 I'm just kind of, I got, my husband's the background going, what are you, like, I just got ankle surgery. So I'm currently in bed right now. Oh, I'm sorry to, well, I don't know if I'm going to say I'm sorry to hear that or glad to hear that. I don't know if you're like better or worse than before. There's, I will be better when it's all done. But that's funny. How you catch yourself when someone says, how are you doing? I'm fine. Don's like, why don't you actually say. Yeah, it's one of those things when people ask. I mean, sometimes people care and sometimes they don't. I know. I know. It is true. We should break that though. Don't ask if you don't really want to know. Yeah, I used to work with a guy who was from Italy. I mean, like, you know, he was an older guy and I mean, like from Italy, I mean, still like a strong accent and you ask him how he's doing and he would actually tell you. Yeah, I know. How about that? Yeah, good old Giuseppe. Hey, Dave. Hey. So Dave. Stephanie's here but she's an attendee. And so you are the host so you can either bring her in or make me a host. Right. Remind me, because I'm never the host. Why am I the host for these person from the town to join probably. Oh, I should. Be late. So if you open up more. Yeah. Remind me again, is that under my under me and then more go under participants then panelists you'll see my name and then under more it should be make you click the more next to my name. Yeah, I never want to be the. I never want to make you the host. No, we thought you might end the meeting again quickly. Okay. You are the host. Okay, so Stephanie should be in. Almost trying to decide is this going to be a one chocolate meeting or two chocolate meeting or three. Anna says to her says three. We're just going to wait for Stephanie to get on as a panelist and then we'll get rolling says that she's being forced to rejoin as a panelist. Hi, I'm here I don't know what's going on. So I'm going to go off and log in again. I see the Roy is over there as well right. If I'm in the attendee mode, you just need to promote me to panelists, but it's not letting you do that. Correct. I just did that for you and I just did that for the Roy. Looks like the Roy went right in. Yeah, that's so weird. Why didn't it let me in. Did you and so you didn't just unmute me you made me a panelist and it didn't put me into the room. And I've clicked promote to panelists like three times so far and then I just did make a loud talk so at least we could hear you now. Okay, all right well I'm going to, I'm going to go off and get back in. Okay, sorry. Okay so hopefully everybody can just bear with us for another minute or two. Just dealing with a couple of technical issues and then we will get going here. Hey Brett this is Jen can you hear me. Yes Jen. I can't get my video to work. I'm here. And we know mostly what you look like so. Yeah, no major changes there. Yeah, but you're not going to see us I shaved off my beard completely so. I can see you. Nice try. And still just waiting for Stephanie here. She can't get on at all I guess. So for those commissioners who are on right now I just saw an email from Stephanie that has a copy of minutes in it. So before we get going I don't see you. It's probably fine for us to take a look at minutes. If people haven't done that so far with them yet. I don't see Stephanie on either list. Oh wait, oh there she is. All right Stephanie you did it. Phew. Okay, we're quite sure where we're going with that but wasn't either. So and then okay so we have you and I as co hosts, and so we are live. So we start the recording Stephanie and launch this. We already, we already are recording it automatically as soon as the meeting opens it starts recording. Okay so hopefully everybody realizes that we're recording it wouldn't say thing too embarrassing yet. Okay so good afternoon or rather good evening everyone. Today is March 24 2021 and this is our bi-weekly meeting of the Amherst Conservation Commission. So starting off with comments from me there are none so moving right along. Dave do you want to go next. I tried to make sure that you had food in your mouth. So, thank you Brett that was that third chocolate I talked about. Laura said only two. Oh no Anna said two. Laura said three. I went with the higher number. Should be enough caffeine for this meeting and more. Okay. Yeah, I don't have any real big updates tonight. There's a lot of kind of gearing up this is the month that we kind of gear up where we're getting. We're doing a lot of advertising right now we're going to be advertising for our summer staff. If you know if any of the commission members know. People who would like to work on the trails at buffers pond this summer you'll you'll see advertisements going out should be next week. We're also going to be as I mentioned before we're going to be hiring some ambassadors to work at buffers pond will have some working at the recreation areas in town as well. So, that'll be those will be going out and hitting hitting the airway next week. We have our new as I mentioned before our new staff person our new assistant manager begins next week friend and Kelly, and he comes highly recommended so there'll be some, some orientation and acclimation next week. So that should be good to get Brad some more help. We have a staff meeting today a virtual staff meeting and some of the things I was talking about you know as we come out of the pandemic year of 2020 and things get better and, and more open and we're able to be back, hopefully, meeting, you know, in different ways in person and out in the field. You know, I would love for and I said this to Stephanie and Brad, and we'll reiterate it to Aaron when she comes back but I just like to see 2021 be, you know, kind of have us the commission and the staff be out in the field more looking at issues looking at management, more field visits. I think it would be really helpful that you know I really want him coming in and doing reports to you about field work. I think it would be really helpful if you heard directly from him and not kind of filtered through me, and do use a lot of visuals what's happening out there because, honestly, I'm not in the field. There are times where I don't get out in the field for three to four weeks so I've asked him to really kind of gear up to bring you PowerPoint presentations and, and other visual presentations to kind of show you what's going on in the field. We'll be going in the field tomorrow. And I'll be looking at we'll be looking at Brad and I will be actually going out with our building commissioner Rob Mora, and Rob is a very experienced developer in in another life of his. We're at the Stanley Street parking lot, the sweet Alice parking lot, and the Richie parking lot on Bay Road so to access points on Bay Road. And then if you're familiar with the Stanley Street parking lot, it's just, it's a moonscape over there near the baseball field and it's a very heavily used area there's a lot of runoff that goes there clearly it would, it would probably be a notice of intent. There's a measurement to see how far we are from the Fort River might be a request, but in any event, there's some things that have been on our list. And now that Brad and Brendan are full time in conservation, we can start knocking off some of these projects that are a little larger a little more expensive, and have been on our list for years. What else is going on. So access I think I hear time and time again at meetings. You know if you know, if you know where to go you know where to park but not everybody knows where you can park and where you can't. And so we need to we need to do better. Four or five kiosks that we ordered last year during the pandemic actually were able to use cares act money to buy those kiosks so we'll be deploying those kiosks and trying to get a more consistent presence and message out there. I'd also like to look at and these are I'm just kind of some of my goals for 21. I'd actually like to look at new signage for our conservation areas. And Angela Mills in my office is doing some research kind of New England wide and getting some different examples of signs and we'll share some of this with you. But you know, Mass Audubon the trustees of reservations do a really nice job. Our signs are nice they're they're homemade we make them in house. But they get broken a lot. Normally they're a little tough to see their they're not really they face the street and most conservation area signs. You can see coming from both directions on the road so coming up with some different ideas for that that we can afford without breaking the bank is kind of one of my 21 goals. Finally just a quick update we you know we did submit with Mickey Marcus is help the boardwalk grant to the mass DCR Department of Conservation and Recreation. You recall that Mickey came in and did a presentation on this this would be a boardwalk extending from the Norawatic Trail East out into the marsh off of station road. And it would require a notice of intent etc etc, but we did submit that grant I'm expecting to hear word fairly soon on that so we will keep you posted. I don't recall the number off the top of my head but I should have looked that up before I want to say it was might have been north of $200,000 for that so we'll see if we get that and our goal would be to use the. They're called helical peers the peers that you essentially drill into the marsh very little impact. DEP likes them and they last forever so that's nice, but very little impact to wetlands so lots of goal setting right now and looking ahead toward the field season. Happy to take any questions or comments I continue to see people getting out there with the warm weather I mean the trails are wow they are being used people are everywhere. So it's nice to see but it sometimes areas do get a little overused so it's nice to spread out. Great, thank you Dave. And specifically in regards to getting summer help if you're interested in getting advertisements out particularly to UMass let me know. And I can distribute it there. But yeah that sounds like great stuff. I agree with you Dave there is a lot of activity out in a lot of those lands. Well there's some lands there's a lot of activity and some lands absolutely none. It was interesting I took a hike with family on Sunday I think it was of this past weekend. And we went by the notch visitor center up on 116 and it was packed there must have been 100 cars there. So we went down to sweet Alice on Bay Road. There was one other car and we hiked up on the range from sweet Alice. We maybe saw six people had we parked up at the notch visitor center I mean, it was, you know it's a very popular place but there's so many more ways to get kind of off the beaten path on the range. And I think we need to do a little bit better job of educating people and giving them alternatives. So soon we'll have the old trolley line. Yeah we were on it it's gorgeous if you haven't been there that would be a great going to Epstein pond and the old trolley line would be a great field trip for the commission I'd love to do that later this spring. I will leave you with one interesting email I had late in the day today. Stephanie knows about this. We actually had a report from somebody who lives over near gold pond and they were asking about a couple things. The first was do we allow motorized boats apparently somebody put in a boat they're fishing with a motor. That was the first in my career with the town I've never seen anyone maybe it was a trolling motor, either way, we discourage strongly discourage motors and any of our ponds but I have never heard of anybody using a motor motor boat if you will, on that pond. The other thing is Brad did such a nice brush job brush hogging the, the under undergrowth there and it all grows up, you know, later this summer it'll be a beautiful field, but people are now driving their trucks and cars right down to the water's edge to fish so you kind of run into this it's a catch 22 when you try to keep early successional habitat open and, and, and it kind of backfires on you so sometimes in the in the way of access so. That's why Brad's going to keep an eye on the gold pond which is more and more popular these days. So, that's great and that is kind of crazy that people are putting both. Yeah, particularly motorized boats. So we'll see a power boat out there one day that'll be funny. So, any questions or comments for Dave. Okay, so not hearing any. So Stephanie, the floor is yours. Hi, I just wanted to say, first of all, that this is my last meeting filling in for Aaron so it's really been a pleasure working with you all and I know you will be very happy to have her back because. I'm sure she's really, you know, as much as she's loving her time with her son she's so dedicated I know that Aaron really likes doing her job so I know she'll be happy to be back with you. And I just wanted to say that your next meeting. I'm so sorry is crazy loaded. I mean you have so many applications that have come in all at once so it's going to be a pretty hefty agenda. I'm going to do everything that I can to prep things for Aaron ahead of time so that she can just focus on getting to the meat of the applications and really diving in and preparing them for for you all. So, that's about all I have. I just had the ECAC meeting ECAC meeting just before this one so I'm trying to shift gears in my head a little bit so I apologize I don't have a whole lot to to say beyond that. No worries but on behalf of the whole Commission, a very deep deep thank you. So we have no idea where we would be without you. Obviously, yeah, it'd be great to have Aaron back, but it's been really great to have you and I'm sure you'll be happy to go back to a single job. Yes, I will but it's been a honestly, I mean it sincerely it's really been a pleasure and an honor to work with you all so thank you. Thank you. Okay. So why don't we keep moving along. So the thing that we have next on our agenda are minutes, and so that came through a little while ago. And so if you have not had a chance to look at those if you could crack those open and we'll share the screen as well so that you can read along. So as commissioners are done we're looking for a motion to accept minutes. I move we accept the minutes of March 10 2021. Okay, looking for a voice vote on a. Hi, Leroy. Hi. Well actually, I think, according to this you were not there so I think you need to abstain. So, is that okay. And I think Laura and yeah. Do we need a new second. No, I think you can still second. Okay. Right. Yeah, I mean they're just minutes for good. So, Jen, how do you vote. Hi, sorry. Laura. Oops, sorry. I know you have to abstain. No, I asked, but then I said no, so I apologize for that. And I for me as well so those minutes do pass so we can move on. So I don't have 730 yet on my clock so we'll have to wait until that time before we can start our 730 hearing. So we can move down into some of our other business items that we might be able to take care of now. Stephanie, do you have any preferences for what we deal with first. Sorry, I'm just looking at time and what we have. Could we potentially do the certificate of compliance. There's probably going to be a bit of a presentation with that. So we might not want to go with that one. Sorry. Oh my computer is doing weird things. I'm sorry. I would say we could go with. Well, I guess, you know, whatever we do, we'll just sort of bump everything else back a little bit. We could start with the certificate of compliance. It just might bump up other things along. Okay. Well, if we're going to, if I didn't realize that there was a formal presentation for that one. So if that's the case, can we just start with the informal discussion then. Sure. Sure. So, Simon, I'm assuming you're going to speak to this so I'm going to let you in the room. So just give me a minute. Okay, welcome Simon and you might need to unmute yourself there. Zoom is doing funny things. I'm going to promote Simon to a panelist. Maybe that will help. Okay, Simon, you should, I think you just muted yourself again on mute. Let's see if I can. Yeah, I don't for some reason we cannot unmute. Maybe we're just allowed to mute people. Yeah, you'll have to unmute yourself. I guess that makes sense. No, maybe Simon isn't actually there. No, Simon's. Well, I'm not sure. Maybe he stepped away from his. Yeah, let's see. Yeah, Simon, if you are handed, if you are here, if you can use the little raise hand thing. I can Steve, I can Steve from GCA. Can I, I'm going to allow you to talk. We can hear you. Hi Steve, we can hear you. Okay, fine. Yeah. I know Simon was going to be on. But I think we were originally later in the agenda. So perhaps he's eating dinner or something. Yeah, you're not a timed item. So. Yeah, so, um, I mean, I can, I can speak to, uh, you know, Simon and I had been working on this. So I figure I can speak to it. I had sent Stephanie, uh, this evening a, um, a request for administrative change and corrected order of conditions for the ever source. MFRP project. And just to give you a little history on this, I know. That, uh, back in October, we have submitted a, an LI and that was approved. I believe in November. We came back for a couple of amendments at that time. I think one was in December and one was in January. If you recall, one was related to a mitigation site. And the other was related to additional tree removal. So we received, uh, an amended, uh, order at that time. So we have approval to do structure replacement along the, um, 1144, 1033 line, uh, you know, in your, in Amherst. And that was all basically we're happy. He said, okay, we have an LI we're ready to get started. Um, simultaneously, we submitted a 401 application to DEP. And DEP noticed that on the form, the form five, the order of conditions form, the numbers that were that were written in there didn't actually match. What was on the maps or in the narrative. That we had presented to you and that you had approved. Oh, you know, we went through all the maps and all the tables and you had given your approval. But when the four and five was issued as the order of conditions, those numbers didn't didn't match what was in the, what you had actually approved. So DEP basically came back and said, hey, you have to correct that form. To make sure that matches what you actually approved. So one of the things we're asking for is basically an accounting, it's basically an accounting exercise. And we're asking that you at the next meeting. In April, April 14th is the next. When we would appear formally. We would ask that you would just, you would approve what basically would always been approved, but just approve those numbers and make sure they're properly set on the form. So we've gone through and actually done that in this submission. And so it's, it's there for you to review. You know, we can go through Stephanie because there's a lot of numbers. It's a little bit complicated to try and figure it out. But so that's, that's one item is actually just putting the month the proper numbers on that form. DEP is very, their opinion, even though you have referenced the document, all the documents that we submitted, like the maps and the tables and the narratives in your order. It's DEP's opinion that it actually those numbers actually need to appear on the form. Otherwise, whatever doesn't appear on the form is technically not valid. Okay. Okay, so with those Steve there. I understand that there it sounds like there are a fair number of small changes that need to be made just so things sync up. Are there any substantive changes that will impact particular resources. Yeah, so the second, the second part of that of our request is related to a few additional wetland areas that we've identified since the original order of conditions was approved. So, basically what we do is we flag the wetlands back in the summer. And then in October, we got your approval based on the wetland lines. Before we start construction, we, we always go out and reflag the wetlands near the work areas. So that the con so that the contractors don't accidentally go into the wetland areas that they're not supposed to go into. During that time. You know, the original planning was done during drought season. So, we went back out in, I believe was November, December timeframe. And the wetlands. There were a few additional wetlands that were not picked up in the first delineation. Okay. So that we presented in our package as additional areas that we want you to look at. There's not a significant amount of impact. It's all temporary impact associated with the work. It's the same work that you already approved. It's just that there are a few additional wetland areas that were not originally identified in the October. Mapping. And Steve, are you going to be requesting that we verify those boundaries as well or just the order of conditions. I think just the order of conditions that I mean that's kind of the way it was done the first time. DEP is going to be doing a verification on their own. You're certainly welcome to do that, but we're not required specifically requesting, requesting that. We provide you photos and we've provided a data form for the, for the additional wetland. One of the additional wetlands that you'll be looking at. So, we're not specifically requesting for a boundary confirmation. Yeah. Okay. And all of those changes are additions. There's no subtractions that you're considering at this point. Correct. There are no subtractions. Although there is one area where we had gravel for a work pad. And we've changed 75% of that gravel work pad to temporary matting. So it's actually a reduction, a little bit of a reduction. Because we identified this additional wetlands, we didn't want to permanently impact it. So we went with matting instead of instead of gravel as we had originally proposed. Yeah. So, so that's kind of what it is. The package I sent is, you know, it's fairly large, but I just kind of, you know, we try to boil it down as simple as possible. And, you know, under the Wetlands Protection Act, it's difficult sometimes because of all the numbers that need to be reported. So those are two main items. And there's a third item, third item is related to, you know, we provided, I believe, a total of $66,000 in funding to mitigate for tree impacts, if you recall that. And that money was going towards some polls for Amethyst Brook that you're using for a bridge or some fencing, signage, et cetera. Some of that money was allocated towards that. Some of the money, it was stated as being going towards conservation projects in town, which, you know, which is good and that's what it's for. DEP has, we've been talking to them and, you know, we need approval from DEP for these tree impacts. So, they requested that we get more specific on how that money is being allocated for those resource projects. They want to be comfortable that it's being put towards something that is like a conservation or preservation or a restoration effort. And they would like to see, you know, what the project is, where it is, is there a schedule for doing that work? You know, so I know you've got, you've got money in the coffer. Part of it is whatever source is contributed. They, you know, we can probably work with Stephanie on this or Aaron on, you know, what that money is intended to be used for, what the projects are and what the schedules are, so that we can allay concerns of DEP. They're not concerned that it's going to go into some general fund and get lost because it's going to, it's going to your group, you know, but they just want to say, okay, it's allocated to a specific project. And this project is slated to occur at a certain timeframe, et cetera, et cetera. Okay. Okay. So that was the third piece. Anything else, Steve? And I think Simon might be back with us now as well. We sent out a butter notifications. So that's all that, that that's for those, for those new wetland areas just to be safe, you know, we sent those out just so that people are informed. Mm hmm. Yeah. That's good. Simon, do you have anything that you want to add? So we had to juggle our schedule a little bit. So I apologize for going earlier than you may have thought we were going. Simon's not really there. So we definitely, somebody's raising their hand. Dave, Dave's raising his hand. Oh, okay. So, so Dave, and yeah, so if we can get comments from Dave and Stephanie on this, that'd be great. Yeah, so the only thing I would comment on is the last point that was made about the mitigation funds. I think that's something that really I'm going to need to work with Erin on when she gets back, which is really about a week away or so. Rest assured, those funds are not going in the general fund. They are in special accounts by the department. So there's no worry that those will get cobbled up and used for anything other than conservation projects. We can work. I can work closely with Aaron. And the folks on this call, you know, to make sure we provide DP with any information that they need to, you know, those funds are securely and they are not going to be used for any other purpose. I just wanted to reassure everybody about that. Excellent. Hi, good evening. This is Simon Hill. Can you hear me? Can you hear me? Well, now we can hear you, Simon. Yes. Okay. Sorry, sorry that I'm jumping in after we started here. I thought we were not going to be until past 745. So I am just back from dinner. So I missed what has been said so far. I just got the last little bit about the mitigation piece of it. But I think as Steve was saying there, in addition to the funds that have already been contributed to the conservation commission's efforts, DEP. I think as Steve mentioned, because there was not fully a project with a concrete schedule and scope already realized when we were going for our 401 water quality cert, they basically said, we want to make sure that impacts are fully mitigated for. So we are working with, we've reached out to a few different land organizations. Kestrel Trust is one of them. Nature Conservancy is another. So basically to see if they have projects that are sort of on the shelf that we can that we can assist with to assist to mitigate for our impacts under the 401 water quality cert. But DEP was very clear that they do not, they recognize that the orders that we've received from each of the commission so far are final. They don't intend to meddle with those, but they just wanted to make sure that that they're getting the mitigation that they see is required. Okay, Dave. Yeah, so I mean, so that's intriguing to me. So are you being required to mitigate beyond any projects related to the funds that were donated? It sounds that way. Because they're because DEP didn't have a specific project that the commission had already committed to and had laid out that they could say, yes, everything's all set for the tree itself. They want to ensure that appropriate mitigation is being conducted. And because the project is on a schedule where we really, I don't think have the time to potentially realize actual, you know, take a conceptual mitigation project to something that is more concrete and tangible, we're just going ahead and taking that route of just working with DEP to look at some other options for providing mitigation. And what we're looking at mainly is Kestrel is looking at acquiring some lands to put into conservation restrictions. So that's the route that we're taking there. And they recognize that each of the commissions definitely has projects that they're working on that will be beneficial, but they have, there's the potential for our project to be held up if they don't have something in front of them that they feel is more tangible. So we're just kind of being proactive to put some put forth something a little extra for them. Okay, yeah. Yeah, in retrospect, I wish you would actually reached out to us because, and we work with Kestrel all the time but since this is an Amherst project and an Amherst impact, if DEP is asking for, you know, something above and beyond the funds being committed in Amherst, we can put forth that. Yeah, it would just be too bad to work on something that's outside of Amherst. So I don't, yeah. Well, what our position is, you know, the commission and I'm coming into the project late of course this is my first time coming before the commission here. You know, our position is that the project has come before the commission. This has all been worked out before my involvement here. So as far as what you all have negotiated, what would be appropriate for mitigation. I think that that chapter is sort of closed and and the mitigation that we're pursuing with DEP is separate. And because it's through the 401 water quality standard program, they have some flexibility as far as geography goes. So that's why that's, that's even an option there. But please do think of it as, as, you know, above and beyond rather than in lieu of something that's lacking here in Amherst. Sure. Sure. Again, yeah, my, yeah, my only point is, yeah, sometimes people go to Kestrel and Kestrel covers 19 towns and we'd love to see the mitigation be in the town of Amherst where the impacts are. You lost your audio, David. Yep, you want to mute or something, Dave. Oh, I was just saying, again, sometimes people tend to, to reach out to Kestrel when the town owns 3000 acres of conservation land in Amherst, where we clearly could, you know, we have projects that are mitigation worthy and probably mitigation ready. But that's fine. I'm not. Yeah. Being that, you know, the project is the way that it has to be run is through a series of coordinated and scheduled outages of the transmission line. So we really have no time to spare. So that's why we reached out to these groups that in hopes that they already had something that had a concrete scope and schedule that we could basically help funds to be able to move forward here. So, next time. So thank you, Simon. Thank you, Dave. Stephanie, do you have any comments on particularly the first two parts of what Steve was presenting so I assume that this will probably fall under Aaron's purview. And then Aaron will be going through that in detail and then she'll be able to report back to us on the April 14 meeting. Yes, so I'll be working with Aaron on all of the applications that are coming in and giving her background but I had a meeting with the folks at GZA and I also had several conversations with David Fallis. So we came up with the idea that it would be best for them to submit a request for an amended order of conditions, which is the application that came in. I haven't seen it quite fully yet. But that came in today so that would be scheduled for the meeting on the 14th so Aaron will be back for the meeting on the 14th. Excellent. Do any of the commissioners have any comments I mean this is more just for informational purposes this will come back before us next time. formal hearing. And if I could I apologize for repeating anything that Steve has already said here but just want to make sure that the point is conveyed. The main purpose of the of the order or tried to request for amended order here is to essentially get the alterations that were included in one form or another in the notice of intent package. Whether they were included in the narrative or on the plans. We feel that you know it was presented for before the commission and it was approved but for whatever reason we, we didn't appropriately get it conveyed on to the actual form. We feel like it seemed like they were reaching out to just let us know that hey, what you appear to be proposing for activities here don't seem to be fully covered on your order of conditions. So that's why we're coming back to make sure that we do have all the you know the appropriate aerial extensive work that were conveyed through the notice of intent actually on the form. That's that's the main part and then the other piece that I'm sure Steve did touch on is during the reflagging or refreshing flags this spring. There were a couple of other resources that were identified and so we just want to clarify that those are on the maps there's no new work that's proposed as far as alterations with any resource areas or even buffer zone so it should be pretty straightforward but just wanted to come back and get it straightened out. Yeah, sounds good. Thank you Simon and thank you Steve again any commissioners have any comments or if there's anybody from the public who'd like to ask a question make a comment you can use the raise hand feature. Okay, so I'm not seeing anything else. We will see you Simon and new Steve in a few weeks. Okay, thank you very much. Okay, so I have 745 by my clock so that means that we can go ahead with our 730 agenda item. And so if you are here for that if you want to raise your hand and then Stephanie can make you a panelist I will formally open this. Being held is required by the provisions of chapter 131 section 40 of the general laws of the Commonwealth and act relative protections of wetlands as most recently amended an article 3.31 wetlands protection under the town of Amherst general bylaws. This is again a request for termination. This is being presented by the Berkshire design group for the town of Amherst for construction of an addition to the North Amherst library located at eight Montague Road map 5 a parcel 38. Hey Brett I just want to clarify you had said it was 745 but we're doing the 730 agenda item. I just noticed the folks who are jumping in our. Okay, thank you with college people. So, yeah, and I apologize it's kind of, and thank you Anna, it's kind of. I should just said that it's past 730 so 30 agenda item, and just happened to be another time for one of the other ones, which I know where it's. So we're looking for Berkshire design group and North Amherst library folks right now. Yep so that is Michael Lou and so panelists Michael. And then, and then Kate and Kenny we're going to put you back into the general pool for just a few minutes, and then we'll bring you back when your time is here. Okay so welcome Michael nice to see you it feels like it's been a while. Thanks for having me back. And so Michael if you wouldn't mind introducing yourself and then giving us some background on your project. Sure. Yeah, I am Michael Lou with the Berkshire design group in North Hampton. Working for the town, the library committee. Guilford mooring DPW is our contact on this project. We are working with Q and riddle architects who I don't believe they're joining in tonight for this hearing we've already been to the planning board. We have one with the planning board and our do back. April, I can't remember the date April 7 or 10 or something whatever that meeting is. So this is a request for determination. We are proposing work and I guess I could I should share screen now, but we are proposing work that for an addition to the existing library on the north side of the building, and then a new parking lot will go on the north side and let's see. We can find it right there. Okay, there we go. Okay, great. So this kind of black and white plan. Can you see the little hand. Yes. Okay, so this, I should maybe blow that up just a bit. The little rectangle here is the existing library building and this is the addition. There's a connector on the north side to a rectangular shaped addition. It's primarily going to house a meeting room stairs that come up into the existing library and the lift wheelchair lift accessible restrooms and a custodial closet in this corner. And this would be the entrance into the addition the entrance on the south side as you know is here you go up a set of steps that would remain the same there's really no work on the south side of the site which is this you know, rectangular piece. So you would enter the library if you came into park here from the new parking lot which includes 10 parking spaces. The north of that we are proposing that this is basically this, the site to the north is also owned by the town. It is basically like 98 or 99% paved or impervious with the building and it's basically paved all the way around this kind of hatched area indicates to the north of the new parking indicates pavement that would be taken away and replaced with a swale to, you know, for the runoff from the new parking and runoff from the existing site here, which flows from north to south. So runoff from this former garage or gas station parcels flowing in this direction and runoff from the new parking lot at the library is flowing in this direction. So we'd end up with a swale here, and with a catch basin, right about where that dot is on the, the leader there and, and we make that connection back to an existing catch basin and sundaline road. I just want to quickly show a couple architectural rendering just to give you an idea this is prepared by Cune riddle. This is the view of the addition from the looking south from the new parking lot. In the background here with the red color roof and the yellow siding is the existing building and this is the addition. Um, they've got this if I can. And this is kind of this is just an elevational perspective from Montague road from the Montague roadside, this being the existing building and the connector and then to the new addition here. You know, with faces north to the parking lot. Excuse me. So our work here is completely out of any resource areas in in the red. The highlight is shown the hundred year floodplain from the Mill River, which comes down here and actually includes this commercial plaza, and comes down here into the, that open athletic field at sundaline road this dashed heavy dashed red line represents the approximate 200 foot riverfront from the Mill River up here. This this the area of work is completely out of these resource areas. So we're basically asking for a negative determination that this project's not going to impact on the resource areas. By definition we have a reduction in the amount of pavement due to this area, the pavement being removed in the grass whale being put in. So I guess that's it if you have any specific questions or anything, I'd be happy to answer them or listen to comments that you have. Excellent. So thank you Michael. Yeah, it seems pretty straightforward at least from, you know, first glance, I agree that it looks like it's, you know, outside of jurisdiction. So Stephanie, do you have any comments to kick us off. I do not. Okay. So any of the commissioners have any thoughts or questions on this. Dave. Yeah, thanks Mike this is very helpful. And yeah, I, I, I agree with with Brad and others that this appears to be, you know, out of resource area. I guess my one question is. So, could you say a little bit more about the swale, because the catch basin that the runoff from the library and then the former garage will go into. I then that, I think is a pretty direct outlet into the Mill River correct to the north. Yeah, let me zoom in a little bit on that you can still see the screen there. Yes. So, basically this, this is, this is the approximate property line that divides the two parcels both are owned by the town. I should just mention that we are planning or to do an a and R to move that property line so it doesn't go through the addition. You know, this whole area of this, this, this parcel to the north is basically paved right up to about where that line is that's where the existing parking sits. So we're taking the existing parking and you know pulling it back to, you know, this line here where the sidewalk is shown. But basically, in existing conditions the runoff from this parcel runs on the bottom half or the south southern part from south to north, and from the northern part of the site runs north to south. So they converge in here and run out see that little square right there on the in the gutter line of Sunderland Road that's the existing catch basin David and we're piping proposing to pipe into that structure. And then from there it does flow to the north and I believe you're right it does daylight into the Mill River. I'm not, you know, probably at the bridge that goes over Sunderland Road somewhere in there. We've, we've talked to DPW and Jason skills about this and basically said we don't have to treat the water because we're doing a reduction in the pavement, and the town has a sweep basically that covers the drainage, you know, from the municipal system. I will say that in the future if you are aware that of the proposed realignment of Sunderland Road. So at some point, you know, I mean they've been looking at this for a little while now but there's no concrete plans. But the idea is that some they're planning to or the town wants to reroute Sunderland Road after you come over the Mill River over here and make a connection to Montague Road, either with some type of T intersection or a small roundabout or some type of road that you have you. At that point in time there's going to be further work, maybe on the, that Ernie's towing that uses this land I think I'm not sure who the owner is of this parcel of here but it's Ernie's garage. And so the road is going to come through here some in some location and at that time, this whole parcel you know would be the garage would be demolished and we were actually probably going to get a lot of green space out of it, which is a great thing. But that, that issue with the drainage was brought up with the planning board also, and Guilford, I mean we were charged with, basically, you know, they said, don't worry about the, don't don't even consider the road realignment. At that time we're going to, you know, there's going to be drainage improvements, there's going to be green space, this section of Sunderland Road in all likelihood will be closed off from wherever it turns to this curb cut and we'd have basically like a kind of like another sweetster park situation in this, in North Amherst here. And there you know they've been talking about various things about even turning this into a more pedestrian oriented way, so that there's easier cross traffic, if you will, pedestrian cross traffic between the library and the, you know, the school, I'm not sure if this is still being used as a school or you know, municipal building. So, at that time, they were talking about, you know, doing further drainage improvements and potentially incorporating more or turning this into even a rain garden feature so that it does, it does more than just direct water to a to a catch basin. Thanks, Mike. No, I'm very familiar. I actually bought the gas station for the town. So I know it well. But so, so for now it's a vegetated swale just may ask one other question just just because I'm, I'm kind of anticipating I realize we're kind of, we don't want to get too far a field here because this is a ways from resource area but there were conversations since since you do have the vegetated swale on there. There were conversations I know fairly recently that that the parking you're showing doesn't really isn't adequate for the size of the space in the North Amherst library so has that been addressed or is that I just want to make sure we are looking, we are looking at that. And, and we were hoping that we would be able to provide, you know, I guess what we call overflow parking at the former school parcel over here you here's where the curve cut is. I think there's approximately 12 parking spaces in here. There's potentially evening overflow if the meeting room is going to be used in the plaza and even though that's a separate property. So we made a presentation or argument that we're on a bus line this is the bus stop right here on Montague Road. I want to take up more of the commission's time. I'm just, I'm just raising it. Sure. You need to address that on the site, you would come back to the commission. Okay, the other while I mentioned that the most. I guess extreme solution would be to add parking up here so that this was a double loaded lot. In that case it's likely that the green space would move up closer to the former garage building. And then the other idea was to use this parcel here for overflow, because it's all paved around the building although, you know, people would have to maneuver around it so there are ideas being tossed around. We are looking at these this idea of a double loading the parking lot here because that would require, you know, more design work obviously on our part. You know, there's various options on the table, and we're working with feel for it about with that right now but if this becomes more paving obviously the green space would have to move to the to the north. I don't want to belabor this because I know there's other things I just in in a time when we are, you know, we're, we're, we're working on sustainability issues all over the, all over the town, even calling it a pavement elimination green space. Is it a, is it a swell is it a vegetated swale that is meant to filter before it goes into the catch basin. You know, we're trying not to put more runoff into rivers right direct runoff unfiltered direct runoff into rivers and I'm just just making the point that you know in the future as we look at this site. You know the middle river is a stone's throw north so I just, you know, just want to make the point. The town will need to step up I think and I'll certainly be part of that effort as we look at the reuse of the former garage. So thanks. All right, thank you. Thank you Dave definitely yes stuff that we'll have to deal with sometime in the future. So any other comments or questions or if there's comments or questions from the public you can raise your hand. Okay so not hearing anything from the Commission I assume that everybody's okay with this in which case we are looking for a negative determination, a motion for a negative determination. I can Stephanie can you remind me I'm doing a motion for a negative determination. Is that all for the work. Okay, so I moved to find a negative determination for the Berkshire design group for the town of Amherst in the construction of the addition to the North Amherst library at eight Montague Road. I can hit. Excellent so looking for a voice vote on a. Hi. Hi. Hi. Laura. Hi. Jen. Hi. And I for me as well. So, Michael, thank you very much. I'm sure we'll see you again soon, but for this one, you are all set. All right, appreciate it. Have a good evening. You as well. Bye bye. Bye bye. Bye Mike. Okay, so moving on to our next agenda item, which on the agenda says 740pm. And Stephanie. So I know that this is poor farm. Is this a new, are we opening up the NOI tonight or is this a continuation? No, so, so it's not a continuation because you didn't open a hearing everything that you addressed before was under an enforcement situation. So this is actually an application for the agricultural piece. I think you're, we don't have a complete. We don't have all the materials. So I think you're going to only just open. I think David Haynes is here to make a quick statement, but then you're going to continue. Excellent. Sounds good. So let me formally open it and then we shall do that. The health is required by provisions of chapter 131 section 40 of the general laws of the Commonwealth and act relative to the protection of the wetlands as most recently amended an article 3.31 wetlands protection under the town of Amherst general bylaws. And so David, if you could introduce yourselves, introduce yourself and give us some background about this specific NOI and how it ties into other things that are going on in that property that be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Good evening. Yes, this is my name is David Haynes with Haynes hydrogeologic consulting my company I've been doing it for about 37 years and been consulting for 40 plus. I did a job for you guys last fall reviewing the delineation over off of 116 where sun and road comes out. I did that for you. I haven't been too much before the commission for the last 15 or 20 years but before that I spent a fair amount of time before you. I'm on the belcher town conservation commission for 33 years. And I'm hydro geologist by training. I'm here representing this project. I'm working with Meredith Borenstein. And on the restoration, as you know that under the enforcement order there was some alteration to the wetlands and inadvertently trying to reshape the shape of the fields and so we have, she has put together a restoration plan. And I've at one meeting there's some confusion there was one meeting it was, it was, you wanted to have a notice of intent submitted for the restoration plan, and their future agricultural work so we have prepared a notice of intent to do both of those things one includes the restoration plan and the other includes the, the agricultural part of it. And speaking, this is also an endangered species area, so that it needs to go before natural heritage. And it is, it is before natural heritage they are reviewing both the restoration and they will be reviewing the agricultural aspects. To simplify the project and the recommendation of Mark Stenson of Stephanie found out that it would be much cleaner and much better to pull the restoration plan back to the enforcement order alone, and pull it out of the notice of intent. We agree. It would also work better because we could get the restoration plan. Approved prior to, we have some timelines in there that we want to do some replanting because of the species of concern, and we want to get an area replanted by May 15 so doing the restoration plan under the enforcement order. And that allows that timeline to work much better. And then we want to come back. We also want to present to you the agricultural aspect under the notice of intent. So first we want to withdraw the, the restoration plan from the notice of intent and and have you put that in under the order of conditions, and since that wasn't on the agenda tonight it can't be discussed. So we're asking that that be put on the agenda for April 14. And then also, we are in the process of putting together a an agricultural plan. I, I, I worded it such that we want to do want to repair buildings we do want to start doing agricultural work on resume doing agricultural work on the property it was agricultural I believe until about 10 years ago and then then it fell out of agricultural use so it's not exempt. And we are working within our SCS to develop a farm plan to incorporate and we want to have that included as part of the notice of intent about what we intend to do with the land there's a number of this obviously we'd like to start hanging it again and and working with it but so we would like actually to have a content and there's also a forest cutting plan that's been submitted to DCR for for the northern portion that includes stewardship mainly with. I mean that's approved by DCR you have a right to review and comment on it. But we would like to continue that hearing until April 14 when we'll hopefully have more information on that. And I hope I didn't speak too much. Nope, I think that was great David so thank you very much and I assume at that point we will hopefully have letters from the agencies that will need as well. Is there anything else that we need to cover with this one or are we okay to just move ahead and can you give us a date in a time the 14th but. 14th so I'm actually front loading that meeting a little bit so. I'm putting this one at 725pm. So looking for a motion for continuation. April 14 725. I'm going to continue this hearing to April 14 725. Second. Thank you so looking for a voice vote on a. Hi, Leroy. Laura. Hi, and Jen. I, and I for me as well so thank you David we will see you in a few weeks. Thank you and looking forward to working with you on this. Thank you very much. Bye bye. Okay, so Kate and Kenny my apologies for before but now it is actually your turn again so this is a continuation for request for determination for foot bridges on Amherst college property. So I don't know if Kate or Kenny if one of you wants to just introduce yourselves again real quickly and then give us an update about where you are that be much appreciated. Kenny here, Kenny and Kate Amherst college, working on replacement. I still there. Oh, there we go. Working on replacement of four bridges and our sanctuary lands. And any changes from, or what, what's the progress since last time or what do we need to do at this point. There are no changes since two weeks ago, two weeks ago we did not have a quorum so we could not vote. So we'll be representing in the hopes that we can vote. Okay, yep, and so Anna has to recuse yourself but we have one two three four. So we are barely there but we are fully there. So, okay, so wouldn't mind just so that you know everybody is sort of up to speed. If you can just kind of let folks know where we're at and then we can move forward from there. Sweet. Stephanie can. Oh, I do have share screen cool. And can everybody see that. Yes. Excellent. Okay. So Amherst College seeking request for determination on bridge replacements. Okay, so for bridges. Site one site to site three and site for as seen in the picture for reference site for is crossing Fearingbrook brief recap of everything that's happened for those who weren't here, March 10. We did speak a little bit, but obviously there wasn't enough for a quorum so here we are. Yeah, we talked about this last time once again but we now understand that request for determination would give us three year provision to perform work so that's good there. This is site one this is closest to Merrill apartments along East Drive on Amherst on Amherst College. This is site to site three. And this is site for crossing Fearingbrook we have since the last meeting made safety repairs. I did not include pictures of those. But as you had stated we could make structural repairs without any damage from the committee. All we did was replace a couple of the stringers on the left hand side did not impact either side all stringers that are currently touching the ground remain as work. And here all the measurements I'm assuming same as last time everybody on the committee has had access to all these numbers. Correct. Excellent. So we're toggling back and forth still depending on contractor whether they sit on the concrete diamond pier blocks or eight by eight timbers. But we're looking mostly at the idea of using natural beam stringers as supports as you as is depicted in this picture. And we did determine that. Unlike this picture handrails would not necessarily be required per committee. Correct. So here's one example of a bridge we have looked at either company would be rather similar at the difference being the what they rest on. These would be lengthened raised and meet 1.2. Thankful. And then the final note is that we do still need to hire a biologist to survey the area we do understand assume a much bigger area than you would normally think be safe, as was Dave's suggestion. Excellent. Thank you Kenny. Anything else that you want to add from your side or. Okay. And so, obviously we'll open it up see if we have any sort of general comments and remember that this is a request for determination and so depending on how that vote goes that would mean that either notice some tent is not required or it will be required. And so that is part of our discussion that we need to come to terms with. Stephanie, do you have anything to add before we jump into it? No, because I think you've had quite a bit of discussion around this project so I don't know that there's anything I could contribute at this point, any perspective beyond what I've shared with you before and I think Aaron has shared her thoughts about this project as well because it did initially I think come in when she was at the meeting so. Okay, Dave, this is the project that we spoke about at length, I guess, a few months ago right. I'm not quite sure I mean if it's only Amherst college one for a while. And it sounds like not much much has changed from our initial conversation is that right. Okay, you're shaking your head so I think you're yeah. Laura, I'm not sure if you're thinking of the same one so maybe you please let us step in and clarify any questions that you have since Kenny did do that pretty quickly. Did you present recently did you both present something I didn't or did you present something different in the in the past number of weeks. I presented two weeks ago on all we didn't have quite enough people here, all of our measurements on bridges have been adjusted to meet minimum requirements. That was the biggest change. Yeah, I just wanted to mention that we did have the site visit with Aaron and Brett and our and the, our very initial plan was simply to try to replace the bridges in their current lengths and then we received the feedback that it would really be better and would replace the resource area if we could lift them up and lengthen them. And so then that raises the potential costs a lot so we went back and forth with contractors, trying to figure out how to do that and how much that might cost. And based on that and then based on going back out and retaking measurements we came back on March 10 with the revised dimensions so the spreadsheet that was part of what Kenny has and hopefully part of your packet. Has the proposed dimensions that we hope will address concerns about the resource area itself. I mean I don't think there's any question that these are in resource areas right. One of them is over what I think is more of a drainage ditch than a than a stream, but the fear in Brooke definitely is a living stream I was out there in these woods the other day I saw some cute tree frogs I think you know many things are alive and well in these resource areas and so there's not really a question that we're in the resource area the question is, are we doing this in a way that's going to improve things and not harm the resource and so we tried to respond to the commission's, the commission's feedback on on that and so got it. Our hope is that we will be able to move forward I guess there were some students who were hoping to be involved in the bridge building. We were hoping to do this as part of the bicentennial which is 2021. So all of those considerations are, you know, hopes but we totally understand that it's your jurisdiction to decide, you know how to interpret things and and how best to move forward. And one thing that's kind of funny with us Kate is, even though it may have started off as a drainage ditch. It doesn't really. Yeah, it's all sort of treated the same. It can be kind of funny some days but just kind of how it rolls with the, with the bylaws and the Wetlands Protection Act. Yeah, I mean we've actually been looking into the history of this whole area a little bit and the whole thing was cleared in the 30s and then brought back intentionally as a wood lot and so it was initially extremely, you know, used and probably not a whole lot was doing well in there and it really has come back into what looks like a natural area, which is kind of neat. It is. Yeah, so Laura, did you have any other sort of comments or are you just trying to figure out where we're at. Yeah, this is helpful. Thank you. Okay. Good. So, the Roy or Jen, do you have anything. No. So, yeah, so we just have to decide if this is a negative determination or an NOI to be filed right so there's not I mean I was very comfortable with the content as presented at the last meeting. I think the plans are really good. It's just whether we need a full NOI or not. Right. Yeah. Yep, and that's what a lot of the discussion has sort of centered around. NOI is what we've done when we've had similar circumstances on our lands on concom land so particularly the one over just west of 116. Yeah, you know for what that's worth. You know thinking about precedent thinking about, you know those sort of issues. There's definitely, you know there's no doubt in my mind that this is an improvement so there's nothing about that. And last time we also did talk about what the relative pros and cons are of an NOI versus request for determination and overall the NOI just gives us a bit more has a bit more teeth to it so it will actually be recorded on the deed and the Commerce College is going to do great work anyways but still, you know just to make sure that we're fulfilling our obligations as well. Yeah I guess my and the way I would land on that is it's less about like regulatory traction as it is about consistency. I mean, if we for bridges on our conservation land, ask the town to submit NOIs I think for consistency and NOI would be a good way to go. I also say that knowing that everything that Kate and Kenny have pulled together is enough for an NOI so there's not a lot more work that would go into that application. So I guess I, if I were putting undo, you know, workload on what is a good faith effort then I would be more hesitant but you guys have already done you have everything you need, and have gone above and beyond in terms of stream crossing standards so I think it'll, it won't be that bad to put it together I guess. It would have been nice. It would have been nice from beginning if it was just submitted as an NOI. I know that you know it went one way. So Kate. Yeah, but I thank you I just want to respond to that briefly I think that the big differences we understood it is that we need to fully delineate wetlands. We need to do the, the full NOI and that would require us hiring a wetlands consultant for probably a few thousand dollars at minimum. In order to do that and then start the process over again with notifying the butters and different different fees. Can you guys help us understand what additional delineation needs to be done for for an NOI because I think for us that's the that's something Kenny and I can't do on our own basically. That was, that was how it was described to us initially by Aaron when we had first spoke about the NOI. Oh, sorry, sorry, go ahead. When we had first talked about the NOI with Aaron that she said delineations would be required and we had also we had actually asked for clarity to see if we could. With the consultant that we were working with, we have been working with through this. They would have the ability to delineate based on vegetation and not soil type and Aaron said that both would be required to file an NOI. And really what held us back from going in that direction. That's, if I could. I mean to delineate a wetland you do need to look at both the vegetation and the soils that's how you define the well and statutorily that's how you define the wetland. But that's not to say that then you would necessarily choose to go the lesser root. You could skirt having to delineate the wetlands, because the thing is you are in resource area. And also you have habitat issues as well. So you should have been guided to do a notice of intent right from the beginning. It shouldn't. And I know, I think Aaron had said that. So, I think she, she did say that initially and it to, to mine and Kate's point it was just, it was physically impossible to do that. And so for us to have been able to do anything. This was the route without this route, there is no route. That's our, that's our hold up there. There are not funds to go in a different direction. Right. So, and to delineate the wetland. I don't know when you say delineate everything. You would have had to delineate around the area that you were proposing to do the work so you wouldn't necessarily have to go along the whole property and delineate every little wetland you would just have to delineate the boundaries that are closest to where you would adjacent to where you're doing the work. So I don't know how extensive that would be. It's just the only input I'm going to give. Can I say this is and can I ask a clarifying question on that because I do remember in the first hearing on this when Aaron was, was on the hearing. We had a discussion about delineation and specifically saying that it would be very difficult to separate out the different resource areas because it's also low lying. So like low lying with like kind of braided streams and what we're formerly drainage is but now we treat as streams. And so there was kind of this assumption that we were in the resource area. Is there any Stephanie is there any precedent for saying okay, can we just like, I don't know how do I phrase this. Can they assume they're in a resource area. You can. So there's, I'm sorry, go ahead, Jen. Yeah, that was it. That was it. I'm trying to think of a solution that because we know that they're in the resource area. Is there a way to move forward with that information somehow. Yeah, it's the fact that you're in the resource area and. Well, I mean, so yeah, I mean there's, there's a few ways I guess you could go with this. Yeah. You could, you could issue a determination saying that they're doing work within a resource area, but you're saying that it doesn't have any impacts to the resource area. I'm not sure that's 100% true in this case given some of the work that has to be done. So, and the fact that it was in habitat I mean again, it, it wasn't totally an option, you know, to say that you can decide that it's a determination versus a notice because you don't necessarily have their funds to do the delineation. The fact that you're in a resource area in and of itself. And knowing that there is some work that's going to impact the resource area and it's, it's minimal but it's, it's still impact to me warrants the notice of intent. The other thing is you did say that you weren't sure when you were going to do the work. And I mean you'd have to, you would have to do it within the three years because you can't. You cannot extend a determination within order of conditions you can and I think you have most of the information that you need and the plan sets that I've seen. You've got a lot of that and you know, I don't, I also don't know that you may be able to find a consultant who would be willing to actually do the delineation for you along those resource areas. Who might just do it and volunteer their time. And it's happened we've had, we've had consultants do that before it would just be a matter of you seeing if you can find someone who'd be willing to do that for you. So anyway, that's all I'm sorry I settled up but that's what I have to contribute. Okay, thank you Stephanie so I'll go to Dave and then Kate. So this is yeah. I was going to start out by saying I'm struggling with this but I actually think I'm pretty clear on it. Again, I'm not a member of the commission but I think there's been a lot of great points made and I think the two of you. You guys have made a really good faith effort on this. I do think some of the early advice you got not from the town of Amherst but outside the town of Amherst probably time, energy and resources could have been spent going right after the NOI which would have been, I think a more direct route to what you wanted to achieve. I also wanted to acknowledge I think you know the commission did and Aaron did advise you on the, what really was the emergency which was the the Boeing bridge right and so I think the commission said yeah go ahead repair that bridge. What I struggle with I think is the precedent. I do worry about the precedent. I think if this were any other applicant that this were the town of Amherst we would, we would do a notice of intent if this were the University of Massachusetts we would do a notice of intent. If this were a private individual who wanted to cross the resource area. I think the commission would require a notice of intent. So I do worry about the precedent the other thing, and I would look to you to as representatives of the college. My understanding is the college wants to do more work on the trail system in the sanctuary. So, beyond these three bridges three or four bridges so what happens next year the year after when, when the college comes back and says we want to do all this and in 2021 a notice of intent wasn't required. So I'm just, I'm just throwing this out there not to be, you know, create, you know, problems problems but it, you know, I think as Stephanie said I think there are reasonable ways there could be a way to get wetland scientists donated hours to do this. And we just went through this with town trails out in North Amherst, and we ended up delineate delineating just the specific area where the bridges these are Bob bridges these were not bridges over there might have been one bridge over on intermittent stream, but the other ones were Bob bridging in resource area, and we ended up the linear feet was thousands of linear feet but the bridges, we really narrowed it down that Aaron's advice to just hiring somebody to delineate a very short portion of the area that was in a wetland resource area so that's a long way of saying I do worry a little bit about the precedent although I, I commend you and in the good faith effort you've made but I do worry about kind of what what precedent this sets moving forward so thanks. Okay. Sure thanks I think we're getting a clear sense for where the commission is is leaning now. And I think that's helpful. I think Stephanie you're right we did receive some advice early on and I think it was. The question was very clear that's absolutely true. And I think the outside advice that we received was that it's more along the lines of what you were saying in terms of, there's the RDA can be issued either because you're not in a resource area or because there isn't an impact. And so I think the question was, is this having an impact on the resource that's potentially negative and I guess the, it looks like you guys probably are going to require a notice of intent which makes, I mean it's totally your call. I think it would help us to understand what you see as the possible negative impact so that as we if we if we are able to do that process that we can think around that so what what. What are the increasing bridges what are the possible negative impacts that you're worried about. If I could Kate, I would just say that. First of all, you're an estimated habitat. And I think I said to you at the last meeting that alone could have triggered having to be to file a notice of intent. They don't typically review requests for determinations. And that alone with something that should have triggered the notice of intent. The second thing is that it's not saying that it's having a huge at a negative impact on the resource area but it's having impacts to the resource area so if you're having to do any kind of a bank to sort of makes room for the, you know to make more room for footings, any of that work that you're doing, it has an impact, and it may not be huge but it's still impact, and those things tend to have to be mitigated for. So when you do this under a request, the commission doesn't have all of those mechanisms that are in place to sort of do the things that address those issues. That's through the notice of intent. And there's no clear permitting pathway for natural heritage to do their review under a request. So, I, I was very clear and when I saw this I had the exact same reaction. Why is this as soon as I saw this why is this not a notice. And Erin and I had a conversation about it so, you know, I feel the same way and I think she tried to steer you in that direction. You know, and I understand and I, and I, again, you know, you're both, you've done such a great job and I hear you and it's, I think we're all struggling you can hear us all struggling. We know what is the right thing to do. It's also hard because we know how earnest you both are and how hard you've worked to make this work as best you can. But the process is the process and I, that's, I think where I was coming from in my guidance and I think where Erin was coming in hers as well. Yeah, and I mean there is definitely some impact that is happening there, I agree that overall it is going to be a benefit. And there's no doubt about that in my mind, but there is impact that is happening. Yeah, and for that property in North Amherst that Dave was talking about, if it makes you feel any better, Kate, we were, we were counseled to do a request for determination as well and we rejected ourselves on the same one. So, yeah. Or we required ourselves. Yeah, to do it and why. Okay, so any other commissioners have thoughts or comments on this one, or people from the public or Kenny or Kate. A comment I think that sort of came to my mind is the idea that this would cost thousands of dollars I remember we kind of talked through that at one point you guys reached out to some larger organizations and there's plenty of smaller organizations. Yeah, if you can get it done for free that's great. But there's plenty of sort of local smaller organizations that I don't know their costs but they're going to be much lower than some of the big national ones. Granted if your budget is zero, that doesn't matter. But there are some that are much more reasonable. And we have a list of consultants I don't know if you ever got that from Erin but we do have a list of consultants and we always guide people to to call them because their fees do range. Quite significantly. Do you have something Kate. Let me just explain quickly that yeah I think we were we were pitched a project in the beginning to fix a couple of bridges for a total cost of something like $10,000 and obviously that was not realistic right in order to get the length that we need in the permitting that we need that that doesn't seem realistic I think what we face is can can we credibly say to the college that that it's worth investing so much in these bridges or it probably it may end up being better just to fix them because it's a temporary fix the carpentry. The reason is that we've experienced lots and lots of tree falls in this area over the past two years, especially you know the last two years out of the last 10 years that I've been walking around in those lands so many trees have come down and three of the bridges were damaged by trees and that's extremely likely to keep happening. So, it is kind of an expensive proposition if to keep, keep doing that over and over again, and there's David David was absolutely right that we had, we had hopes to, you know, renew some of the other trails I think that we will be, we probably will be limited in terms of just doing mostly signage at this point because I think. It just doesn't it doesn't seem realistic, I think. Yeah, that's okay that's such as life. Yeah, I mean Amherst College does have resources so it's a question of how they choose to spend them. So, I mean unless you're cleaning hardship and that would be a different issue. I think that might be a tough one. So, so Dave are you trying. Do you have you're leaning in there. A little bit and and and to both of you I mean, I've been working on kind of land and trail projects for a long time and and and again you know the college better than any of us so we, we, we should stay in our lanes but part of, you know when I know the sanctuary well having grown up in and I now live, you know, five minutes from the sanctuary, but part of me thinks that actually making a bigger project pitching a bigger project to the college. As opposed to, you know, and maybe you guys have already done this but pitching that that the sanctuary is an incredible resource for the college students faculty you all know this better than I do because you work there but I mean, maybe this is, this is not a 15 $20,000 project this is a $350,000 project to top to bottom make the sanctuary, a show place for alumni staff faculty students in the community so I don't know. Sometimes in my work, making a project bundling things and making it bigger is sometimes easier to fundraise than it is for small potatoes. So, I just offer that as something that that I've used in the past, and I'd be happy to support you in that and you know I work with the college on other issues but I think I wouldn't be saying that if I didn't think the sanctuary should be a show place and something the college can really point to and say wow this is an asset. And right now I'm not sure you know it's kind of a, you know, it's a nice trail system but it's, it's not like wow there's not a wow factor. So, what it's worth. Yeah, I don't know if Kenny wants to respond to that at all. I think you're totally right we will try we will keep trying. We have been trying we will keep trying. And my response is this was that pitch. That's exactly what we've been doing. I work with people at all levels in the college and I'm happy to help you make that pitch for what an asset it truly is for the college and it should be and across the country, many, many schools like Amherst college have natural areas that you know they really put money into and it pays dividends with alums etc down the road so just like what you're trying to do Kate I mean I think that not to put words in your mouth but I think one of the things you're trying to do is make this a better asset for the students first off. And yeah I mean that would just be I so applaud you for doing that where you don't have to but yeah I feel like we're being obstructionist to a certain extent and I'll apologize for that but I don't think there's yeah I mean we just have to do what we have to do as well. So I wish you luck. We totally appreciate that you're doing your job and protecting the resource and you know upholding the law and that and trying to set precedent and. Yeah, Stephanie totally understand that yeah you're trying to guide on that. We do hear hear that. So yeah and so as David saying if there's stuff that we can do to help please let us know. Okay, so are there a policy question. Am I allowed to help. In any way, like because I'm in the middle. Can I either like because I'm abstaining help from like the Amherst college side without being a commissioner, or vice, I don't even know if they'd want me but like, I mean, I can I can I help in any way, or no. So who are you, who are you asking that to so I think I think or maybe Stephanie. So now we could explore that there are ways for appointed members of boards and committees to file. Acknowledgements it's filed with the town clerk that you may have a real or perceived conflict of interest but you've recused yourself from votes etc etc so that you may participate in the following things. So let's be in touch on that and you could even get. There's a free way to call the ethics commission in Massachusetts and they can guide you through that in, you know, seven or eight minutes. I can happily say I've never had to call the ethics commission before so. It's a very common thing to get a little. All right. Thank you I'll reach out to you Dave thanks. Okay, anything else on this one. Okay, so if not I think we are finally ready for a vote. And again, so we have in front of us a request for determination and the Stephanie will help us with the basic wording but basically, you know do we determine that there is the potential for impact and will is a no I required for this. Stephanie give me the wording and I'll. So you're looking to issue a positive determination that the area is a resource area and that you're requiring require the filing of a notice of intent. Okay. So, we are looking. We're making a positive determination one if you want just to make it easy. Yeah we're making a positive determination that the area is a resource area, and that we need to file a notice of intent. I think that's all I have to say right. That sounds good so looking for a second. Seconded. Okay so looking for a voice vote. So the Roy. Hi, Laura. Jen. Hi. And I as well. So I don't think this is quite the decision you're looking for but at least it's a path forward. And so if there's anything that we can do please let us know. So hopefully we will see you in front of us soon with the NOI for this. Thank you both. Thank you all. Thank you. I'm just getting in touch with Stephanie or yeah soon enough it'll be Aaron. It'll be Aaron, but I'm sure if you reach out to her she'd be more than happy to talk you through this and if you wanted to sort of bundle it with the other work to she'd be happy to talk you through that. Thank you. Have a good evening. Thanks. So that is our last official hearing for this evening. But we still do have some other items of business so Stephanie should we go on to our certificate of compliance. Yes. And Katie is here. I will let her in. Katie I've promoted you to panelists so you'll have the ability to share your screen as well. So Stephanie and Katie if you can also just introduce yourself and then give a brief background. So my name is Katie can sell a professional wetland scientists and I'm with VHB and I'm here tonight representing every source for the Owens pond request for a certificate of compliance. Excellent. I was just asked to be here to answer any sort of questions that you might have so I didn't prepare formal presentation but in the meantime I did throw a few slides together if you want me to just run through them quickly. Yep, if you have something prepared. Yeah, please go ahead and share and if not we we did receive a copy of the materials you sent. So tonight representing every source for the Owens pond request for certificate of compliance. So a brief project background the order of conditions for this was issued way back in 2011, and it authorized various mitigation measures throughout this property, including replacing a failed engineering out of control with a natural stream channel. And the edge of the pond and controlling invasive species, replacing a failed culvert with that a restored intermittent stream channel. And creating a an inner and outer floodplain zone so basically wetland creation, and then installing wildlife habitat features throughout the site like turtle basking platforms, nesting boxes and artificial snags. So this is just a view of the features that were created on the site and the different zones so if you receive the copy of the wetland mitigation report for 2020, it talked about different zones that we had to monitor. So you can see here these P4 zones. These are all your pond enhancement zones where there were plantings done. This one over here the R1 C1 this is the restored intermittent channel here. Just beyond just land water upland of the pond enhancement zones, you see there's these invasive control species zones here. This is IC1, IC2, IC3. This is the restored natural stream channel here. So the failed outlet was here. This was removed and then this whole area was restored. And then this FL1 and FL2 here were the inner and outer floodplain zones that served as our BBW replication. Amherst Concom issued a partial COC on November 15th in 2013 and what that partial COC did was it said that everything was constructed according to the order of conditions and the NOI and that the only thing that was remaining to fully close out the project was the long term monitoring that was required. And so when we submitted this 2020 report, that was the last report according to the order of conditions and various permit conditions to close that out. So we completed monitoring in 2014, 15, 16, 18 and 20. DEP signed off on the water quality cert back in 2016 and the Army Corps of Engineers recently signed off stating again that the mitigation was successfully implemented and we met all the permit conditions. So here in front of you tonight to answer any questions that you might have and I guess I'll let you take it from there. Thank you, Katie. So one thing that you mentioned in there, Katie, was that the original or the older flood control or water control structure was removed? I thought that's actually still in place and it's to the west of the current one. Or is that a different structure? Well, there's still, I guess there is still a structure there, but we did restore that channel so it increased connectivity to, I forget what the name of the stream is downstream there, improved fish habitat. Yeah, you basically rerouted. I just wanted to make clear that that that old structure is still there just no longer operable for lack of a better word. Yeah. I would clarify that if you want, Brett. If you go back to the, could you go back to the. Sure. Sure. This one. Hope you're no longer sharing your screen. So yeah, over near the new stream channel so that area before this project happened when we kind of visioned it with ever source. There was actually the emergency overflow for Owenspond. So there was a very subtle channel there. And the, the old flow structure is actually the little, a little kind of bump on the, on the dyke. Yes, just to the south. Just to the south if you move along the blue section. Yeah, right. Oops, you just there. That is flow structure. So all of the water used to flow through that. It got dammed up by beavers it was, you know, not functioning well so we really envision this project with ever source to be and get a natural connection back to the Fort River. And so that, that old flow structure was actually, I think that was completely filled. We need to deal with, with the other side of it now, but it virtually no water flows through that. So yeah, this was a great project. We added, you know, terrific habitat added two bridges for the trail system here, and most importantly provides some movement both stream and upstream for fish and other critters along that, that new, a new enhanced stream channel there. Yeah, thank you Dave. Yeah, and I think it's those old structures that are no longer operable those are the ones that kind of trigger it in my mind. Yeah, it was interesting we got Boyd Canard who's, who's quite a famous fisheries biologist in this area involved in this and, and he talked about lamb, sea lamprey and American eel, now being able to move at least this far upstream there is a large culvert at the eastern end of own spawn and that's, that's a project for another day. Yeah, and overall I think. Yeah, I wasn't too familiar with this project beforehand but right now I think it looks really nice and yet that green hatched area right now that is beautiful snake habitat. I don't know if anybody's been out there there's, I, you know I've counted hundreds of snakes in that area at one time before. And a fun little gardeners, garter snakes but still fun. The balls of them. So, any sort of comments or questions from the Commission or anybody from the public. I have a question. And you don't need to pull up the picture again but I know that there be there have been a lot of kind of natural small paths made where people are trying to access the water along there is that a consideration when you think about the things that you've done or kind of the future around what's paths that have evolved out of use not out of intention. Yeah, I don't, I don't think it was a design consideration when this litigation project was originally designed and, like you said, or hinted at people are going to find a way to get to the waterfront right. They want to get there and it is, I guess if it's more intentional, you can guide them to where you want them to be as opposed to them trampling vegetation and just to create their own path. So you know it can be a consideration in the future and for other projects. Yeah I think that's that was exactly what I was thinking is like how can we maybe embrace one little piece of like oh it hurts my heart to the full on trampling of the full area. Yeah, and so this I guess where the old I'm not sharing anymore but that bump that where the old structure was is a great spot people it's open people go there all the time I've seen you know dogs jump off of that into the pond. But yeah, it is sometimes helpful to actually create a trail systems to guide them and keep them where you want them to be. Yeah, but yeah you're absolutely correct it's a future consideration it's not a serious if it had come up. Yeah, so probably at that point it would actually come into the purview of us. So that's more of a question for Dave, or Dave is very aware of those issues. fix all the problems. But yeah we're looking for a certificate of compliance here and so I mean everything that was outlined in there I thought it was a very thorough report that was given that was provided. I didn't see any issues, but I don't know if anybody else did. I'm happy to move it unless there. Okay. Yeah, why don't you go ahead please. I move that we issue a certificate of compliance for the Owens pond work to ever source is that who I'm sending it to, or am I just issuing it. You can just issue it. I'm just issuing it. Thank you for Owens pond. Thanks Stephanie. Thank you. Okay so looking for a voice vote on a. Hi, Leroy. Hi, Laura. Jen. Hi, and I as well so thank you very much Katie. We'll be in touch with the final paperwork. Great. Thanks guys. Have a good night. Okay, bye. Thank you, Katie. You're welcome. Okay, so just moving down the list that we have on our agenda the next one on there is just Canton Avenue. And so Stephanie, have you heard anything from from those people. No, I haven't. And I in your packet I. I gave you a copy of the. Latest enforcement that was issued that had to be issued under the bylaw, because there's no mechanism for finding under the state well and protection act. We can only do it under the bylaw. So, so you have that information, but I haven't heard anything since that's been issued. Yep. And so for any commissioners who weren't here last time on the commission has set our first fine and memorable and recent memory. And so it said at $300 a day until flagging is installed. Yep. I was talking to one of the neighbors on that property and they did notice somebody yesterday I think it was walking around back there but that's neither here nor there they don't even know who or who they were what they were doing there. Yep, then completely unconnected. Okay, so why don't we just keep on moving. And so the next one is for our good old friend. Right. So that was another emergency start for sorry I'm just opening it up myself. And so what happened was, we got a call from or got contacted from Ruth Callahan. There had been some folks that were going out and sabotaging the traps. And so they weren't able to do the work that they needed to do they weren't able to breach because they had to deal with the trapping issue so they finally had to keep replacing them they finally found something that would work and so we had to issue another emergency to give them the time frame with which to be able to do that. So, and it's been done I think I, if I didn't put it in your packet I meant to because I got notification that they had done the trapping. And so, and followed through with the reaching as well. So I can, I'll make sure that gets into your packet for next time. Okay, so at this point they have removed you've missed them for killed the beavers. Yes. Yep. Okay. And so, if that is the case unless anybody has any questions we'll be looking for a motion to ratify the emergency search for Pomeray Court. I do have a question I mean, sorry, and I apologize I know it's late. When people are are damaging traps, is there anything that we can put out there explaining why we're doing it. So they know like this isn't our first attempt at dealing with the beavers here and that it's like we've tried this is the last resort. I'm assuming it's a welfare thing but maybe I'm maybe I'm off. Any like just to explain why I don't know. Dave I defer to you on that one. Yeah, no it's a great question on. I think it's an animal animal welfare, you know, somebody who knows what's happening and about about mammals in this case beavers. Honestly, I, I've never, I'm not aware that we've had people spring the drops before. So this was kind of a new one for me. We could talk to the people at, you know, I don't. We're not shadowing them doing their work we're not out in the marshes. We, I suppose we could provide something on down letterhead. You know as we move forward if we do need to trap in again I think, you know we're in a public meeting here, you know this is something that we none of us like to do nor want to do. But it sometimes comes down like in the case of Fomroy court comes down to the welfare of people their houses their property and access for emergency vehicles when that road floods. So, was provide something on town letterhead for the trappers to put out there. Yeah, I mean, I'm wondering if it's possible people also didn't know it was a town, you know, like, if there's no context given then very possible. They're like oh someone's trapping that's not you know, I mean, I'm reaching but I do think like, if there if it's possible for us to put more information when we do things like this, just like literally on the traps, you know, saying like, I'm not flooding this road anymore. And this is the only way that we know how to do it. I think it's a reasonable request and one we should try to work on in the future. Yeah, they could be laminated so at least some couple of weeks of life before and dirt and weather get to them yeah. Yeah, good, good suggestion. I'm all for that but these people probably you know I'm not sure how effective it's going to be I mean these traps should not be visible from the road anyways I assume that they're putting them in relatively discreet places these people know. Yeah, I mean that's not easy to find these traps. I know I just want to I want to assume best intent and make sure we're doing everything we can to explain kind of why and also just yeah just in general. Yeah, it's a good educational opportunity. I'm fortunate one. So, okay. Yeah. Any other sort of comments on this one. I mean and this is a persistent one I mean it was every six months we deal with. And so this isn't going to solve it either. The beavers of Pomeroy court sounds like a terrible mystery novel to me at this point like it's something about that title. I thought it was a new punk band that you're starting up. Great idea. Okay. So if nothing else then looking for a motion to ratify. I move we ratify the emergency certification for Pomeroy court. Thank you so voice vote on a. I, Laura. Hi, the Roy. Hi, Jen. Hi, and I as well so we are done with that one. And so then we are just on to other miscellaneous business Stephanie so mind your reports everything looked fine that I looked at. But is there anything that you wanted to highlight there or any other items. No, I actually I don't have anything. Okay, anybody else have anything that they wanted to add for today. Just thanking Stephanie for stepping in and doing such a great job and helping us appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We need to make a motion. Yeah, it needed to be on the record. That's why I said it before we ended. We need to go to where we're good. Thanking Stephanie. All right. All in favor unanimous. Thank you. Well, again, like I said, it was my pleasure. I was happy to do it. Okay. Okay, so with that, I am looking for a motion to adjourn. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Whoa. I moved to during the meeting. Okay. Laura. Hi. Roy. Hi. Jen. Hi. And I as well. So we are all done. So. Rest up for next time. Apparently we have a bit of a doozy coming up. You do a really long one. Sorry. We'll do our best to move through it as quickly as we can. Thank you. Good night. Good night.