 Hi, everyone. Welcome to the July 13, 2022 meeting of the Amherst Massachusetts Conservation Commission. Erin, can you make me a co-host? Yes. Sorry, just dealing with some. So I see we already have a fair number of people in attendance early in the meeting. So I'm going to quickly and I'll try to announce this throughout the meeting. I don't know if the listeners remind me if I don't, but if you are in attendance tonight for the hearing about the notice of intent at 52 or at the applicant is SWCA for 52 Bearing Street LLC, but the notice of intent is for work proposed at 46 Bearing Street. That will continue. We will not discuss that application tonight. Similarly, we will continue the hearing that is SWCA on behalf of Ron Laverdier until our next meeting. So we will only have one hearing tonight that will be discussed by the commission and that is 51 Spalding Street. So again, if you're here for 46 Bearing Street or 395 West Street, those projects will not be heard tonight. I think you probably already would have been notified for previous meetings for those hearings and you won't be notified again. So the best thing you can do is keep an eye on the agenda as posted before the next meeting. Our next meeting is July 27, Wednesday, July 27. So keep an eye on our website for the posted agenda to see what time the hearings will be for those projects at the next meeting. I can just say off the top that 395 West Street will be at 710 and, or I'm sorry, 710. Bear with me for just a second. 740 and then Fearing Street will be on at 745 at the next at the next meeting. That's when they'll be scheduled. So there. Yeah. At the earliest. Correct. Yeah. Great. So the first item on our agenda is comments from the chair. Those are my main comments. You only have one hearing. That's a continuation from our last meeting tonight that's 51 Spalding Street. There's a, there's like not a ton of other business but a couple of land use applications and a couple other correspondence issues to discuss commissioners but I think if we are efficient, we should be. I'm going to jinx us but I'm going to go in that we won't have too long of a meeting tonight. Aside from that, Aaron continues to do a lot of work online and offline for the commission. I know that she's had an incredible work lately so extra thanks from me to Aaron. You know, professionally and you manage all this and how knowledgeable you are and how fundamental it is to everything you do that we protect our well and resources and Amherst so super appreciative of that as a commission and the commissioner on a day to day basis. With that, I know Dave, I think it's either traveling around vacation so he won't be here tonight. So yeah, we have to land management updates do you want to start there Aaron. Ask a question. Oh yeah, sorry. We're, are we so we're going to be in person. Starting next meeting is that the deal. Well, it depends. There is legislation pending through, I believe the state budget to extend the remote meetings and I am really what's really kind of cool we've we are the only I think committee in town who's managed to skirt meeting in person just because of our meeting schedule so this is really so the 15th of this month is the day I have to post our legal ads for the 27th and so the day I post our ads I'll know if the legislation is continued so that's really good because if the legend if we know on the 15th the legislation has been extended I can just schedule us virtually. If it hasn't been at that point then the meeting on the 27th will be in person. Okay. I guess stay tuned on that. Do any other commissioners have any announcements I should ask this at the top of the meeting or questions. Yep. And I am happy to take anybody's thunder but I'm happy to be take Vice Chair, if you need. Awesome. Oh yeah you weren't here in the last meeting and we like that's right. Well we heard that but I wasn't there with Roy left I didn't know you left. Yeah, I know. Two meetings ago so I'm happy to fill that role. It's. Yeah, so I'm happy to do that. Okay. Do you want to just somebody want to just make a motion and I move that we nominate Fletcher Clark for Vice Chairman. Second. Second from Michelle voice vote. Hi. Larry. Michelle. Hi. Fletcher. Hi. And I'm an eye. Thank you Fletcher. That's awesome. Thanks for the boat of confidence everybody I appreciate that makes me feel good. Thanks for seven out Fletcher. Yeah. Yeah. Second bed. Does anyone else have any kind of procedural questions or scheduling questions or comments. As a reminder I guess while you guys think about that we have another meeting in July. So we have a July 27th meeting. I'm looking at my calendar really quick and then we'll have our first meeting in August. So that's August 10, but then we will not having a meeting on the 24. So after the 24th, it's quite a break. We'll pick it up again. On September 14. See you guys have that on your calendars. Anyone else any other procedural comments questions scheduling things like no. All right. Land use at the top I'm just playing at the errands. Yeah, so we have. First one is the Janet planet land use application for Mount Pollux and I believe it was the last meeting that the producers joined were they planning and joining again for this meeting here and do you know. I believe they are. Okay. Oh, there's Meredith. And Audrey got you. Oh geez. Sorry. Hello. Hi Meredith give me two seconds I'm just trying to get Adrienne. Hi. Hi, Audrey. Hello. I'm in a basement on our set so we are on location. Yeah, so do you guys want to give us just if you wouldn't mind just please briefly introducing yourselves and then giving us kind of a three minute update of where we've moved since we last heard from you and you gave us a very good overview kind of the knowns and the known unknowns at our last meeting. I don't think any other concerns have emerged. But if you wouldn't mind just giving us a brief update that would be great. Yeah. So if you are commissioners there's a letter in our packets that I guess in our own dry folder that you could look at the same time. Meredith you want to jump in and we need. Yes, can everybody hear me. Sorry. Okay, great. Thank you for having us at your meeting. We're excited about the possibility. And just a quick recap. We are hoping to film at Mount Pollux on Monday, August 15, and Tuesday, August 16. The approximate times are 2pm to 10pm. We would not be able to film in the rain so we had our proposed rain dates of the 22nd and the 23rd. We did talk about the challenges of access because there is just that there's that small parking lot there. And that we would on the second day also like to be filming in that parking lot. But even if we weren't, you know, we realized that it could be tight. If anyone from the public wanted to come up so what we talked about doing was hiring police to be stationed at the bottom of that hill that drives up to the parking lot, just mostly for safety concerns even if we put a sign someone might not catch it the way that road is and I try to pull up and then there could be sort of a traffic jam someone trying to back out. So we figured if they see the officers car there that'll just help us with safety. We also discussed the fact that we know that folks could enter in from different paths and you know the public would come by. So we have production assistance with us that would politely ask them to hold for a moment if our camera happened to be rolling and then let them pass through. Audrey am I forgetting anything. No, I do know that I did want to address. I think last time we met there was a question about a generator or, you know, or food truck. I just wanted to reiterate that our, our footprint out at Mount Pollux will be much smaller than it is at our other sets where we're trying to keep it as skeleton as possible it's the term we use a skeleton crew so while our bigger crew is 60 to 70 we're keeping it to 25 to 30 only essential people. We will not have our regular generator on site because we don't have huge amount of electric needs it's outside. You know, they're just going to be working with a lot of a little light they're just going to bring a lot of good bring what we call pot that generator so small generators that we can like keep down in the lot. And they'll be using will be using power off of that we won't, we won't have a huge. We won't have a catering truck there will have like, like I think we mentioned like a table for craft service, like a little pop up table, and we did let everyone know on our technical survey or tech scout that they, that they are not allowed to do that, that's off the path, and we made it very clear to everyone on our scout that this is a conservation and you have to respect and, you know, I think everyone was really, you know, fine with that and understood and we have a super pro crew who's who's going to who's going to respect that. So I think I think that kind of addresses some of the main questions that were brought up last time. Thank you. And I see in the letter of intent that you guys are making a donation to the town of Amherst Conservation Commission, which is just the town of Amherst and the amount of $1,500 per day of filming so that's totally $3,000. We really appreciate that goes right back into all the trails and minutes for us. And the parents we can't help but mention that there is a ton of poison ivy off trail there. So, like literally growing over the edges of the trail. We noticed that and we had a little we have a little like tick and poison ivy memo that goes out with our call sheets or with our emails so we've, we have, we have let everyone know that we have a lot of locations where we're having to be extra vigilant about the poison ivy and ticks. But thank you. I just want to interject that. So I'm supportive of this application commissioners I think that the applicant has gone, you know has gone above and beyond interpretation and being flexible and responding to the concerns we raised. But I want to give you guys a chance to ask any questions or raise any concerns. So Michelle I see you have your hand up. Yeah, so I don't, I mean, it seems like ecologically, you know, impacts are being minimized and I don't have any concerns about that. I do have concerns about restricting access to parking lot which is part of the, the application, which I don't think is something we've ever done before. And I guess I have concerns about precedent and equity here. So, you know, in terms of the opportunity for other members of the community to ever do this. It's not something we've opened up to our community before. But I think that if you know members of our public Amherst community knew that, you know, for $1,500 they could have exclusive access to the parking lot at Mount Pollux. That would be a pretty popular option for weddings in Amherst. So my concern is just setting a precedent for allowing, you know, a pay for exclusive access to the parking lot at Mount Pollux and if we're going to start allowing this opportunity to other people if they request it. For example, if next week someone wanted to have a wedding up there and they offered us $2,000 to have the parking lot. Are we going to, are we going to say yes, are we opening the door for that? So what road are we going down by allowing this for the first time? I can just sort of, you know, address that from our, from our standpoint. Yeah, I don't know what will be known to the public about this, but I do think. Maybe there's something that could be put in writing on our end or maybe there's something that we could make it known that this is a, that this is, I don't know that this is maybe not about the money that this is a case by case basis and it's also because Annie is from Amherst and it's maybe more of a, you know, a culturally specific thing to the area, and more about the, I don't know, I understand your concern fully and well. It's just one of those things that, you know, I don't know how we would be able to do it without access to the lot. Unfortunately. So in the past, when people want weddings, which is normally what they want to do we say the parking lot is going to be open to the public and we're not going to restrict access and if you want the parking lot get there early save your parking and just kind of reserve it with your own vehicles and that's how we get around helping people find their place without really restricting it to the community but like commissioners currently the policy for land use amount politics is to review them on a case by case basis and we've never restricted access for the public before so you know unless we're like pursuing some different route for fundraising, you know, through pay for exclusive access like I don't like for next week like what if a native, you know a third generation emmercite wanted to have a wedding up there and they are willing to pay $2,000 are we now going to allow that, like, I just I don't, I don't want to be short sighted in, and how we evaluate this particular application I don't necessarily have a problem with the application of itself. You know, I went to school Annie but but I just want to like keep in mind equity for our community members. And I'm just interested in everyone else's opinion on this because we are undergoing a land use to advocate you know land use policy revisions and this is probably something we need to think about like, are we are we going to open this to our publics. I mean I think that I'm sorry. If I if I could chime in. We considered this donation as a as a thank you and as because we do want to support the mission and we do believe in it being available to the public. And that's really just what you said about if we just showed up there early. We would just fill the parking lot, and we didn't know if that was okay for us to do. And so my concern would be more if we did do that. I was just worried about creating a disturbance in the community, when people tried to come in up that up that drive we wanted to make sure that it didn't cause any dangerous traffic jams and someone had to back out that road. So, so I guess my two points are one is that we didn't necessarily see this as as purchasing the ability to use the drug, the parking lot more as a gesture of thank you for all of the work that people are from the conservation committee need to put in to help us to organize, and just as a support of the mission. So that makes any difference and I also I, I think that your points are very valid and they're really make a good point because you have a, you have a mission here which we support. So hopefully we can figure it out. Yeah, yeah I appreciate this I see your hands up Aaron just give me two sex I just want to say so to your earlier point, Audrey, all of this is public so the letter of intent was is made public. This conversation is public so just so you know like the donation and everything in there is already public information this is not a surprise. And I do appreciate the distinction between a fee and donation. I think that's an important one. Sorry. Andre give me a second Aaron her hand up and thinking maybe she has some facts to help us here. No I just had a question so like it let's say you guys arrived at like 6am in the morning, and there was three cars there and people were hiking or walking like what would happen then I guess just logistically kind of. If there was cars there, the day you were filming in the parking lot and they're, they were like walking down at Atkins flats like across the street and we're hiking for the day or something how would, how would that be. We would just have to, we would just have to adjust. We would have to make sure that, you know we weren't blocking them in and that we could, you know, and this, and if this is the case where we wouldn't be allowed to sort of necessarily keep it, you know, block it off until the public they can't come in if it is this case where we are just getting there early and taking up the spots. Then we would readjust we would adjust a little bit and perhaps reduce our crew even more. Because my concern would be we don't want anyone to get blocked in. And then if we don't have the equipment that we need to do to finish the work that we're doing. We would just have to get our team together and see if we can reduce that and see if it's still possible for us to film at Mount Pollux with a even more reduced amount of equipment and people. And just to be clear to we wouldn't bring any, any cars up there we were going to park our crew elsewhere and then just drop them off and they would walk walk in from the road. I just wanted to make that point in light of Michelle's comment because like if somebody's there and they're using it it's not like you're going to arrive and be like hey whose car is this you got to leave. Like if somebody's there and they're using it and they're on the property. Yeah, they're still using the property so it's just just to show that people would still have access potentially if they got there early. Absolutely and we would ask that you know if they happen to be walking past our camera and in our shot, we might, if this is if this is all right, have a, you know a polite do mind holding just while we're rolling and we cut and that's only a minute or two. But of course if they're if they're like no I'm going to rush and go through them, let them through. I think that distinction Aaron because you know if we're talking about not, you know, sort of blocking off the, the parking lot for our, our use if it's more that we're just getting there early and using the lot, then we'll just have to know on our end to adjust if the lot isn't available when we show up. And we'll, we'll talk on our end and see if that's feasible if we can, if we can still work under that circumstance. So I think that's a good question. Well, I think Meredith just touched slightly on on my question. How much of the time that you're going to be there. Do you expect to be filming and restricting in essence the, the passage of the public. That's a very good question. A lot of the time that we're there. We're not rolling our camera. We're getting people into position. We're looking at the lighting we're, you know, bringing whatever gear we need around. We're having a stand in there to see what they look like in the light and we're not actually rolling. And then once we are rolling. It's not a very long time that we're rolling. It's short segments of shoot cut shoot cut shoot cut. So, you know, again, if someone were walking the path and we're asking them to hold that it's not, you know, half hour it's not 20 minutes it's not 10 it's really just while we're rolling. I know that's not a very specific answer. But it does go to the, to the, it does provide some clarity in terms of public access to to the public location. And then just something I'm throwing this out as a possible solution, if you would do to the public parking and so on or to the restriction of parking is perhaps some kind of an arrangement that you could have with with someone some property owner nearby to shuttle people back and forth or something like that. I don't want to. We've already done that. Yeah, we've reached out to Hampshire College with that plan that we would we would put all of our people park them there. We put them in a van we drive them to the bottom of that driveway we drop them off and they walk up. So we're not expecting any crew members to drive their personal cars there at all. Oh yeah I got I got that part. What I'm curious about is for the public who would, who would. Oh, sorry, place to park. Back to the equity issue that Michelle was speaking to earlier. I see. And so you're saying that we would, and we've done this before at different locations before where we've provided parking for the public. If anyone wanted to impine they couldn't get in. If there's someplace nearby is that that's what you're suggesting. Just, yes, I'm throwing it out as an idea that would resolve the issue of, of preventing the public from parking in the parking lot. Yeah, we've done that before in different locations, for sure. We would provide that, you know, and, and cover the cost of that and communicate to folks when they came by. Well that might be a solution. I think that is like, South Amherst Common, there's part of the parking spots there so if somebody was adamant about wanting to pull in the police could say, go park at South Amherst Common and somebody will come pick you up to come hike while this is being filmed just to like, play that out that is one. Yeah, we can, we can look into. If that could certainly the parking part the transportation for them would be another religious school thing we'd have to put together with our, we have very strict COVID protocols but we could, we could work on that. My parking spots are there five. At Mount Pollux. Maybe five or four. Yeah, between I'd say five or six. I think when I was there, I counted. Yeah. You're probably part of that six. Yeah, it's pretty small. And if you have like a truck or an SUV there, it's part of the last because you can get out. And then the equipment. I mean, honestly, I don't, I mean guys, if you close the place off, if we're going to do this, you just close it off, you're going to have the police there. It's going to be safer. But talking about like safety here too, like that road stinks, like that sight line is terrible. Coming in and out of there. I mean, that's another thing to throw it at it, but, and you guys need the whole parking lot, right? If you want to do this, you pretty much need the whole parking lot for your, for your equipment. We do. And the safety issue was the reason why we wanted to have a police officer on. Allow it to allow the public to kind of come as it in and out as they go. We're only talking about a couple spots here. I understand allowing access. When I was talking about the public, it's to be clear, sorry, I meant pedestrians who might come in from other trails. We were, we had the same concern about safety. And that was why we suggested that we would have a police officer on the streets because when you come down that turn it's it's hard to see, you know, and they might try to pull in. So if they see a police officer vehicle there, they'll realize something's going on and they won't just pull right in. Yeah, I think that if the drive in wasn't so narrow and so steep, this would be a different conversation altogether. We're clearing another. We're working with Chesterfield Gorge for a totally different scene. And it's a bigger parking lot and there's another lot nearby and there's better access and it's just a different conversation altogether. So, and then we may not even actually end up that's, I shouldn't know if I should say that we may not even end up there actually but I'm, but you know, we have the like experience with different parks but this one is just so specific in terms of safety concerns, I think, and just access and like having someone drive up and not having a place to turn around, or to, you know, I mean we're, if we're pushing it, you know, I don't know if we're moving equipment and, you know, yeah. Yeah, so I see hands are stacking up Michelle just before we get into this again so if, if it were possible to, if you were a member of the public and you wanted to drive to mount politics. I think that the parking lot was being used for filming, not for parking but just for equipment for filming, and they drove up to the entrance and the policeman was like, I'm sorry, like the parking lot is full of equipment. Can you please go park at South Amherst Common, and the crew was able to then figure out how to shuttle the members of the public back so that they could walk around mount politics do you think that that would address the equity concerns or is that too complicated or not Yeah, it's definitely complicated, but it does get to addressing it and my main concern is just saying that we're shutting down the parking lot for this event because I don't want to, I don't want to do that for a single event and I definitely hear the public safety and I'm thinking maybe just like a sign at the beginning that says like large truck and equipment like be careful up ahead because mount politics is always like that you know on a Friday it's like sketchy so you know maybe some forewarning before the public drives. Could we phrase it as temporary, temporarily relocating mount politics parking to the South Amherst Common, so that unfortunately the parking is not adjacent to mount politics but there would be a way to get people from this temporary relocation of the parking to the mount politics conservation area. I'm just trying to find like a. I mean, I guess I just want to throw out the hypothetical that like, you know, next week, like a, you know, three generation Amherst site comes and wants to get married up there and is willing to donate $2,000 commission for the same thing or we just are we just going to do it like every weekend through the wedding season. Like I just want to be sure that we're thinking ahead on this one. I think I see where you're trying to find compromise and I, you know, if we're not shutting it down I guess I'm happy to move forward, but like I just want everybody to consider that, you know, if people knew that this was an option they probably take advantage of it pretty regularly. I think Aaron, do you, I wanted to get an idea of like where everyone is on this and if there's more information that people need in order to move forward because I'm cognizant of the fact we've been talking about this for 20 minutes and you have a full agenda. So is that your reminder Aaron. I just wanted to state one thing which is, Mount politics is always first come first serve. If they arrive and there's people there. There. If they're if they arrive first and they stake out the parking lot. It's first come first serve. So we're not kicking anybody out we're not telling anybody they can't access it. It's first come first serve so I don't see if we condition it as such that it's just treating them exactly as anybody else. There's just a donation coming along with it. If, if we were saying public access restricted today, you can't park here. Because the parking lots closed. That's a different story but I mean I, I'm just trying to like separate the fact that it's first come first serve all the time so if somebody drove up there to walk and there was five cars in the parking lot. They're turning around and leaving because they don't have access to my politics so if they get there at 5am and they stay out the parking lot, then, you know, just putting that out there to consider. So the application asks for a restricted access the parking lot or exclusive access so that's, that's my only thing that if we just approve it, like as is. It's not necessarily a first come first serve. I'm totally fine with first come first serve which is what we do for every single application. Right and I just wanted to get back to the fact that when I asked them initially are you going to be kicking people out if they're in the parking lot when you arrive. I would just said they would adjust their plan to accommodate the fact that there's cars there. So I just want to make sure because that's essentially treating them equally as other folks who use the land. I think that, you know, given what we've discussed about the first come first serve scenario. I think, Meredith I don't know about you but we could look into, we could readjust our letter of intent to have different language regarding the parking lot. I do still just want to make sure we're safe with if people are driving up. I think that's still the concern that there's nowhere to turn around. Well I think that's a public safety question for the police. So my recommendation would be, we approve it and state in the conditions. It's always been first come first serve just as we do for weddings and any other occasion. Get there early, stake it out. You can, you know, put up signage just like people do for weddings just like people do for other events on the place as long as you're cleaning that up at the end of the day or at the end of the show. So I just want to work out the safety issue with the public safety department who's in charge of keeping the roadways safe because ultimately that's a question for the police department not for the conservation commission to me anyway but I just just trying to hash it out and keep us on track. Yeah. Let me just throw this out in terms of back back to the Michelle's concerns in terms of the application stating that it that that you're looking for restricted as access. How about we you either change that restricted access to not request that. Or in the conditions, we condition it that or we specify that access will not be restricted. And then, you know, in terms of public safety that's a whole other story. That's just what Aaron said, I, I'm sorry. That's just what Aaron said I agree with what Aaron said. And Aaron's, yeah Aaron said something about the end of what I just said, in terms of the application seeing they've applied for restricted access. And that and just approving it straight up with perhaps a precedence that we don't want. But we make we approve it, we approve it in the basis of what Aaron said, and negate what it said in their request. So I just want to say the same thing then. Let's go to hand raising please commissioners if you have a comment. Sorry, go ahead, Aaron. I was just going to say generally when we have these applications, we have conditions that we list and we have a whole slew of conditions like you can't leave trash. You can't damage the, you know, you can't damage the ground leave disturbance. So I would suggest that we have a condition the parking lot is first come first serve so get there early and stake it out that's what we tell everybody who has weddings there that we have a condition that states, you know, access isn't restricted to the public. It's the fact that you've offered to notify people if you're filming, you know, and letting people know if they're trying to pull in the parking lot, etc. What's going on with signage, and then to coordinate with public safety to make sure that whatever is going on with the driveway access is done so safely so no one's injured. I think that is a great path forward. Is that good. The thumbs up for me, Larry, what's your Michelle. Alright. Is that I'll cope aesthetic with you guys Meredith and Audrey seems like that's a good workable hopefully. It sounds to us. Must be logistics experts. You're like, yeah. Yes. Yeah, I'll make a motion to accept the land use. Filming application for application as long as we follow the conditions that we were just discussed about allowing first come first serve allowing access and working with a public safety officer to ensure full safety standards. Got a second from Andre voice vote Andre. I shall. I will share. Hi, Larry. Hi. And I'm an eye. Thank you Meredith and Audrey. Thank you guys thank you for your time. Thank you. Thank you so much. Alright, second land use application drum roll wedding at Mount Pollack. Let's see the exact same conversation. They were listening. Do you know if this person was spending on attending Aaron by any chance or they were Chad at the top Chad Howard Chad. He's already heard all our conditions. I know I hope it makes this one easier see it took a little longer on the front end a little shorter on the back end right. Hi everybody. Yeah, thanks for being here. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you very much for having me. Yeah, it Mount Pollack is a wonderful little spot and I, I from the last half hour of everyone's aware that it's a everyone here at least is aware that it's a wonderful little spot. Yeah, absolutely. So before we even jump into it, I'm, I'm looking at your application. I don't see any red flags, our usual caveats are that there's we can't, we can't restrict public access so you have to be ready for that there's very little parking we recommend a shuttle, some sort of shuttle setup. Often people use parking at South Amherst Common or some other place and then shuttle people up. There are bases, including poison Ivy, anything that you bring in bring out, try to stay on the pads and kind of minimize footprint is usually our big concerns. Is that okay on your end. Do you see any concerns accommodating that. No, absolutely not. Yeah, we, we as far as parking we're aware of the limitations we were not intending to use the parking lot at all. Perhaps the bride may pull up if she's able, or she might get dropped off at the bottom of the hill. We have arranged since my application we were planning on shuttling from a other location but we actually have arranged with a resident on blossom lane to allow us to park on their property. So, we feel that we have a pretty good parking situation, and guests will be able to walk up one of the paths from blossom lane side of the property. So, as far as cleaning up after ourselves we plan on bringing nothing a few benches for a few people to sit down, particularly a couple older people that will be attending, and maybe a small PA system battery operated with a Bluetooth microphone. And that's it no decorations no flowers no arch no equipment no just it's pretty simple. Commissioners any additional concerns or comments. Chad you hear everything that we discussed earlier. I was here. I was here. Yeah. All right, we're looking for a motion. I'll make that motion to allow chat chat you want to get married. I am. Yes, of course, September, September 18. All right, there you go man. I move to accept the wedding land use application for what I'm on Pollux in September. Second. Hey voice vote Michelle. Hi, Audrey. Oh sorry, Andre. Hi, Larry. Hi. Hi. And I'm an eye. I'm trying to find that that got that person on blossom lane too. Yeah, yeah. It was going to be a it was the one point of. Struggle to get people there really and as we have well discussed tonight. So, yeah, it worked out really well. Thank you. Congratulations. Thank you. Can I ask what happens from here? Do I wait for a permit or. You'll get a permit. It'll come directly to your email. It'll just be a document that you can print out. And it will list similarly the, the conditions we discussed. And just, you can. You know, generally, like if, for example, folks are stargazing at night, we recommend putting the permit in their car window. But in this case, since you're not relying on the parking lot, you don't have to really worry about that at all. Beautiful. Thank you. Thank you very much, everybody. Have a good night. All right. So I think we. Yeah, so we're well past time when we can move to our, to our only hearing. And I just want to take a second and make an announcement. If you weren't here at the top of the meeting, but you've joined us since then, we will be continuing the hearings for the projects proposed at 46 fearing street and three 95 West street. So again, the hearing scheduled for today at seven 40 for the project proposed at 46 fearing street will, will be continued. We will not discuss that project tonight. And further the hearing scheduled for seven 45. For a project proposed at three 95 West street. We will not be discussing that project tonight. I've never proposed project tonight either. So if you're here for those hearings, you are probably. Calling the hearings or if you're notified as a butter, you won't receive a formal notification again. Instead, you have to keep track of what time the hearings will be. It sounds like the, they'll be scheduled for seven 30 and some, something to meet adjacent soon after that on our next meeting night, which is July 27th. So the best thing you can do is keep an eye on our website. I think Aaron has to post the agenda by. Friday, the 15th. So keep an eye on our website. Follow it. Log into that meeting to see if we're able to discuss those projects. So again, 46 bearing street three 95 West street. We're not discussing those projects tonight. All right. I'm sorry for the delay with that. We should, we can move to our notice of intent hearing that was scheduled for seven 35 for Berkshire design group on behalf of Bruce Allen and Carol, Carol, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I mentioned an existing driveway parking area and a hundred foot buffer zone to boarding vegetated wetlands at 51. Spalding street. So who is here. So probably Bruce Allen. My guess. So I'm going to promote you to panelist. If you're here as an applicant or. as a panelist. I believe Doug is the representative, so I just put him in as a panelist. Okay, thanks. And if anybody else is. I'm, hi Doug. Hi, thank you all. Was there anyone else like that I should bring in to be a panelist? No, it is just myself from Berkshire Design Group. Okay, so if I could share, is that possible to do that? Yep. And so actually, you can give me a couple. I just want to line up how we usually do these hearings, just because it seems like we have a good amount of public interest. I just want to review this at the top. So what we'll ask you to do is introduce yourself and give like a really a three to five minute overview of the project. And then we will discuss the project, any additional information from staff or commissioners that were able to be there for a site visit and view any photos that Aaron might want to share. And then we'll take public comment. So that's questions and comments relevant to our jurisdiction on the project. We limit those usually to two to three, really two minutes just so that we can move through and hear what everyone has to say. And then we'll come back to the commission and ask any clarifying questions and make it very clear what we would need to move forward with the project or at that point condition and figure out a ruling on the project. So that's kind of the arc of how we're going to do this. That's for your benefit, but also everyone here in the public. So commissioners, did I miss anything about that? Okay. All right. So with that, yeah, Doug, if you could introduce yourself and give us an overview, that'd be great. And you should be able to share your screen. Okay, thank you. So hello, everyone. My name is Doug Sarle. I work with Berkshire Design Group or Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture Survey firm in North Hampton. And I am here tonight on behalf of Carol Albano and Bruce Allen that are the owners of an owner-occupied duplex at 51 Spalding Street in Amherst. That's approximately a half acre parcel. And the owners are in the process of applying to construct an additional set of parking spaces to accommodate the residences for the two family duplex, as well as two lodgers that are residing within the owner-occupied dwelling component of the overall duplex. So currently on the screen is the existing conditions of the site. There's an existing asphalt driveway that is on the south side of the parcel. And then this is the main building with the two family dwellings in it. To the northeast side of the property, there were delineated wetlands. These were delineated by Wendell Wetland Services in March of 2022. And also shown on this map is the 25-foot wetland no-build buffer as part of the town's wetland protection bylaw regulations. And then as well, yes. Sorry to interrupt you. Could you just find a way to like map zoom in a little bit? It's just really hard to see. Absolutely. Is that a little bit better? Tiny bit more. I just want folks to be able to see that 25-foot buffer and the BBW. Yeah, perfect. That's great. Thank you. Oh, you're very welcome. Yeah. Thanks for asking. So I'm going to move my mouse over the area that was delineated wetlands. And then there's a series of existing vegetation, a mix of native and Japanese knotweed, a variety, certainly invasive. And inside of that, there is an existing maintained lawn area that's been in existence for many years on the site. And then on the southern edge of this section of vegetation, there's a series of herbaceous perennials and planted, maintained kind of garden beds that are part of the residence landscape that are a mix of native, non-native vegetation in this area. So what they are proposing, I'm going to skip to the next slide here, the next sheet that was part of the submission, there was an initial submission and this was the third plan that was sent to Erin to distribute to the commission. The reason for the kind of updated plans, the revised plans, as we initially, Berkshire Design Group started working with Carol and Bruce to assist them with this permitting process. We were aware that they wanted to apply for four additional parking spaces for the residence of the two-family duplex. It came to our attention that they also had lease agreements for two rumors, two lodgers within the owner-occupied residence. And it came also to the homeowners awareness that they needed to provide parking spaces for those residents as well. So the plan increased from having four parking spaces off the eastern end of the existing driveway to a request for two parking spaces that would be gravel parking spaces within the front setback. So suffice to say that all of this is in process for special permit amendment with the zoning board of appeals. And so that group is going to be reviewing this in terms of how that relates to the zoning regulations and requirements for this parcel. Here tonight, we wanted to discuss that a small portion of this four-space gravel lot is within the 25-foot no-build wetland buffer. And so what we are here tonight is to say that that is part of the proposal and to say that that area is approximately 206 feet of space that would change from essentially lawn to gravel parking area and to offset that. We're proposing to plant six native shrubs, red-osier dogwoods along the eastern edge of the terminus of this proposed expanded driveway. And along with the learning of the two additional parking spaces, it came to the owner's attention that they needed to add in additional plantings to try to minimize any headlights from these cars that would be potentially intrusive to residents to the north. And so there are seven swamp azaleas that are proposed in this area as well. So this would be essentially an enhancement. It is within the 25-foot wetland buffer, but it is an enhancement compared to the lawn that is currently in existence there. So those are the expanded plantings that are in that area. So in terms of how that relates to the performance standards, we find that we're not doing any work within the existing wetlands onsite. And there's not really a new point source discharge to this. Any runoff from this gravel, any surface runoff that would come off of this gravel paved area is intended to be directed within the lot. And it would go across the existing vegetation onsite and also would be further buffered by the roots. Once these red-osier dogwoods are established, that would certainly help to offset and capture filter any runoff that would come through in that area. And then the area of additional site, it's a pretty small project, so it does not require state stormwater standards. It doesn't need to apply for a stormwater report or stormwater permit. So essentially that's the project. Okay, thanks, Doug. And I appreciate how well delineated both the resource and the buffers are these plans as well as the specific call-out to like exactly how many spare footage we're talking about within the 25 foot buffer. Like I really appreciate the details being on the plans. And I also just want to make a note at this point for the commission that because this permit was filed before we accepted the bylaw revisions, like really that 206 square foot listed within the 25 feet buffer, 25 foot buffer BBW is the only thing at issue here. So like the old bylaws apply here. Just so you guys are aware of that. Erin, did you have any photos or like any further info? Yes, I do. Should I I can stop sharing or that maybe is not an issue? So this is if you're standing in the existing driveway looking forward the wetland. And this is in the wetland itself looking down or in the buffer looking down toward the wetland. You can see there's quite a bit of Japanese knotweed in that vegetated buffer. And then this is standing sort of behind the residents looking in the back. Again, a photo of the Japanese knotweed. So I did work with Doug on a couple of things. The first revision was adding in the plantings. And that was as well as being mitigation for the impact of the driveway. It was also in my mind a similar barrier that the commission has required along buffers to prevent encroachment of lawn or encroachment of driveway toward the wetland. So I think it's sort of twofold there as mitigation and also as a visual barrier. So that was added in and obviously they've had to make other adjustments in terms of the plan and to accommodate the uses of the site. But I did put together recommended conditions and I'll just share those right now and run through them really quickly. And again, I know this is to just address some of the concerns that have come up in terms of site specific issues here. So sort of our standard boilerplate for residential projects under Wetlands Protection Act in our local bylaw. The Conservation Commission would only be approving work on the subject lot of this application. So the property boundaries should be clearly marked to prevent any inadvertent, unpermitted encroachment or impacts to the neighboring lot. Erosion and sediment controls around the proposed large parking area. I suggest the staked straw bales to really prevent any movement of material or encroachment during the construction of the larger parking area and then stake straw waddles around the smaller parking area which is further away from the wetland. An erosion control inspection prior to the start of work. A pre-construction meeting with the contractor prior to the start of work. Parking and drainage runoff from the parking areas must be directed within the property itself and not graded to send runoff onto neighboring properties or to impact wetlands on neighboring properties. And that if any runoff or erosion is shown moving towards wetlands on erosion on neighboring properties particularly just that little there's like a little area where the wetland cuts up on the neighboring property that is pretty much my area of concern that I'm worried about material moving toward. So just to make sure that in the final grade that that's graded properly so that it's staying on site. I would just I added this condition that the conservation commission encourages hand cutting and appropriate removal of invasive species and bagging it and disposing it at a landfill but that chemical treatment of the knotweed would require us to know about it and also a WM4 permit from DEP because it is in the wetland when fully stable an erosion control or an inspection prior to removal of controls and then again only native plantings in the buffer zone and that 50% of the plantings must survive over a three-year period which is pretty standard in our boiler plate. That is super thorough thank you Erin and hang on pleasure two seconds Doug was any of that a surprise or is that all okay? No none of that is a surprise whatsoever I will add that the applicants have expressed interest in wanting to remove the Japanese knotweed in this area and so this is very helpful to kind of clarify that if they're just removing it by hand that that's okay if they're wanting to do something a little more intensive that they need to submit a permit for that so I think that's very helpful to clarify how they can go about doing that. Great so Fletcher do you have like a quick clarifying question for now or were you getting into discussion of this because we do stop the public comment? Okay I can wait. Okay so members of the public if you have any questions or comments relative to the jurisdiction of this mission about this application so that is really the location of the additional parking relative to the BBW delineation please raise your hand and I would ask that we limit your comments or questions to two minutes and that you identify yourself and your address at the beginning of your comment or question we do appreciate that so Amy Amy I just promoted you the panelist. Yes hi I'm Amy Gates I'm at 54 Spalding Street and my question is not knowing much about dimensions would you in your experience say that the dimensions of the proposed parking lot are appropriate for four cars and no more? So that's not jurisdictional to us so I don't know exactly who that would be probably planning I don't know yeah is it going before planning or zoning? Yeah it would be going to the zoning board of appeals okay so they could definitely answer that. Zoning board of appeals Amy right Rob Kroener I'm Rob Kroener 44 Spalding Street I have two questions about the last proposed condition what is what does it mean that the there's an expectation is it not mandatory I feel like that that should be tightened up and second there's two areas of planning proposed there's one right along the eastern edge of the parking lot and then there's one that's farther up for to shield headlights if the condition is 50% does that mean that the trees at the end of the drive we can die and the and the road entrance can live or is that to be 50% of each section I would I would suggest that the condition require 50% at least of each section. So usually it would apply to all of the plantings as part of the permit and the reason that it is said as an expectation is because it's not part of our bylaws that apply to this permit we have recently accepted revisions move through revisions to our bylaw where it is a bylaw so in that case we can immediately require it in this case Doug would you be okay moving forward with 50% survival of each species planted at the site okay great great so we can move forward with that thanks for your question or comments the first the first question that the gentleman had could he clarify that a little bit because I wasn't I didn't really catch what he was saying about not being mandatory it just says that the the condition is there is an expectation that sudden such that seems vague to me but it was answered by by the other by the chair just like the use of language and I was explaining that it you know we're in the middle of these by the bylaw transition and so harsh or even more specific language couldn't be used but I think we've moved past it it doesn't matter okay okay gotcha okay I just wanted to make sure I had that right okay okay thank you thanks Rob any more comments or questions oh all right Rebecca hi thank you my name is Rebecca Cornell formerly Rebecca DeCorsi and my family has a own property on at 60 Spalding Street since 1961 this project is before you because I have been complaining for 10 years to the town about this 10 years so a couple of questions I had number two in the conditions um the property boundary should be clearly marked could that be changed so shall be clearly marked doesn't um do you have any problem with that Doug shall be clearly marked um nope I mean I think it's not the exactly the jurisdiction of the conservation commission to determine uh property boundaries but it's not up to me to decide what you guys want to put into condition so I if you guys find it reasonable then I don't have a disagreement with you okay I mean the project boundary should be delineated for even just these plans so I think asking that their marked is not an overreach here Aaron do you have any trouble with this or any commissioners oh sorry Andre go ahead yeah I'm just saying that if we say shall be uh where we are ordering it that's what I'm asking yes well I don't yeah it's already okay um my other question is the survival of plantings um why can't it be 100 percent why is it only 50 or could it be 75 percent I mean I will say with all the problems we've had with these neighbors parking over the years they do take take good care of their lawn and I don't think it would be a problem for them to maintain that and then the plantings would have to be maybe could be replaced when they died yeah so it says the commission expects that 50 percent of the plantings will survive over a three-year period otherwise dead plantings will need to be replaced so are you saying you want any dead plantings replaced just to clarify I think for three years I think it's reasonable to have a at least a 75 percent or 100 success rate of the plantings yes so I think these property owners have the ability to do that yeah so as background context here our precedent and kind of industry standard is 50 percent over three years um Aaron do you have any further information on that or I mean I would say if if Doug was comfortable with saying 75 percent then I think that that's a reasonable a reasonable ask um just to up it I don't I don't think the applicants are going to be a disagreement with that okay 75 percent would be appreciated thank you um another question about snow removal is that within the conservation commission's jurisdiction for this project only in terms of like where the if the snow pile is the snow wherever the snow is removed to cannot be within the 25 foot buffer per um so my concern not in what's moved that's not our jurisdiction but where the snow is piled if it is putting the resource at risk is our right section all right we're on concern is the gravel driveway so this is um this project is being related to a special permit that was issued over 10 years ago and in that special permit it was going to be a previous paving and I know that prices have gone up but if this work had been done 10 years ago it wouldn't have cost as much as it would today and um I have doubts that that gravel is going to stay in place um I have concerns I mean it can't be plowed right you really can't plow gravel right now they snowblow their lawn but how these property owners are aging so how long is that really going to be realistic for them my suggestion was would be for them to explore options other than gravel and then I have one other question for um for for Mr. Sarrell you stated in your presentation that this is a duplex but I know that there are three apartments there so can you explain your your statement and clarify that for us as the butters sure I'd be happy to uh the home is developed with two dwelling so dwelling is there's three well hold on just let me uh let me finish because I hopefully this will clarify it but if not certainly we're happy to happy to discuss my understanding that there are there are two distinct dwellings right so that it is a duplex a dwelling being with with um within one of the dwellings there are uh lodging availability so they're able to rent distinct rooms but those rooms don't have kitchens the kitchens really the key thing that makes it a dwelling so you're able to you're able to rent uh with with they have leases for tenants or individual uh uh renters that are in the the lodging situation lodging or rumors are kind of the same name within the zoning bylaw so a little bit outside of the conservation commission but for the sake of the the point being that they um there are two dwellings then they that are you know housing units apartments that have kitchens and uh you know all that are independent uh domiciles uh but the owner occupied residents uh they are offering and they can do this anybody can do this by right is um providing uh lodging or uh available space for rumors they just can't have separate kitchens they need to provide that same shared space so they're choosing to do that and they are offering that to to two individuals at this time so there's a total of uh six residents is our understanding uh that are there two in each uh of the duplex units and then individual uh renters in those two rooming operations so because of that uh uh residency arrangement uh zoning request that there are six parking spaces for that so that's why the plan is saying that because all of this is within the 100 for buffer and then part of this is within the 25 foot uh wetland buffer that's what brings us here to the commission my final question when will this come before the zba um don't know yet you don't have a plan you don't have a timeline well we haven't submitted that application yet that's in process okay it's in process thank you absolutely thank you commissioners thank you okay um great any other members of the public who would like to ask a question or make a comment please raise your hand well karsten hello this is karsten ties 26 balding street i wanted to ask about the logic of the three-year time frame is the wetland only wetland for three years what do we do after three years if we see that the wetlands are impacted by the current standard um current status the permit is only valid for three years yeah so the work can only be done while the permit is valid and the permit is only valid for three years um so do you want to review kind of what happens at the end of the permit erin for the benefit right so so generally once the work is done um and the site is fully stabilized the applicant can file for a request for certificate of compliance and so the commission can require as part of the certificate of compliance ongoing conditions so let's say they finish the work within six months and applied for a certificate of compliance we could have as a condition that were monitored that plantings have to be monitored until the um expiration of the permit for the survival um there are situations where it's appropriate to have ongoing conditions like for example if it's a commercial site and there's required maintenance and perpetuity of a storm water management system or something like that that requires specific um management activities like regular cleaning and maintenance like that generally those would be situations where there can be conditions that go in perpetuity but in a residential project like this this is fairly standard and so when a property applies for certificate of compliance there is another site visit and so there are situations where say the project was done in six months and erin they applied for certificate of compliance and erin went out reviewed the property and it wasn't clear you know how those you know those native plantings are doing we can we can um my god condition that that be monitored and reported back at the at the end of the three-year period or we can not whole not issue the certificate of compliance until the end of the three-year period um so there are a couple options there and it's something that we monitor so we always have this permit we always have these plans we are going to always know exactly where these plantings happened and what the concerns were relative to the wetland um so it's it's that's the thing we let slide um pretty detailed about that thank you the other question I have is I noticed that parking lots one through four are a little bit wider than five and six I wonder would it be possible to make those parking lots smaller so that there would be no crossing of the line so I Doug if you're comfortable answering that question you can go ahead but that is out of the jurisdiction of the conservation commission unfortunately that would be a great question at if a permit is filed with the zoning board that would be a great question at the zba hearing um Doug I'll let you decide on that I don't quite understand because you're permitting that we are going into that zone and if it's not necessary then we shouldn't go into that zone right yeah but it's not our jurisdiction to determine how wide a parking spot has to be like I really literally don't know so it's it's not our job here is to say is this legitimate you know have there is this an okay use of this 206 square feet that's jurisdictional for us um is the project doing everything can to actually improve conditions on the site which they are they've gotten above and beyond to put in additional um plantings and it sounds like really working with us to make sure that they're going to survive so they'll be not only a buffer but also a native buffer on the site um so that's our jurisdiction is to protect their resource um thank you we can't tell you how how wide unfortunately as much it can sometimes be frustrating I echo that a lot of the time we find ourselves asking like why does this have to be so big but that's not our jurisdiction um so Doug I'll like if you have any comments on that if you're willing to comment on that go ahead but otherwise sure I'm happy to come here I you know I realize it's it's it's outside of the conservation commission's jurisdiction but the reason that the parking lot is the uh current size um uh I guess for a couple reasons one it's my understanding you know minimum size parking space is to be um uh nine feet wide by 18 feet in in depth and so in this area uh giving a little bit of extra space around cars to make sure that they can come in and out uh where there's not going to be striping uh in a gravel lot situation uh helps to give people a little bit more room to move their vehicles uh in and out of that space uh the second part was that this uh configuration of the lot was approved by the zoning board of appeals back in 2007 so when we set forth to um submit this notice of intent we were following that previously approved plan um it's fair to say this uh is coming back to the zoning board of appeals and so um it will be uh requested to um continue to to build what they had previously approved um but that's why that this is currently uh the size that it is thank you for the context sure of course um and again sorry I'm sorry I don't know this Erin and Doug do you happen to know if the butters are notified as part of a permit filing for zba yeah absolutely yeah state public meeting law okay okay great so um karsten I don't I don't know if you're in a butter I don't remember your exact number but certainly a butters which would be your neighbors or you would be notified when the permit is filed um with the zoning board of appeals all right all right I think last call on any um questions or comments from um members of the public in attendance about the hearing for additional parking at 51 Spalding street just raise your hand okay I'm not seeing anyone um so oh okay thanks for pulling up the conditions Erin I actually would you mind not sharing just for one second because people are like raising their hands I can't see okay so Fletcher thanks for your patience did you have a question or clarifying comment or anything well the first one was that lodger um the rent rooming thing anyway that got clarified um so Erin going back when you said about the motion about bagging everything for the not sorry going to not weave invasive plants here you're up against a serious challenge here Doug and wherever else actually really does the contracting for this were you specifically talking about just cutting the the plant and bagging it or were you specifically talking about digging out trying to dig out the root system so just cutting yeah yeah okay so I yeah there there's ways to do it Doug but you're there's going to be you're going to have a very difficult time and that's going to um and when when we go to when you're planting these native plantings to make sure survival happens the knotweed's going to come at you so I was thinking you got something you got to think about pretty hard about how that's how you're going to tackle that I'm just I know you're you're going to have to come back with us with WM for whatever but um I was just clarifying Erin you weren't specifically talking about cutting and taking the soil out and bagging it you were just talking about the plant okay that's all I needed for um right can I comment to that yeah oh great so uh the I guess uh officially um uh we aren't asking to do that in this um application but um it is uh it seems to make a lot of common sense obviously that would be a condition to outline the kind of parameters the difference between a manual removal like cutting versus needing a permit if there was herbicide treatment or something more more aggressive or particularly chemical application because that requires having a like applicator license so um so it's good for the homeowner to to know that they had a sort of side note they had um Carol uh Albano had had distinctly expressed uh interest in that she would love to have more uh native plantings just to support the wetland and the buffer and uh it you know she she likes that aesthetic and likes all of that the ecosystem services that that brings and so she was uh she's excited about it um so I think knowing for her to know that she doesn't need to submit a permit if she simply cuts it and removes it uh I think I think she'll be enthusiastic to try to um try to remove that further where that's located on the property is further behind where the um shrubs are proposed so the first photo that Aaron showed where there was kind of an extent of lawn and then there was a perimeter of various plantings the gravel parking area extends further into that lawn and then at the far eastern end of that is where those uh six uh redders or dogwoods are proposed but that's all still like basically a taking of lawn not extending into that uh wetland vegetated buffer so hopefully I guess I say that just hopefully that the um that that area doesn't have a large seed bank of Japanese knotweed and that those plants uh you know when that soil is disturbed doesn't uh open that sort of Pandora's box up but I agree that the homeowners are going to have a real challenge uh combating that plant that plant is certainly aggressive for a reason so yeah so just to kind of clarify for the record that that condition is kind of um precautionary and educational so no actual hand cutting in the buffer is like part of this permit discussion it's more than Aaron was anticipating that a film owner was interested in that he wanted to provide that information um and just to repeat again that where the proposed native plantings are are again to use Doug words that taking of lawn so we do not have to count on the knotweed not being there in order for these new plantings to come in and do their job as natives protecting the wetland workforce um any other questions or comments commissioners okay um so I think we're looking for a motion and I just want to say I appreciate Aaron and Doug the kind of back and forth and work that has gone on behind the scenes to bring this application up um to this status and again I appreciate the the clarity in the plan said Doug all right looking for our motion commissioners I moved to close the public hearing and issue in order of conditions for 51 swalding street DEP number 089-0700 with the following conditions that are listed um listed there the conditions or sorry I think just say previously oh I can I can just highlight that the changes were I added in the snow storage um can't be in the 25 foot buffer the 75 point 75 survival rate and um it was shall delineate border or the property boundary yeah I wouldn't I wouldn't yeah I was I was a little bit on the fence on that one myself in terms of um whether we should say shall there I don't think so sorry jurisdiction yeah okay all right so I moved to close the public hearing and issue in order of conditions for 51 spalding street DEP number 089-0700 with the following conditions that we've mentioned before and changes in uh the fact that snow cannot be stored in the uh 25 foot buffer zone and that the native plantings uh the expectation of survival should be 75 percent instead of 50 second all right that's a second from fletcher voice fletcher hi andre hi larry hi michelle hey i'm an I all right Doug thank you yes thank you I'll appreciate it good luck thank you very much right so that is the end of our public hearings for the evening um if you're here in attendance at the conservation commission meeting um waiting to hear updates on the projects proposed for 46 bearing street or for 395 west street those projects will both be continued until our next hearing which is on scheduled for wednesday july 27th so watch our website for an agenda um where you'll see the scheduled time for those hearings um all right so Aaron do we have to have a motion to continue both of those yes why am I asking that okay yeah so commissioners we're looking for a motion to continue public hearing um for 46 bearing street to july 27th 2022 at 7 45 p.m so moved so good that was michelle with the motion and larry with the second voice vote larry hi andre hi michelle hey fletcher hi and I'm an I and then we're looking for a motion um to continue the polling hearing for 395 west street to july 27th 2022 at 7 40 p.m pending um revisions oh that was a new review they were just submitted yeah a new review of revisions review of revisions thank you I thought so so moved I think larry got that one second thanks michelle michelle with the second voice vote larry hi andre hi michelle hi fletcher hi all right that's a little too bad are there business correspondence what I guess I should look at the problem oh yeah right so we need a motion um to schedule an executive session uh about the 52 theory street dp so rad and whoever makes the motion should specifically read the language Aaron has posted screen I moved to schedule an executive session pursuant to glc 30a section 21a 3 to discuss strategy with respect to litigation at 52 bearing street regarding recently issued dp so rad to be on 7 27 22 agenda second we have a motion from michelle second from larry voice vote larry hi andre hi michelle hi fletcher hi and I'm also an eye all right Aaron I looked through monitoring reports I didn't see anything surprising we're in a drought so it's just going to be the next time we get a deluge that we have to worry right um and I guess I should mention that the state actually just moved up to a level two drought um so and it's like moving quickly west into the Berkshire so almost the whole state is in um a drought level two of four uh yeah serious um so yeah so with respect to monitoring reports I don't think we're going to see a whole lot of concerns until our next big rainstorm um do you want to give us an update on these specific correspondence did um I mean I I usually throw a bunch of stuff in the correspondence folder and I know there's a ton of stuff in there right now um but I wanted to just specifically point out two correspondence um so the hickory ridge solar project um they just basically submitted in their um more or less just for your information that they um plan to implement the natural heritage endangered species program conservation management plan that was approved as part of the hickory ridge order of conditions and that does include um uh herbicide treatments to address invasive species on hickory ridge um in conversations we've had many many meetings with uh amp regarding the um proposed herbicide treatment to address the invasives and that's part of the habitat management plan that was approved by natural heritage because the site is located in priority and estimated habitat and um I basically let them know that they should be providing some additional detail to us before that treatment takes place um sort of similarly to the level of detail that was provided to us from Eversource for the treatments that were done on the right of way so for example um precautionary steps that they're going to take to protect wetlands during the treatments um who their licensed applicator is and their contact information the chemical that they intended to apply on the site and preferably the the um components that will be in the blend that they use including the surfactants so basically asked for sort of the same level of detail that was provided as well as where foliar spray is proposed versus cut and dab spray so they're they're aware that that level of detail needs to be submitted to us and they intend to provide that to us once they've identified an applicator so I just wanted to introduce that to you guys remind you guys that that is going to be coming along that that work is going to be done in the field and I'll keep you informed um once those correspondence are submitted to me as far as those details um we also got I also got an email from paul bachelman and he was detailing some changes to the general bylaws with regard to the wetland bylaw and this is no substantive change as far as what the bylaw actually protects or covers um it's more so um reorganizing and making the bylaw more efficient um so like um certain clauses aren't repeated again and again um throughout different sections um there's like a severability clause which is referenced in like every individual section of the bylaw and they're just going to do an an entire severability section and then there's a couple sections where things are sort of misplaced in weird sections and I did go through those changes one by one and saw what he was talking about and I didn't have any concerns with that I responded to him and let him know that I thought that the change has made sense um based on the recommendation of the bylaw review committee so I just wanted to share that with you I don't believe that there's any approval that's required from you guys for that um I just mostly wanted to share it with you so if you saw that the bylaw had been changed that you know it was something that um was on your radar screen and that you didn't get sort of skipped over in the process that's great thanks for handling all of that Erin um any other comments or questions questioners about that okay so sorry well no just like general business are we are there um any movement to replace LaRoy yeah thanks for bringing that up um if anybody knows of folks who'd be interested in serving on the conservation commission please encourage them to submit an application online um that's about all I can say about that we are we're on the hunt so yeah well Dave they probably knows more but we he's not here so yeah I mean I know that we're there have been certain folks who we've been reaching out to to try to get them involved um folks who've expressed interest in serving on boards and committees who have uh conservation or ecology um within their area of expertise uh but certainly if there's other folks in the community who have that area of expertise and are and or interested in learning about it and um applying the wetland laws um it's a it's very um fulfilling thing to do and you learn a lot and uh it's a great way to serve your community so please apply and I'll say like you know our best commissioners come from all kinds of different backgrounds because sometimes it's not for a field and sometimes it's just asking good questions so I had a commissioner who was a jeweler right and he was phenomenal so you know you don't have to have it as your career or you know your job it can be a hobby or a side interest thanks for the reminder of that flutter any other general business questions or items I think the 27th is probably going to be pretty stacked so they all are aren't they just a reminder land use policy if you haven't looked at it already um that if you have comments that you'd like to submit and again don't feel that you need to on this level but if you have time and you want to at this stage your comments are welcomed and I can try to get them integrated onto a single document for us to view um on the 27th and if it turns out that our meeting on the 27th is just overwhelmed with business um you know we can take that into consideration and continue working on it and I certainly will continue to work on it behind the scenes oh and there was one thing I wanted to tell you guys that I almost forgot which is the culvert was replaced um at the kestrel land trust and it is so awesome and the timing of it was it couldn't have been better um the stop logs being removed the dewatering of the stream the replacement of the culvert the final stabilization it's gone from being like this undersized dammed up um area to being like a free flowing beautiful stream and I recommend that you guys go down there and take a look at it um it's gonna last probably through our lifetime so I'm really really happy okay um I drove by while they were doing the work and I saw Dave and his face looked like remarkably serene and between that and my in-depth knowledge of hydrologic conditions I was like this is gonna be awesome but I haven't I haven't gone to see it yet so congratulations yeah it was the the guy who did the work did an outstanding job we ended up having to dewater um it was wetter than we had expected but just the the the site conditions the way that the the way that that stream flows is really wonderful because it was flowing constantly as soon as it goes under the driveway there's another stream that feeds into it so there was always stream flow it was that one little section and it was dewatered literally for two days and then it was flowing again so it was actually better than what we had expected because we were thinking it would be three to five days dewatered but it only ended up being like two days dewatered and it was flowing again so we were really happy I mean it couldn't have been better than weather conditions were perfect um so good job everybody it was a super team effort to get that accomplished and everyone really came through so very happy about it and have a look when you go by awesome nice celebrate your celebrations right that's right um okay I think we're just looking for a motion to adjourn then I'll do it I'll make a motion to adjourn at 844 second I have voice vote flutcher hi michelle hi andre hi larry hi and also I thanks everyone this job