 Okay. Oops. Now I have to stop eating. No, not at all. All right. Welcome to the June 28, 20, 23 meeting of the Amherst mass conservation commission. We have. Four hearings on the agenda, but three of them are going to be continued. I'm going to jump right in. So I'm going to be getting into intent for 29 mill street. I thought that was Malaine. Mill Lane at 740. Dave can't make it tonight. So we're going to jump right in. To any land management updates. I'm pulling up to see if we even have any. Yeah, they're a couple. Yeah. I'll make it really, really. Yeah. So we're going to have a land management subcommittee meeting scheduled for July 7th. I'm thinking that's going to be fairly administrative. And basically the intention being to set a schedule for the, you know, remaining year and moving forward. So that'll be sort of the start. And that's, I think what next Friday, but we will be, you know, meeting that's going to be a little bit more of a change. So anybody who's interested in particularly, I see, I see Bruce and Jason Dornie in the audience, our new members, as of July 1st. If you folks are interested in attending the land management subcommittee meeting, we would love to have you to jump into that. The other piece is just an update on the land. I know Alex emailed me about that. And I, so where that stands is basically that I've gone through it and I've updated everything that I can update. I've made all the revisions that I can make. There are several things which warrant additional discussion as to whether they get incorporated or not. There's several areas where things need to be refined a little bit. So I'm thinking that we might potentially take a look at that. And determine what sections can be approved. It might be approved section by section, but I think we kind of have to strategize as to how to move that forward, but still allow time to sort of finalize or refine some specific sections. That's basically all I wanted to share about that. Okay. Alex, did you have a question? I'm not sure I can make the seventh. We had a death in the family and it's going to take us out of town. Okay. Seventh and eighth. Friday and Saturday. I wonder if we could back it up to Thursday. I will make a note of that and I'll check in with you three via email. Okay. So the sixth at noon. Or some other date, but. Okay. These kinds of things. Need to be attended. Of course. Of course. All right. Any other questions about land use planning. Sean. Aaron is the land use plan in a, in a. The land managed land use plan. In a position where we could look it over again, or is it, is it like individually or. We need to just bring it to the meeting piece by piece. Yeah. So I can certainly share the, the final version that I have and why don't let me, let me take a quick look at that in the next few days, just to make sure that I have it where it needs to be to share it. And then I can share it. Is that something that you, do you want me to share with the whole board or just the subcommittee or what? Well, I'm just interested in seeing everyone's comments because I put mine in first and I haven't seen any like responses or subsequent comments. So. Yeah. So. And just to that, Michelle, I'll just comment that some. I did incorporate some of the changes. Some of the changes I didn't where I felt like it warranted additional discussion. So there are places where. Like, for example, if somebody said, um, I have a question about this. And I think it should be removed for this reason. If there was a logical reason for it being there, I kept it. The suggestions where it was like something that I felt warranted discussion. I kept those comments in there. So some of the discussions or some of the comments have been removed. Some of the comments remain. So it depends on the section. But I'll, I'll get you a. A draft version of where it stands now in the next, like two days, like maybe by early next week. Thank you. I did, I did ask. Erin, if we could see it two weeks prior to meeting. So I could fit it into getting it read. Yeah. I'm, I apologize. I, I am doing my best to, um. To get through it. There's just there. There are a lot of irons in the fire. So it's, um, I, I kind of do my best to get through things as I'm able to. But, um, If we, if it turns out that folks haven't had a chance to digest it yet. Um, We could maybe just put together a schedule at the first meeting. So like a schedule for when the meetings will be held time and days and then, um, Maybe put together like an itinerary sort of. Um, So to speak of like, this is what we hope to tackle and when, like to set up sort of a, um, a roadmap of how we want to tackle the discussions or something. And then give people additional time to review it before the next meeting. Um, so if folks haven't had enough time, um, I'm not committed to jumping into it immediately. I'd still like to see it ahead of time. In whatever shape it's in. And I'm going to have of August and the first week of September. So I got basically July to work through it. Okay. Um, so Aaron. Seven 11. Um, What would you like to try first one, 67 Henry street or issue order of conditions for, um, the UMass. Colbert replacement. Um, I see, um, Mark Baudry in the audience for one 67 Henry street. So why don't we just dive into that one? Um, Uh, Kristen from SWCA is not on yet. So, um, Okay. I'll pull Mark in if that's okay. Yeah. Yeah. So this is an informal meeting. Commissioners just to introduce us to the project and kind of get our initial feedback. Um, On kind of permittability. Of the proposed work. Mark, you should be in the meeting. There we go. Um, Hi, Aaron, the, uh, Bob clinger. Yep. Bob clinger should be in as well. He just joined. Uh, Allow him in also. Yes. Yeah. There he is. Good. All right. Now that, uh, Bob is in. Um, Hello everybody. My name is Mark Baudry. I'm with civil works in New England. And, uh, with me tonight is, uh, is Bob clinger. And, uh, Bob and Karen clinger purchased, um, Uh, One 67 Henry street back in November. And, um, They, uh, Started talking, uh, they, they realized pretty quickly that they needed, um, you know, to get some, uh, Storage space on, on the property. And, uh, cause it is a rental at, at, you know, the time, although it's a single family house that is a rental. And, um, So there's a four bedrooms in there that could potentially have four. You know, people, you know, they're thinking students and what not at UMass and whatnot. To, um, Uh, You know, And they needed a place for, uh, you know, So make sure to have adequate parking. They needed a place for a snowblower, a lawnmower, things like that. And they just really wasn't any suitable storage on space. So they actually started talking to. A, uh, to an architect who came up with a plan. That initially. Had a, uh, a garage that was, uh, lined up with the, with the back of the, uh, Back of the house with a, uh, with a mud room on it. And, um, So they were, uh, they started realizing that, um, You know, there was some, some wetlands in there and they, you know, I think they started talking to, uh, to Aaron. And, uh, realized pretty quickly that they had a, um, Uh, Quite an array of resource areas on the property. And, um, So they ended up, uh, Engaging, uh, our firm. And I got angry Kendall of LEC involved to delineate the wetlands. And, um, we do have as part of the submission materials, A, uh, a sketch of the wetlands that Andrea prepared. We had since, um, got the, uh, the property survey. Because frankly, there was a question about whether the, The, the, the, the existing house was even on the property. If you looked at GIS information. So. It is fortunately, um, but that we got that surveyed. We got the resource area surveyed and we started doing some planning. On it. And, uh, realize that where the. Wetland BVW line was, uh, you know, we're riverfront area. Um, there's, uh, It's right near the infamous, um, you know, Uh, Um, You know, environmental elements and constraints. They, uh, we started realizing that there's, uh, you know, This is, uh, Certainly a challenging project more than anyone envisioned. So. What we, um, What we wanted to do is get a, You know, I'm not going to go into that. Um, I'm not going to go into that. Um, Um, Um, Um, Um, Um, Um, Um, Um, Um, Um, We actually got a, um, Um, Um, Um, So what we wanted to do was get a, Put a, a design plan together, which, You know, the claimers already realized that they, um, They needed to. You know, basically move away from the plan that they had originally envisioned. And they've done quite a bit of, uh, you know, com, you know, Adjustment to that they moved the garage forward. Including not only under the state wetlands protection act, but also under the Amherst bylaw. We wanted to have an informational meeting with the commission. Just to, you know, discuss the project with you and, you know, get some feedback from the commission and, you know, hopefully we can come up with something that we already see is being kind of a win win for the for the cleaners and the town and the environment to, you know, before we did a formal notice of intent filing. So, that's where we're at. The Aaron if you wanted to pull up first of all the. Yeah, these are, that's the existing conditions plan. And that's my cover letter. Maybe what we could do first is pull up the sketch that Andrea Kendall did for LEC. That's the. Sorry, there was a lot of attachments. Yeah. There we go. Okay. So the, you can see the blue line, which would be the, the bank on the east side or house side of Fort River. And then there's a the orange line is bbw. And you can see you'll be able to see on the existing conditions plan better but the, the backyard is currently mowed. There's a stockade fence around it. And you can kind of see it on this aerial but the, oh, by the way, you can see how this plan or how the GIS has the house actually over the property line so we got that figured out but the wetland actually extends into the backyard. And so the clingers have already stopped mowing that we they realized they we need to let that restore back into a, you know, a natural wetland. And we can talk more about that moving forward but if you then extended off that bank, you know 100 feet and 200 feet basically the entire property is within riverfront area. So, and then to make it more interesting. The, the salamander crossing is just north of the property. And that, you know, is basically has created a vernal pool situation. I don't believe it's certified yet, but talking with Aaron it really doesn't matter according to the regulation so we are presuming that that is a, a, that you know, a vernal pool that would have the regular, you know, that the immerse regulations as far as, you know, various, no disturb and setback and whatnot so I think maybe we don't necessarily have to go Aaron to the existing conditions plan but maybe we can go right to our. Oh, let's go to the first of all the, the architects sketch. We can touch on that real quick, which is right. No. Sorry, I'm not sure which is which okay this one I think maybe. Yep, there you go. So, this is from GIS information that did show the wetland but to a point but nothing not nothing real anything else so didn't show the river. Didn't show the obviously the, you know, the, the, you know, the issues related to the vernal pool and whatnot so the architect prepared this plan, showing a connection with a 24 by 22 garage with a double door and going beyond the extent of the the current driveway and then having a pretty good size deck off the back of the house in my room and garage going down to existing grades so we realized that that was going to be problematic from relative to the local regs so we working with the clingers we came up with the design that we had on our on our civil work site plan that we can, we can talk about. Thank you. So this show is pretty clearly the, the bank, which is the B flag lines should the BBW lines that extends into the backyard as you can see beyond the defense line. And then it also shows the 50 foot no disturb from the BBW now that that's presuming that I think conservatively that the entire wetland area is vernal pool. So, but anyway, the, so the 50 foot no disturb off the wetland you can see that in the backyard currently there's a there's a raised planting bed there's the fence the like I mentioned the wetland was being mowed underneath where we show the deck here is a landscape tie. Like terraced area going down to the hill going down the bit the slope and backyard that's, you know that there's a lot of work that's been happened here now. This house was built in 1985 by the way which is really important so it obviously predated the wet the riverfront act. And off of that good the good news is is that the the railroad ties I think just absolutely coincidentally fell 50 feet off of the, the BBW which is good. Then if you put you look at the 60 foot building setback. That's where, because the part of the existing house is actually in the, the 60 foot already so we realized pretty quickly that the mudroom addition or the, in particular the garage was going to be within that area so we wanted to comply with the local guidelines as as best we could. So, the next line would be the 100 foot. I won't touch on the riverfront just yet but the hundred foot buffer zone is shown that goes well into the front yard almost to the front property line. And that is what we could conservatively call the 100 foot off of the vernal pool as well. And you can see there's a lot of work development area including the, the driveway, the house, the, you know, the, all the existing that the landscape ties timbers all that stuff in the backyard is all within that area currently. The driveway that was put in in 1985 is gravel which I put that in quotation fingers because as you know gravel gets very compact over time. And it's, you know, substantially impervious right now. And right now the house just has downspouts that dump on the ground. They flow across the driveway area, which causes a lot of icing problems. You know, a little bit of erosion and whatnot and then it just sheets down the backyard heading towards the wetland. So we can talk about the mitigation moving forward. And so, what the cleaners wanted to do is move the garage to a point in the mudroom that it, it complies with the 60 foot building setback. The, we show the deck off the back which we think is much smaller and reasonable that stays 50 feet off of the wetland area. And then they're also calling for replacing of the driveway and they wanted to do this before they even were aware of this just because of the condition of the drive was to basically replace it with a permeable paver type solution. And now you can see that parking area on the side. That is existing so we're we're holding the the limits of the existing driveway but replacing it entirely all the way out to the street with with permeable pavers. There's no walkway to the front door right now so they wanted to have a walkway going to the front door that's also permeable. And right now there's people just tracking over the grass and it's getting kind of disturbed and rutted and whatnot so they wanted to definitely improve that. And I think that's important to point out is that the septic system right now is in the in the front yard right in front of the house which obviously would be is really the only place that it could be put on this property. So, anyway, that's constraining the the land further as to where the that the building could potentially go. Sorry, Marcus is Jen the chair I just want to let you know we're going to spend about five more. I'm about five more minutes to discussion. If you want to hear from the commissioners just because we have another agenda item before seven hearing. So what, thanks Jen what we're real quick what we're proposing to do is that this is considered a redevelopment and because we are. If you look at 10% of the riverfront area be 1900 1941 square feet I've got the table that was that I that I provide of areas that I provided to Aaron. But I'm the. Here we go. So, the total riverfront excluding the river itself was 1400 we'll call it round up the existing development area in the riverfront was 3118, which by the way if this was new development you could do 10% or 5000 square feet whichever is greater so we're under that 5000 square feet which is good. The existing is 16.1% proposed work in the riverfront is 3375 which is 17.4 I think 1.3% more. So what the, because this is redevelopment, what we'd be looking to do is provide mitigation for the area that's increasing over existing conditions so you know we'd be looking at. I think it's 250 or 254 square feet additional so we, in theory need to do 514 I think square feet of mitigation at two to one so the clingers are willing to do that and we can talk about all that. We're talking about putting all of the storm water runoff into the ground in which is allowed. And even though single family homes don't have to meet the storm water standards as you know we are proposing to do that. So that's an improvement over existing conditions, and we, you know, with the, with the driveway improvements, you know we're looking at, I think a really substantial improvement over existing conditions here. So, that's kind of that's that's where we're at. Now I'm happy to answer any any questions you might have but we're hoping the commission can kind of look favorably on this and that we can get get this approved as a redevelopment project and you know I think it'll be a good thing for the town the environment and obviously the clingers so it will meet their needs for the property so that's where we're at. Okay, thanks Mark. Commissioners does anyone have any clarifying questions on the details of the project Aaron could you maybe pull up the proposed plan just so we can have the visual of the proposed garage and mudroom with respect to the hundred foot buffer to name one of them of the vernal pool. So, yeah commissioners any clarifying questions. Not seeing any. My first cut on this mark is this is going to be very difficult to permit between I mean the vernal pool is the most difficult thing here. But just the town bylaws itself it's very it's going to be very difficult to permit. And here I'm like, you know I appreciate that you guys have gone through iterations to try to move out of the resource areas and I'm hearing all of that. I'm sitting here thinking about anything else we can do and I just it's not a clear path to me. Commissioner does anyone else have a kind of guidance to provide Michelle. So we talked about the redevelopment and the being inside the out the riparian so there is the inner and outer proportions which I'm not sure we have straight here but regardless of that, what we haven't talked about is being in the completely registered buffer of the vernal pool and you know it's not just one vernal pool this is an entire functioning complex, which is the, you know, continues all the way to pine street so just thinking about the ecological context here, in addition to just being within that 100 foot notice or buffer which is a local regulation so there is a lot of exceeding regulatory thresholds here, and a lot of like riverfront BVD vernal pool and yeah I agree with you I'm not seeing a path forward for this I don't think that the potential mitigation that can be done on the site could, could really cover what is going to be impacted. That's well said Michelle it's like three overlapping difficult, you know, by resource areas that we have to deal with here. If I may the, you know the alternative one alternative would be to just leave it the way it is which obviously isn't a good thing either so. Okay, any other commissioners. I got some, you know, yep. I don't know if you can hear me. Okay, so I think the two of you know you, Michelle have both put it in, in a really good context I think I can't follow that up very well. I would say everything looks very looks pretty messy as it is right now and I would need to. I'd actually need to get over there and take a look at it and get a little bit of a better look at the plans but it. I agree with with with the two of you that it. You're up against you're up against a few hard fairly hard challenges or backstabs hard regulations that are going to be difficult to justify from from what I'm seeing right now. Andrey, and I really we really have to spend only a couple more minutes on this. Can any commissioners think of anything that would be guidance that would permit this to be permissible. I'm trying mark, you know, I know that this has been an effort to get in front of us and I appreciate that in for you know, I appreciate what you're trying to communicate first and foremost with us. I'm not willing to see a path, but commissioners as anyone else see a path forward for this in a way. Not seeing anything. I think we fully comply with the state regs and really only what is in question here I think is the local regulations. It's our bylaws yeah. Yeah so and I, I believe there are provisions in the bylaw for for relief and under a certain circumstances, and I think this is a unique kind of property that is that I think would be appropriate for consideration without the, you know, the commission being concerned about setting a precedent. So, I think the 100 foot no disturb of a vernal pool mark is a really, really tough one. Yeah, commissioner has a long, this commission has a long precedent there for being taking that very seriously in this town. I have heard that. Yeah, so that is, and you know, that is a really, really tough one. So, Andre is your hand still up because you want to talk or because it's still up. Not okay, okay. All right, well, I think that's our feedback, better or worse. And we appreciate the effort. And I guess we'll see what happens. And as there any point Jen and hanging around to maybe discuss a little bit more after the next hearing, or should we just call it a night and, and I obviously the clingers need to, you know, we need to all talk and maybe we can continue some dialogue with Aaron and if you, if you, if you wanted to, we'd be happy to meet you on site to kind of walk through everything if that's appropriate, or any other commission members. We're not in a public hearing room right now so I think that would be okay. So, anyway, Yeah, I think communicate with Aaron and she's the best conduit to the commissioners to figure out what's appropriate moving forward. All right, very good. Thank you so much for your time it was, you know, not great news for that for the clingers and but it was something that was certainly we appreciate your frankness. And so, anyway, we'll Aaron thank you for working with us on this and getting us before the commission. Thank you for hearing us. You know, informationally. So we really appreciate the feedback and we'll see what happens. Okay. Thanks, Mark. Thank you, Mark. All right. Do you think we can do the order of conditions for you that you mask over replacement in five minutes. We have Kristen. Let me just see. But five minutes. Yeah, we let's give it a shot. Why not. Should I should we do the continuations of those two hearings quickly the 730 and the 735. It's totally at your discretion, Jen. Yeah, let's do that commissioners. I need, I will read it emotion to continue the public hearing for a lot 13 Olympia Drive to July 12 2023 at 735 p.m. So moved. Seconded. Seconded by Cameron voice vote Andre. Hi, Michelle. Hi, Cameron. Hi, Alex. And I'm also an eye unanimous. The next is a move a motion to continue the public hearing for 246 called straight notice of intent to set to July 12 2023. At 740 p.m. So 30, 730, sorry. That's 730. So moved. Seconded by Cameron voice vote Michelle. Hi, Cameron. Hi, Alex. Hi, Andre. See him saying I. I got it. All right. We hurt, we hurt, we got you Andre. Okay. And I'm going to bring Kristen in. So I did put draft orders of conditions into the one drive folder. They did make it in there a little bit late this afternoon. There. It's, it's a decent size order of conditions. I would say pretty significant by way of like special conditions, but then we have our boiler plate as well. What would make the most sense, Jen? Do you want me to pull up the draft conditions and run through all of them? Or. I'll defer to you on how you want to. Work that. Yep. Commissioners, if you guys can pull that up and take a look if you haven't already. Just to look it over and see if you have any questions. And then I'll just ask Aaron and Kristen. Was that, were there any particular conditions of all of those that you want to flag and discuss? If it's okay. I'll, I'll flag a couple that are just sort of standouts. Okay. That makes sense. Let me just do a quick share screen. I mean, these are, none of these are conditions that everyone hasn't seen before. So these are pretty standard. And some of these again are very boiler plate. So they might, might be like no plant, no, you know, only native plantings, you know, so, you know, things like that that are just our standard boiler plate. And no snow storage and resource areas and stuff. So let me just see here. You guys can see these on the screen, but I'm going to just see if I can. Highlight some ones that I felt like were particularly important. So the requirement that during installation, that there be in a licensed engineer on site and that there be survey equipment basically to ensure that the installation is done to the, you know, inverts of pipes when they're installed or installed at the proper grades. And also to make sure that fill volumes, and stuff are installed to the proper elevations per the design that's been submitted to us. That work shall be completed during low flow conditions. I think that the expectation here is hopefully to not have to do a dewatering plan. The site, you know, in talking with, with Kristin has a low water table and they're hopeful that they won't have to do dewater to a great extent. But there is a condition that we're going to be able to do at a great extent. But there is a condition in here that it be done during low flow and appropriate weather conditions and that if it's wet, rainy or inclement weather that, that the work shouldn't be done in that situation. So a couple of things which may warrant discussion or not, but permanent boundary markers placed at the limit of the restoration areas. So the restoration areas being the outlet side of the culverts where there's the plunge pools being installed. So permanent demarcation there and the intent being that this is a restoration area and it's not going to be disturbed or otherwise altered in the future. So that that should be marked with some in some capacity, whether it be boulders, split rail fencing, rebar, wetland markers, signage, something to that effect. Let me see ones that stand out as being unique to this site. So weekly monitoring reports. I figured that this, you know, installation of this culvert really should only take a few days, but obviously the installation of the plunge pools on the down slope side down on the outlet side might take a little bit more time to engineer and install. But the idea being and the reason quite frankly that we do these weekly monitoring reports is to encourage them to install it quickly and to stabilize it quickly. So they don't want to be paying for monitoring reports for months and months. The hope is that they start the reports and within, you know, a matter of weeks, the site is stable. And so the erosion control inspection by a person who's competent in doing the inspections, as well as monitoring the mitigation area and then submitting weekly reports to me or to us. And then the other sort of specific one called out was there wasn't a whole lot of detail provided for dewatering. Now, while it is, the hope is to do it when it's relatively dry. The dewatering is sort of a insurance policy, right? So if they're in there doing the work and the site is flooded and they do need to dewater, we should have some sort of dewatering plan. The final plans and, you know, part of this was just a matter of sort of rush to review and getting the final plan set today. That there, there was like a filter bag and there was a note about a dewatering plan, but there wasn't an actual dewatering plan that I would expect to see for this. So that the contractor who selected to do the work in advance of the start of construct construction will submit to me or and or the commission a dewatering plan for review and approval. And that that should include what systems will be used for the dewatering and a diagram showing where the dewatering equipment will be installed during the dewatering activities. Other than that, they're pretty much our standard boiler plate for commercial projects. Thanks, Aaron. That all looks pretty good to me. Kristen, is any of this, do you have any further info to provide? Is any of this. For some reason not doable or surprising. No, none of it's surprising. I had a couple of questions and I can follow up offline if we're really pressed for time in the meeting here. But one I wanted to just ask. Just so you're not surprised, Aaron, when I follow up. The level of onsite oversight required by the engineer, if that's not in there, just to make that clear. And then for the weekly reports for both the mitigation and the kind of construction monitoring, I just want to make sure that we're able to understand what exactly is expected. If it's a PWS for the mitigation reporting, if it's a says we or somebody qualified, you know, is it kind of like a sweep where there's like a rain threshold or is it just while the site is not stable or just kind of some of those little details, but we can talk offline. If this isn't the right time to talk about that stuff. Yeah, no, I think those are all excellent. Questions and comments. I mean, I think one of the things that I wanted to make sure that you know, I think the expectation for having an engineer on site would be to verify that things are being installed properly and to, as they're being installed, checking the elevations to make sure, for example, that the culvert inverts are placed at the appropriate. Elevations that they. Compaction over the pipes is done properly. So, you know, I think it's a good idea to go to the, on the outlet side for the plunge pools that, that the elevations are being installed as they were designed. So basically to have the engineer on site for all of that process, but once it's installed, I don't think the engineer needs to be on site. So it's basically for, for the installation. As far as the, the reports. You know, the requirements for the installation, like, the service or a assess we, or somebody who's, who's, um, certified for sweep inspections, as long as the person is, is competent. And we have a definition under our bylaw of, you know, what the expectation for competence is. So, um, I would definitely refer to that. But, um, you know, Generally speaking, it's like, we like, if somebody comes to us and they're, they've never done this. work before, then we would probably say they're not qualified. But if they're, you know, if they can hold a straight face test as far as having some experience with site monitoring and erosion control monitoring and stuff like that, I think in the past we've been, you know, relatively flexible as far as who's doing the oversight. And then I guess I just had one more question about the demarcation, the permanent boundary markers. You know, one of the purposes of the restoration plan for the stream bank and the floodplain restoration was to incorporate more shade and wildlife habitat and woody cover. So again, we can talk about options offline. I don't want to, you know, suck up all the air in the room here with this, but you know, like a really big boulder, which would potentially be unmovable without a machine might not really work. Well, we can, we can, and maybe rebar is not really the safest. I don't know, we can talk about that. Yeah. So a couple options and one that I might recommend in this particular case is a couple signs, just a couple signs that say wetland restoration area. And I have a sample sign that would work in like one or two of those I think would be sufficient, but I'll defer to the commission if you have that. Yeah, that's exactly. Yeah, that's exactly what I was going to suggest. Sorry, Michelle. And I think it would help to have like an informational component here, especially it's a cool project. I think like calling attention to it would be beneficial and served a couple purposes. So I'm all for signs. Great. And it's an educational facility. It's university. So maybe I'll turn it to a learning classroom, a teaching classroom or outdoor classroom or that kind of thing. That would be great. Yeah. And it should be monitored for three years. So that would be really cool to incorporate something like that. I was going to ask, I didn't hear you say anything about that, but I was assuming that there was going to be post construction two-year monitoring. Yeah. So that's built into the sort of standard boilerplate language for the mitigation, that the three years of monitoring to make sure that there's 50% success. Okay. Commissioners, any other thoughts as we're talking through this? Alex is trying to raise his hand. Am I muted? You are not muted. Go ahead, Alex. I have to admit, I do not have this project crisply in my head. My question is informational. Is aquatic connectivity an issue in this project? Yeah. One of the purposes of the project is to improve the aquatic connectivity. So originally there were two 18-inch clay pipes. And when the university was installing the underground conduit between the, basically the campus and the new apartments up at the north end of this gravel road, they deemed that they couldn't borrow under those clay culverts because they were really old. They were from the 60s and they were really fragile. So they replaced them in kind. But when they replaced them in kind with two new double-barrel 18-inch culverts, they put this weird thing at the toe, at the outfall that was basically like concrete curbing. So it really created an aquatic disconnection. And also double-barrel 18-inch culverts aren't ideal. So long story short, it's been upgraded to an open bottom arch culvert. Yeah. I heard plunge pool mentioned, which is why I asked the question. Because that means water is dropping off the pipe. Yeah. There's a pretty significant elevation drop between the culvert inlet, which is on the eastern side of the road, and the culvert outlet on the western side. So I think before, when the contractors put in those concrete curbings, they were just trying to create kind of like a velocity diffuser. There really isn't that much aquatic flow, to be totally honest. But these plunge pools, what they'll do is they'll maintain some water during periods of low flow, so that they'll still be able to kind of maintain this aquatic connectivity even during periods of low flow. So it's not really, it's not a velocity diffuser or like a splash pad. It's more just like a little pocket that will retain some water because there isn't a whole lot of flow. I mean, we called it a perennial stream because it's really the same system as the stream to the south coming out of that 60 inch culvert. But really, there's this huge wetland on the east side, and the water is draining through those two separate culverts. So most of the flow is going to the 60 inch. I think I'm remembering this project, but just a little worried that I'm remembering it wrong. So there will be aquatic connectivity. Yeah. This is what's there now, Alex, just for perspective. And it's going to be replaced with a basically restored stream where there'll be more net. Right now it's like somebody dumped a bunch of riprap at the outlet and then put these repurposed granite slabs here, which this was never permitted. So the idea being that because the, you can see the elevation drop coming down, you're like coming down the steep hill that where the outlet comes, when the water comes out, it'll go into a natural plunge pool and then another natural plunge pool and another natural plunge pool to avoid having this steep slope. And we'll have an arch culvert. Exactly. Yep. It'll be a significant, significant improvement over what's there right now and what was there before. Thank you. Great. All right. So commissioners, any other questions about the orders of conditions specifically or comments? Kristen, are you good? I'm good. And we will, once we do get these orders, we will include them on a separate sheet on the plan so that they will be part of the bid package, part of the specs, and the contractors will absolutely have a copy on site. Okay. Thanks. Do we need a motion to approve this, Erin, or? Yes, absolutely. Yep. And I'll pull that up right now for you. Okay. So, yeah. So that's a long one. Does somebody want to read it? Do you want me to read it? Oh, well, actually, you know what, I kind of guy somehow managed to not get it in there. If you bear with me just a moment, I can write it for you. Or if somebody wants to try to take it there, more than welcome to. I think what we should do is say it's a motion to approve the previously discussed and referenced order of conditions for University of Massachusetts at Amherst after the fact approval of installation of underground utility conduit between north village departments and UMass physical plant and replacement of previously replaced two 18 inch culverts with eight foot by four foot by two inch two inch arch culvert removal of fell previously placed in the stream with proposed stream bank and stream outlet restoration at 950 North Pleasant Street. So moved. Who got the second on that? I didn't hear. Alex will second. Okay. Alex is in the second voice vote, Michelle. Hi, Alex. Hi, Andre. Hi, Cameron. Hi, and I'm an I see unanimous. Thanks for all the hustle to get all those awesome conditions together, Aaron. Absolutely. And I'm psyched about this project, Kristen. I'm excited to see how it turns out. Thanks. We appreciate everybody's work. I know that this was a long process, and we really appreciate the commission's time and Aaron, all your efforts. Appreciate it. Thank you. You too, Kristen. Thanks. Have a good night. Have a good night. All right. Sorry, running behind. Let's get to that hearing. 29 Mill Lane. Aaron, remind me that was Bruce. I think it's Brian. Brian. Yep. Oh, Bruce is our almost commissioner. Right. And so is Jason. Okay. All right. So they've come back and are no longer within the 50 foot is what I read. Correct. Yes, they moved out of the 50 foot. That was our major guidance. That was our major guidance. That was the challenge. So Brian, I think you're here. Okay. Do you want to give us a kind of brief update since our last meeting? Yes. So we met with the property owners, clients, and they've agreed to actually delete the whole gravel pathway. So we're not encroaching. We're not on the 50 foot buffer as previously shown in the drawing. They decided that shortening it didn't do it any justice. So now we're just going to maintain it as a lawn mowed grass. Okay. And drive around? Yeah. As frequently as needed, they'll just drive across the grass with a lawn tractor and such. They figured it's not that much traffic. So they'll drive around. It's not much automobile traffic as it is like a golf cart moving stuff from around the barn or landscaping tools. Okay. Well, commissioners, that's what we asked for. Brian, thank you for figuring and navigating away to this point. Yeah. I'm just looking. Sorry. I've been trying to pull up the plan and for some reason, I guess I didn't manage to get it in the folder, which I thought I checked and double checked, but here it is. So it shows the driveway moved out of the 50 foot and the erosion controls it looks like are partially within, but that's temporary. And so that gravel path that comes from the north heading south across the front of the proposed addition would actually just be maintained as grass. No longer that five foot wider driveway right there above your pointer. That's just going to be maintained as grass. And the proposed gravel driveway down but low is actually current and would just be maintained as so. Okay. So you're saying this section is going to just be grass? Yeah. Okay. Okay. Commissioners, any clarifying questions? Let's see anything. Okay. The one thing that does pop to mind and I'm is demarcation of the 50 foot buffer. I realize that this is maintained as lawn. So I was wondering if there's any plans, Brian, to do any kind of border along there at all that could also act as kind of a permanent demarcation of that buffer? There's nothing planned and it's kind of very close to the building. So I don't know what they could do to actually establish something to mark that it's, I mean, they're going to maintain it as a lawn. Yeah. Yeah. And the area on the other side of the Yeah. Basically maintained just with the plantings that the wetland plantings and trees that they put up there. Yeah. Okay. I mean, I'm comfortable with it as is, especially since they've removed that whole gravel driveway. But commissioners, if anyone has any concerns, now is the time to raise concerns. Otherwise, let's talk about conditions here. Then I'm just curious about your concern. Are you concerned about just encroachment or the traffic over the lawn or who knows what just? It's more about consistency, honestly, Michelle, because I feel like we do this to pretty much every project where we are this close to a buffer and we want to make sure that there's some sort of permanent demarcation. But I think this is a little bit of an outlier, given that it's through the middle of there, like actual lawn and also given the other kind of like NOMO and planted areas in the resource area. I feel like there's a lot of effort already to stay out of the resource area. So I'm acknowledging precedent, but also saying that this is a little bit of a different case, I guess. But I'm interested in your guys' input. Yeah. And if it's helpful for me to pull up the plan, it doesn't actually show the... We have a photo or something that would... I mean, so is it lawn to a NOMO area? Like the 50 foot is sort of demarc by NOMO and the other side that it's a NOMO, basically. Right, there's a fence there. Let me pull up the photos again, because that did take a ton of pictures. And so I think this will help to... Well, everything is mowed to the fence. So let me just get to the... So this is the lawn area that is being discussed. And this yellow post right here is the 50 foot, like right square in the middle of the lawn. These are the dry wells. This is the back of the barn existing. So this is the fence. So this is the lawn up to the fence. And then on the other side of the fence, this is where the wetlands swale intermittent stream is located. And so the natural area that Jen is referring to is on the other side. And that is... I wonder if I get another better picture of that. You can kind of see it here too. So their tennis court is here. And then this location around the front of the tennis court adjacent to that wetland, it's like a grassland back there as opposed to a lawn, like back in this area here. And that's the resources that area behind the fence that's not mowed at all. Yeah. So that you can see this... There's an intermittent stream that comes down through here. And then there's another intermittent stream that runs along the fence line, the tree line that where that you can see all the trees in the back. I think the fact that nobody is expressing how I can... How to grave concern about this means that we should move. It would be weird, right? In the middle of the lawn. So I guess I'm just wondering... So is there a three-year monitoring for this? There's a three-year monitoring for the work that was done. So there was a restoration that was done over here. And that's why this is an amended order, because there was several plantings done in this wetland swale, as well as tree plantings, which demarcate the 50-foot adjacent to the tennis courts. And so that's what we're monitoring. Yeah, if you look at the NOI in total, there's a lot of effort to protect the resource and buffer to the resource. I mean, I guess that I was just thinking, have we ever put a condition on something which is... Like nothing is required unless it's triggered by some observation by you, in which case the commission reconsideres the condition... Like a trigger for a demarcation. We could put something... No further encroachment into the buffer zone is permitted. I mean, I'm not sure how to sort of preface that, other than to say... Because there's been really no violation or anything there. I think the issue previously with the wetland swale slash intermittent stream that flows through there was basically it's a swale and they didn't know that it was even a stream. I was out there like during a major rainstorm and saw it flowing and I'm like, that looks like a stream. And that's how we determined what it was. And now that they've actually repaved and fixed Mill Lane last year, I haven't seen any flowing water in that swale, but they're also currently... They have drip lines through there to promote growth in the wetland area. So they're irrigating the wetlands because if not, it's all going to dry out and die. They're watering the plantings basically because the plantings weren't doing well without watering. So they're watering. So they're making every effort. Yeah, of course. I think that given everything else going on this site, if you look at it as a whole package, I think we're okay here without requiring demarcation in the middle of the lawn. So unless anyone's going to push back hard, I think we should move towards order of conditions. Do you want me to run through conditions again for this that I've drafted? What have we talked about on them? So it's the state and local boilerplate. Were there any special conditions, Erin? There are some special conditions. But we're not changing any of it with this. Are we changing order of the conditions with this amendment? There's no changes to the previous order. There are some special conditions relative only to the... And there's only a handful of them, two handfuls of them. Just noting the reference to the new plan set, the reference to the tying in the downspouts from the roof gutters to either a stabilized stone area, the existing dry well, or to the daylight stable stone outlet that's... Or vegetated outlet that's existing on site. So just to make sure there's no new sort of point sources coming into play, they're tying into something existing that during demolition and construction that the heavy equipment has to remain on the stable driveway surfacing and not crossing over the erosion control boundary into the lawn area and into the 50 foot no disturb. That debris from the demo is taken off site immediately. No vegetation may be removed. No material may be stockpiled unless shown as a stockpiled location on the plan. No equipment may be stored in the buffer zone overnight. No snow storage in the buffer zone. Contractors shall sign the original order in the presence of the wetlands administrator acknowledging they've read and fully understand the requirements. Applicants shall abide by and remain in compliance with all their state and federal regulations. And then this is one which is kind of unique to this site again, because this is a close to 3,000 square foot personal gym and we're not requiring storm water because it's not a commercial structure. It's just that an acknowledgement that this was presented and approved as a residential project, not a commercial project. And as such, it's conditioned in perpetuity that the gym is for personal use by residents only and that approval of commercial projects or development would require stormwater management plan and long-term pollution prevention plan, which has not been completed as part of this permit approval. Was that okay with you, Brian? Was that all? Yeah, yeah, comprehensive and it's all within our plans and intention. Great. Commissioners, any other concerns? I just had one last thing, because it's a continuous lawn and we're not doing any kind of demarcation on that 50 foot no disturb, maybe during construction, some kind of temporary fencing just to keep the equipment out of the no disturb because I don't know, I could see that being difficult to keep trucks and heavy equipment. Sure. We could do like a silt fence. So you have to put it in? There's a rosary control right along there. Yeah, like a straw wattle would be fine and just like a filter fabric fence that's not towed in, so you don't have to excavate it to tow it in, but more like a visual barrier. Okay, yeah. Thanks, Michelle. So I have additional conditions to the ones I listed, which I have as the gravel driveway that was previously noted on the plan is going to be maintained as grass and that temporary silt fence will be installed as a visual barrier during construction, but not towed in. Yeah, that's great. Was that it? Was that a yes, Brian? Yeah, yeah, I agree, yes. Okay. Great. So I think we're looking for a motion, commissioners. I moved to issue the amended order of conditions for 29 Nail Vane to EP number 089 686 with boilerplate state and local and special conditions as noted. Second. Got a second from Alex. Voice vote, Michelle. Hi. Alex. Hi. Andre, can you vote for us? I think it's frozen. Yeah, Cameron. Hi. I'm also an I. Since Andre was trying to second, I don't know how we can interpret that. Hi. Oh, there you are. There you are. Hi. Hi. I'm not sure what's happening. Yep. All right, Brian, best of luck with the project. I appreciate it. Okay. Good night. All right. I think that was our agenda. Am I missing anything? Just the continuation for. Oh, yes. 46 fairing, which is also continued to the July 12th meeting. Okay. So we need a motion to continue public hearing for 49 fairing straight to July 12, 2023 at 740. So moved. Seconded. Seconded by Cameron. Voice vote, Michelle. Hi. Cameron. Hi. Alex. Hi. Andre. Hi. And I'm also an I. All right. Is this when we start crying? This is where we have the party. You guys are in good hands. You don't need me. Well, Jen, I mean, I just want to say thank you so much and your expertise and your guidance and your just maneuverability through hearings and meetings and keeping us efficient and on, on point and everything like just stellar, stellar and real, really miss you and just very grateful to have had you on the board and very sad, very sad for me to say goodbye first and later to you. Thank you. But I think only as good as the team, this group has been made it so easy to like figure, navigate these things. So I appreciate everyone's time and expertise and also I am a, you know, research hydrologist for the USGS and I'm not going anywhere. So I'm hopeful that in a more professional capacity, I can still be a resource to the town and to Erin. So I won't that expertise doesn't go anywhere. You guys are stuck with me. Thank you for being willing to consult. Of course, yeah. I'm going to take you up on that. Okay, you guys know where I am. We'll see you in the, in the pickup line or like battle room for after care. Jen, you run a good meeting. Great example to follow. Yeah, thank you. I was telling Michelle that I feel like it's like the area of the most like required personal growth, like is figuring out how to navigate these meetings. It's tricky. And I couldn't definitely couldn't do without this commission. So I feel like I've been super lucky. And that goes for Fletcher too. I can't believe. Oh yeah. This is six years for me on the commission and Fletcher had been on maybe two years by the time I joined. So it's a lot of your life that you've, that you've given. And it's, it's not anything that is taken lightly. It's a huge, huge service to volunteer so much of your time. So the town of Amherst is lucky to have had you both. And, and with that, welcoming Bruce and Jason to the board. And thank you guys for being in attendance tonight and listening in because it's, it's good to see how Jen runs things. And we're going to be appointing a new chair at the next meeting and taking, taking the baton and running with it. So it'll be good. Whoever that is, they're going to be great. And there's no bad choices in this group, but it's going to be awesome. That's true. All right. I think we need a motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn. Second. And I'll add a commending Jen Fair on her six years of service to the town of Amherst. Hi. Thanks. Voice vote, Michelle. Hi. Cameron. Hi. Andre. Hi. I for both. Alex. Same here. I for both. And I'm also an I. Thanks guys. So long, Jen. Enjoy. Don't be strangers. You gotta find me. All right, guys. Have a good night. Thank you so much. Bye bye. Bye.