continuation this is the anrad for 246 Montague Road and again SWCA requested a continuation the contract is for the site is being finalized by the town and SWCA requested continuation to the next meeting pending pending review so Aaron anything to add on that or are we just looking for a motion to continue I was just gonna say Jen I think that there might be a number of attendees who are here about this oh okay I'm sorry I could be wrong but that's yeah okay might we might want to check on that that would be my only okay as Anna said that would be my only comment okay okay sorry about that yep it looks like we do have a comment my bad things for arriving me yeah so attendees raise your hand if you have any questions or comments the overview is that SWCA needs is pending a review and so we're continuing to the next meeting on October 13th ultimately but Hilda looks like Hilda Greenbaum has a question or comment so Hilda you should be able to talk you unmute yourself work did you hear me because it wouldn't work we we hear you now we hear you now you hear me now yep oh okay I've got two things to say one from having listened to the other hearings it would be really nice if you follow the procedure that other boards do of having people identify themselves by their first and last night and and also address because some of us aren't neighbors of those neighborhoods but interested in Tanbrook and I really don't know who was talking so I just want to make that as a suggestion and then I have a question about something you just said the contractor of the town over 246 Montague Road is something that's being discussed did I hear that right and if so what is the contractor of the town so there's currently a the commission voted to have a third party review of the an rad application and so when the when the commission votes to have a third party review what happens is that the town myself on behalf of the town solicits a quote from a third party peer reviewer and that the amount of that peer review quote we ask for from the applicant in the form of a check written out to the town of Amherst they give me a check and I set up a contract so that third party peer reviewer is actually working for the town of Amherst in reviewing the delineation that was prepared by the applicant and we do that so that it's like a checks and balance on the application to make sure that the delineation is 100% accurate or as accurate as we can make it I should have said headline third party review we are finalizing the contract for the third party review with the town and SWCA has requested a continuation awaiting that third party review yeah I know about the third party review but I didn't realize that the deal with the town was that was what the contract was and I thought it was a new loop being thrown in here for us to deal with thank you all right Janet Keller you had your hand raised and you should be able to talk if you unmute yourself Hi Janet Keller 120 Popeth Hill Road I want to just add my thanks to all of you for how hard you're working on this and the professionalism and the expertise that you display it's much appreciated thanks thanks Janet get a thumbs up from Fletcher happy to do it okay tell that I'm assuming your hand is still up from your previous comment anyone else any other attendees have any questions or comments please raise your hand I'm not seeing anyone so again we're awaiting the third party review on the resource area delineation for 246 Montague Road so we're looking for a motion to continue I'll make the motion to continue the public hearing for 246 Montague Road over 13th at 7 50 p.m. second okay voice vote Anna hi good boy hi Larry hi Michelle hi Laura hi Fletcher hi who did I forget I'm an eye did I forget anyone okay all right so last hearing this is an RDA this is Haynes hydrogeologic consulting for Kim Harwood for removal of fill from a bordering vegetated wetland revegetation and vegetation management for an area altered without the benefit of a permit at 121 pond view drive in Amherst since this is a new RDA I have to open the public meeting so the public meeting is now called to order this meeting is being held as required by the provisions of chapter 131 section 40 of the general laws of the common wealth and acrobatic protection to wetland as most recently amended article 33.31 wetland protection under the town of Amherst general bylaws so we'll now promote to panelists any attendees so I'm assuming David is David Haynes is that you is that you microphone oh there he is you got him yay okay microphone wait excuse me microphone yes you got it Larry thank you can you hear me now it seems okay yep so um okay Dave yeah so we'll just ask that you introduce yourself and give us an overview of the project and the resource area restoration as proposed we'll do David Haynes with Haynes hydro geologic consulting representing Kim Harwood at 121 pond view drive this is a RDA in response to an enforcement order issued by the conservation commission for work that was done in the back of his property without benefit of a permit it was mostly land it was landscaping of creating trails removal of some vegetation invasive species mostly and some pruning put some trails in and this is a some of those trails two of those two sections of the trails did infringe and and bordering vegetated wetland areas and what we are proposing to do is to remove the fill from those wetland areas and yeah there's a sketch plan here it is a sketch plan as required by the by the enforcement order there is a perennial stream so there's riverfront area bordering vegetated wetland and bank in this area it is not within a natural heritage habitat and what we're proposing to do is this is a sketch it was not was not flagged in the field and has not been surveyed the we're proposing to remove two areas of fill that were placed across wetland areas for to establish a trail those are shown on the sketch plan the eastern area or the western area that Aaron is pointing to is about 150 square feet we are going to remove that fill it's in there and we would like to replace that with a with a bog bridge just with planks going across it so the soil doesn't get any more disturbed the other area is on the western side right along the edge of the brook and or the eastern side excuse me it's on the edge of the brook and there is some gravel along the edge of the bank we're proposing to remove that fill that's in there and if necessary replace it with topsoil mixed with compost up to the grade of the wetland and replant it with a combination of high bush blueberry winterberry holly on eight to ten feet on center and seed it with a new england wetland seed mix if necessary we'd use some landscape netting in that area to stabilize soils this year everything has been underwater at various times and there's been an experience high flood flood flow high flows in that area that have come into this area so perhaps landscape netting would be appropriate to further stabilize it there is a plank bridge and I in my narrative I caught that I put put that is the southern bridge but that is actually the northern bridge that plank bridge is to be removed and if we wants to replace it we'd have to come back with another filing there is another walking bridge to the south that was permanent we're not sure when that was put in that we are asking to maintain it there is a little stone bench along one of the pathways that we would like to leave we'd like to leave the pathways and and then the areas that were cut would like to continue to to remove any invasive species that were come in that was bittersweet multi-flora rose had had become established in there that was removed there is a lot of regeneration of other species red maple and some shrubs that are coming back in we're going to monitor the revegetation of that area and augmented as necessary has spelt out in the notice of intent and basically that is everything if you have any questions before we go to thank you Dave before we go to questions Aaron do you want to share any site photos and any comments you have yes so just right off the bat that the proposals basically as submitted meets what I requested to be provided to the commission I don't have any any additions I think that what Dave has proposed is exactly what I asked for yeah site visit photos right now yeah commissioners I asked Aaron to put the original enforcement letter in the folder hearing folder for tonight so if you want to go back and just look at that for your notification I did check it and this does address all of the requests in in the original enforcement so this is the stone bench so this is this is Mr. Harwood's house here there's a path that comes down from his lawn area and if you take a right there's a little stone bench and this is the wood chip pathway that leads down toward the bank this is taken from up above on the hill and right about here is where the well and fill was placed this is a photo of the bank you can see where there was stone it's like kind of a gravel that you would see on a driveway that was placed along this bank here this is the stone plank that's proposed to be removed or the I'm sorry the plank that was proposed to be removed and this is another shot of I believe Dave correct me if I'm wrong but this I believe is the area where the fill was placed in the wetland area there was I believe some bbw right here yes that's true and that's where we want to we want to pull out the fill and we'd like to put in a bog bridge across there was just planks and four by fours great and I feel like I should say on the record that I mean this has been you know a little bit of a rocky process but we appreciate the owner applicant coming to this this RDA and this hearing and making such a great effort at addressing our concerns and protecting the resource and you know we just appreciate the process and and the engagement on this so we very much appreciate your willingness to work with us and we feel like this is a much more protected perennial stream as a result of of these restoration activities so thank you and Mr. Harwood has become very he wanted to fix this he loves the area I have to say that I saw so much wildlife in that area it was great there were there were blue herons in the stream there were raccoons running through there I mean it was I saw a lot of wildlife in there but yeah he does he loves the area he uses the area he walks through there and he he appreciates that you you are working with him to keep it great yeah Koopie continues to enjoy it as much as he has before it is beautiful all right so commissioners unless anyone has any further questions or comments I just wanted to say Jen this is a really good resolution I think looks like a great plan and I think everyone's going to walk away much happier than it looks like in the beginning thanks all right Erin I had a question about the monitoring reports so you said annual is you're just is that what we were putting into the motion is the goal that being the an annual sorry apparently after week 30 my brain no longer connects to my mouth you'd like to see annual monitoring reports from this that you think that's sufficient going forward I do but I would I think based on my conversation with Dave Haynes Dave plans to be present when the work is taking place so as long as Dave is present when the work is taking place or basically what I would like is for him to be present or to inspect that the work has been done report to us that the work has been done with a written report and photos and then after that point an annual report until the permit expires basically so that's kind of what I had in mind yeah that makes sense to me the only other question I had was we mentioned removal of invasives which always trips my little flag in my head of just making sure that we're specifying that's not with chemicals that it's hand pulling and not with machinery what's been done there haven't been any chemicals used out there it's all been yeah hand hand removal and and some pulling up of material I totally believe you it's been on my mind for the past like three meetings so I just it's up again and again yeah it comes up again and again um thank you yeah and I the only other comment I make if it's okay with everyone else in the commission is I think that those monitoring reports Dave you know pictures with you know decent captions you know we're not looking for something heavily you know verbose onerous effort for a monitoring report we just want to know initially that the work has been done with some photos and some decent captions and then annually thereafter similarly just some photo captioned well captioned photos is 100% sufficient the goal is not to make work for anyone great thank you as I I appreciate that I that's the way I like to work too so yeah great so I have a quick question just about process so we have an RDA I'm fine with that but there is an enforcement order in place so we have to where does that play in so they have the all the work has to be done first up to the specs in order to lift that enforcement or is that correct so the them completing this work would effectively bring them into compliance and so at that point then the enforcement order would be lifted yep okay so regardless of so if we do a negative determination here tonight that enforcement order is still in place until the conditions are permit correct yep okay just just okay just confirming yeah thanks pleasure and I should make that like classic clarification that a negative determination here is means yes please move forward with this work as described no you do not need to do a full permit process here so a negative determination is allowing this to proceed as described it's a good thing and in this context I know you know that here I was just clarifying that for the record sure um okay so unless anyone has any other questions thank you Dave anyone else I'm doing a quick scan and I'm not seeing any hesitation here so we're looking for a motion oh no you took it away for me I'm sorry I was just looking to see if anybody in the public there was anyone in the public oh yeah so I just seems that those I'm sorry okay I'm sorry thank you Erin yeah so we still have attendees in the meeting they're all people who've commented on past hearing so I'm I apologize I assumed that they were not I can't see I can't see attendees when I'm sharing my screen you can take it away I had no way of knowing yep so sorry sorry meeting public attendees thank you for hanging with us if anyone has any questions or comments about this RDA for a 121 pond view drive please raise your hand and I will enable you to speak now I think we're okay all right just skip just skip on enough time to write down in your hand yes okay so I move we issue a negative determination under the wetlands bylaw box 3 and a positive determination under the local wetlands bylaw box 5 for 121 pond view drive with the inclusion of annual monitoring reports and Dave Haynes being present at the beginning of construction or not construction beginning of work so on set of work what did I do wrong yeah so we are yeah so Dave is on site during the work we need a monitoring report once the work is complete correct and then annually there after for the duration of the permit yep do you want me to say it again no that okay I got it I think our our power is combined all right good okay and I heard a second but I forgot who it was Leroy Leroy okay seconded by Leroy voice vote Leroy pleasure hi Anna hi Michelle hi Larry hi Laura hi and I am an I um all right David thank you once again best of luck with the with the restoration thank you thank you very much and have it have a good evening thank you so much Dave thank you for your understanding in the situation all right okay great so with that we're at the end of our public hearings um and I know Erin had a another couple other business slides to get through yeah nothing it's actually just just one and it's really nothing that requires any action on behalf of the board the Faringbrook flood plane restoration project is another one of the big ones that's underway right now and Beth Wilson did make a note change on the plan which I wanted to make you guys aware of which is very simple but I'm trying to keep you guys informed of all these things basically they want to install some additional queer logs where the Faringbrook enters the Fort River they're beautiful very nice queer logs and it just adds some additional stability so I don't really it's so minor I don't think you guys need to approve anything I just wanted to make you aware that those were being added in and hopefully you guys are okay with that no I just lost my share screen sorry that was bad okay so the other the other one I'm just going to talk about them you guys don't need to see the slide the second one is just a minor ever source change and I am tracking those changes and keeping track of the resource area impacts I'm waiting for the resource area impacts as a result of that but it's basically a very minor change just some additional an additional pad on the corner of the bvw but I will check the resource area impact numbers before giving the green light on that I just wanted to keep you informed I am checking those doing a checks and balance every time those come through and then the last thing I wanted to ask is under the wetland protection act there are standard exemptions for certain activities and one of them is road maintenance when roads are repaved within the existing road footprint under our local bylaw that exemption does not exist it is in one of the revisions that we have marked up for our bylaw revisions and right now DPW proceeds under sort of the same standards under as wetland protection act which is that we're notified basically when the road is going to be paved that they don't file a whole notice of intent application when a road is going to be repaved they don't file a notice or a request for determination when a road will be repaved I have no problem with that no community that I've ever worked for has ever required a permit filing for road maintenance so I'm just putting that out there right off the top we did get a request for a private road in Amherst called cross crossbrook to be repaved because it's damaged with a lot of potholes they're basically just wanting to repave the existing roadway not expanding the footprint not changing drainage at all just repaving and they want to know if they should submit a wetland filing and so I wanted to it's a tricky one because DPW doesn't file to do their repaving I don't see a reason for them to have to file we're aiming toward updating our bylaw so that it's in line with the state and kind of more more in line with the expectations of standard statewide maintenance I just wanted to put it past you guys before I gave them that guidance if that's how you feel or if you agree or disagree I don't think it's necessary for them to file especially if we don't require the talent to okay anyone else have any objection I agree do you want to get like notified though Erin do you care yeah we do get notified you get notified you get notified yeah we get notified by DPW when they're doing the repaving yeah and they do use erosion controls when there's wetlands so that would be the same standard they would have to notify me and use erosion like the wetlands during the repaving process but that's that's basically all I would require I just want to be clear and there's no extension it's just a repave same footprint correct if it's only applies for maintenance of existing roadway on the existing footprint if there's any road widening involved at all they have to refile if they're expanding you know extending the road in any given area if it's gravel and they're adding pavement they still have to file it's just repaving existing pavement okay yeah thanks for knowing that by us I don't think that is necessary that's all I have for you this evening okay great work team yeah we got it on it that's nice another clock that's right well we were lucky because if we had had to dive into any of the any one of those anrads we would have it would have been probably 10 or later we'd have been 10 yeah I guess it's coming yeah it's coming it's coming around the bend next time all right wow thanks everyone I'm doing it can I make the motion yeah make a motion to adjourn yeah I can oh Laura got me Laura got me that's fine Laura okay but voice vote Larry hi Roy hi Michelle hi butter hi Laura hi Anna hi I'm an I all right guys thank you so much have a good night thank you everyone I got your back support you Anna dang bye see you guys bye