So are we, I don't think we're in practice session. I think we're live. Oh, no, we're live now. And it looks like we're recording as well, Aaron. I just click record. Okay, and we are public, I believe. Yeah, I think we're. No, it is recording. Yeah. Okay, so good evening everyone today is January 13 2021. This is our first meeting of the Amherst Conservation Commission for the year. So according to the agenda comments from me first I don't have any so that is quick. Dave is next he is not here so that's even quicker. And so just like that up to you Aaron. All right. The town just gave me a laptop, which is so wonderful. And it's, I think, going to make this much easier for me. I can't see the do we have any attendees other than concom members right now. Yeah, we do. Okay, and they, and several have their hands up. Okay. There's 13 people involved right now. All right. So I'm going to start by sharing Chris to second and see who's raising their hand. People are putting hands up and down. It's kind of like all over the board. So. I'm recognizing the team. They're raising their hands are from the district one group, which is exciting to see. Oh, is that the CPA stuff. And it looks like a little Roy is an attendee right now. And Aaron, I don't think I am a co-host so I can't let people in or out. All right, little Roy's in Aaron is rocking this new laptop. Put it through its bases. So you should be a co-host now, Brett. I am. So, you know, the, the open space items aren't on until seven 10. So I don't know if you want to try to get some other business out of the way beforehand, or if you, how you want to tackle this. Yeah, I'm just going to, there's a couple of people their hands up. So I'm going to see if they have something to say quickly. No, they're going to keep going down. So. But yeah, so Mary has her hand up. So Mary, do you have something. to say at this point? No, you just, you just asked if there were other people. So I'm a property owner. I'm here for the camp and I have part. Okay, got you. Okay. Yep. We will be getting to those later. So thank you. Yeah, I do have one question though. Can I, I'll like it. You, you must all be committee members that I can see. I don't see anyone like a committee member. Is that the way it will always be? Or is there, I might not put the right button. Nope. That is how it works here. So you are good. Oh, okay. Okay. Thank you. Yep. She will see other people when they're added to our thing, but not where the main ones. Yeah. So other panelists will be. Okay. So Aaron, did you want to start. Yeah, on those items. Sure. I'll just start on one of the requests for certificates of compliance. Cause that's something that we could tackle really quickly. Yeah. Okay. This is an ever source request for certificate of compliance for the work at the. Potix substation. And it's kind of a little tricky because when they, when they prepared the request for certificate of compliance, the site was fully stable. But you guys might recall that we issued an. Determination of applicability for the repair of a. In addition to that, we also issued an application up to the Sunderland town line under one 16 and that works been underway. And so when I went out to do a site visit. The front Northwest corner of. The Potix site had had disturbance from where the duck line had been installed. So. I don't know how you guys want to handle it. But I think the city of Potix is going to be beginning there. They did seed and mulch the disturbed area from the determination. And that area won't be regitated until probably mid to late spring. So they're trying to administratively take care of this before their new order of conditions starts up, which I think is. Good to do. So I'm sorry, Erin. I don't have a problem with that. I don't have a problem with that background. And I will yield to whatever decision you make. I don't, I don't have a problem with the certificate being issued because I've got. I go by that site pretty much. Multiple, multiple times weekly. I'm sorry, Erin. So did you say that the place that's disturbed now is still under an order. A different order of conditions. And then there's this order of conditions, which is DP eight, nine dash six, six, seven. And there's also a determination of applicability that's also active. And that was for the replacement of the duck line, which actually they just finished, but it's, they seeded it and mulched it. So they're just kind of wrapping up operations there now, but that's what's caused that additional. Little disturbance on the front corner. And then the, the project that we just issued. So we're going to have a, we're going to have, we're going to have, we're going to have, we're going to have, it's a new order of conditions that's going to be starting up. Early this year for additional work at POTIC. So we will have another active order of conditions on the site where work is beginning very soon. But that does not necessarily cover this area that's disturbed now. Right. It's the area behind the substation that we have. But so is this area. So I get what you're saying. It's out in the front and kind of goes up one 16. Yeah. But it's, but it has been seeded. So it is, it is stable at this point. It's, it's stable. It's just not vegetated. Okay. But it's not going to be vegetated for a while. Right. So. I think, I mean, I think it'd be all right to give them. The only reason I say that is because it's such a, it's such a busy place. They're going to be there all the time with that new substation. So that's where I kind of, that's my take on it. I agree. As long as we have some, yeah, mechanism to keep them in check. I'm good. Okay. So. Well, if others are comfortable with it, I have no problem with issuing the certificate. I just need a motion. I'll make a motion to. The certificate of compliance for the POTIC substation. Second. Okay. Looking for a voice vote. So Anna. Hi. Jen. Hi. Fletcher. Hi. Laura. Hi. LaRoy. Hi. And Larry stepped away. So I'm not quite sure. So no vote from Larry. I'm back. I'm back. I'm here. So, but Larry, did you hear everything? Yes. Okay. Yes. Okay. And yes, for me as well. Great. So it's seven 10 now. And so for the open space related item. The. Folks from the historic walk in Cushman area. That would be the first item for that. Okay. So for people from the public who are here, you'll notice that we do have a fairly long and full agenda. And so when your item comes up and this is an open meeting, you're welcome to stay as long as you want to participate in everything. Please do. We strongly encourage you to do so. But specifically when your piece is up and if there is one person who is presenting it, we'll ask for that person first to raise their hand. We'll make them a panelist and they can present. And then we will go through discussions. And then we definitely will open up each and every one to a public. Discussion. So we definitely want to get everybody's comments. So is there anyone here who is presenting on the public discussion? Okay. So Meg, I see you. And so Meg, you will be a panelist in just a sec. And Jessica as well. And Jessica as well. Yep. And she is on her way in. And so Jessica or Meg. Would one of you like to take a look at the panelist?  And so we have heard parts of this. Great. I believe. So this is really a chance to brief you. We're not asking for anything. But because it's on this historic. Interpretive trail idea is on conservation. We want to be sure you know about it. And hopefully we like it. So. The goal is to research the many, many mills. And small factories that went along the Mill River. Really from where the current. No river park is. All the way to Christian common. Except for Christian common. It's entirely on conservation land. So that's of interest to everyone. At this meeting. I don't know if you've ever noticed when you're at. The Mill River Park. To the north side, there's this berm. It looks like a high hill, but it's actually the outside of it. Canal that went. From the river all the way along that edge. And then around the corner up to the. Um, I don't know if you've ever noticed when you're at the Mill River Park. To the north side, there's this berm. It looks like a high hill, but it's actually the outside of it. Canal that went. To the north side of it. And then it goes all the way along that edge and then around the corner up to the. Uh, Grissmill. That's now the. Home. So our goal is to research what was there. And to, uh, Build an interpretive trail. Our original proposal. To the CPA was a little grand. Um, and we have pictures that I should have prepared and. Maybe when Jessica speaking, I'll go find them. People who've looted or whatever you want to call it. Um, Found things there that are ancient, very old. Uh, coins and relics that they're taking away. Um, I think of it as looting, although they're thinking of it as kind of amateur historian. Research, I'm sure. Um, but our goal is to try to protect. The sites and to protect and to create a sense of, um, What happened in North Amherst, uh, over the. Years between when this town was first colonized through almost the beginning of the 20th century. We hope to have a signage. Uh, we will have signage. I gotta be more positive here. We will do this and, uh, with QR codes, which allow you to link into all sorts of additional information like websites. And one of our hopes is that we'd have students involved who might, Uh, Be the voices when you go on the QR code that you hear high school students or middle school students describing the families that lives there and what they produced and what their lives were like. Um, So we think North Amherst is one of the great treasures of our town and we are eager to, uh, Find more ways of celebrating. Maybe I'll hand it over to Jessica. Yep. And just for a second. So we're getting some feedback on the line. And so if you're not speaking at, at a given point, if you could mute your microphone. It might be my husband listening to the news. I will. Okay. But I will mute. So I'm inviting Jessica. Sorry. Thank you for that. The feedback. I mean, the good feedback. Thank you for telling me that about feedback. Um, I'll hand it over to Jessica to make a few additional comments and I'll mute. Right. Um, one of the things that we love about North Amherst is it's rich history. Um, and we want to help people who are currently zooming through North Amherst, um, to have a reason to stop and, um, provide them with a rich, um, experience while they're in the town.  Um, get to see if we will. Um, but we could all, but this will help, um, build up the local economy. There's a quite, within a half a mile of North Amherst, there are quite a few people living. Um, and many, many of them already walk in the conservation area. Um, and so, uh, we would also be drawing on those people who are current fans, um, to form a committee that will help to, um, enact the, uh, the trail and then take care of it. Um, we don't expect the conservation commission to have to take over the responsibility for the maintenance of the trail. We, we expect that it will be a community, um, effort. And so that's part of our planning. Can I ask a quick question? I was able to find this picture of some of the stuff that's been found on the site and dug up and taken home. Old coins. Uh, it's really, it's really, uh, cool in a way, but also kind of horrible. Uh, if you're into archeology and preserving, um, history, we're going to reproach this, approach this woman who gathered these things and hopefully create an exhibit at the Jones or somewhere of, of, uh, what she's found. But I remember it's, you know, we've changed our attitude around digging and finding old things. I remember as a kid, we used to go to the Connecticut river and dig around and find arrowheads and, you know, it was a really great thing and we'd bring them into school, but it's actually not a great thing. Uh, cause we're just nothing precious history. You know, we didn't know. So we were 12 and 10, but, um, we, we think our community in North Amherst is, um, cares about history and that they'll want to protect this resource. You had a question. Yeah. All right. Um, where you sit, where is this trail you're talking about? I haven't seen any of the plans. Sorry. So I'm, maybe I'm late. It will be on the. Oh, what is it? The name of the, the, it goes from, um, from the mill river park and the, uh, Julius Lester trail. And then it goes, um, up by Puffers and it goes out to Cushman on, um, I think it's still, it's still the Julius Lester trail. Oh, so it's existing trails. Yes. Totally existing conservation trails. Got it. Yeah. One little spur when I've spoken with David about it, he was, in order to get to the dam. That created the canal. You have to go a little just before, if you're on mill river. Park. Recreation area and you're approaching the bridge to go into the woods to the left. You walk down there a very short distance. There's actually, people have made a little trail. You can see the dam that was built to create the canal that was built up to the Christmas mill. Cool. Have you spoken to a Steve Puffer at all? Well, we've Steve Puffer is not a lot. We're working very closely with Barbara Puffer Garnier. Yeah. Yeah. He used to tell me about, I used to walk down to the blacksmith shop where Cushman market is now. Barbara's very, Barbara's very enthusiastic. We can send you a letter. He wrote the support of this. I think it's, it's, it's worth noting when this came to CPA, it was not. It was not concert. I wasn't the, I wasn't the reason that it didn't go through. I think, um, I, I, you know, I think my questions for, for Megan Jessica were, and, and their group were really around. What you just asked, right? Around like, is it existing trail or not? And, and yet the only, the only part I think if I'm not mistaken, is that part we're working on. Kind of a natural path has occurred that was not built by, by conservation folks by the dam. Um, and so just to kind of bring to folks' attention, you know, what, what I was told was there was no digging. There's no, you know, like this is not supposed to be a disruptive project. Um, and it's really more about. Ensuring that these sites don't further slip into decay. Um, and so from our end, just so people can see, um, I guess I, I think that it's a really great project. I think that it's really nice to see the community coming behind it in a, in a strong way as well. Um, my, my questions are around that one piece of kind of. Not intentional or well, not created intentionally path. Um, and then, um, but yeah, just, just to let folks know, like, this is hopefully coming back to, um, and I'm looking forward to seeing it again. Thank you. Thank you. Anna. The little mini path that Anna's talking about is goes from just before the bridge. As you approach the woods. Uh, it's about a hundred foot. It's not even that it's 10 or 50. It's like 10 or 20 feet. It's really very short.  It's like 10 or 20 feet. It's really very short. To see the dam. Yeah, so I too just want to express my support. I think that this is a great idea. Love seeing people use the conservation land. Love people seeing doing more historical stuff. My main question is just, and maybe this is something that's going to be happening afterwards. Is what's going to be added to the conservation trails? I think that's still in development, but that would be my concern or my concern about question with the story walk that's in there. Now, it will be about like that. It, you know, we can't we haven't designed anything yet, but it's not. It's, they're not going to be giant, you know, tables of information. That's why the QR codes are a key feature because we don't want to have intrusive signs. We want them to be explanatory, but and provide a link to more information, but we don't want to get them in anybody's way. Right. The part of the trail from Mill River to Puppers has fewer sites than the part above Puppers to Cushman. Most of the sites who are on the Summer Street side and they've just been totally destroyed, you know, they don't exist anymore. I think a question I have along the signage, sort of a conversation is, you know, what's the plan for maintaining the signs if they get destroyed if they get damaged. Who's responsible for that and just making sure that there's budget for that. I think we'd be responsible. Totally, you know, our district one neighborhood association would be responsible. The committee that will be more, you know, more directly in charge. We're creating, yeah. Jessica maybe say a little more about we're creating a community committee, sort of non governmental committee though. To feel to supervise it and walk on it and maintain it. It'll be all the dog walkers. It's not some amazing people who, you know, archaeologists coming out of the woodwork is pretty amazing. And so one thing that we would be looking for is before anything is finalized. And so I think today is just sort of informational and we really appreciate you approaching us this way. But before anything is finalized, allowing us to get a chance to see the actual number of signs where they're going to be what the signs are going to look like. That's not anything that's imminent. We have to. We have to identify the sites and, you know, just decide how to research and decide what the best display, you know, the best way to explain them. So it's down the road. Really, really. Yeah, Larry, you have a question and then I'd like to hear from Dave to see, you know, from the town perspective but Larry you had a question first. Oh, Larry, you're mute. My question is who has who has final control over the signage and what it says. Is that coming to our, our, our or the towns or is it up to them. We're happy to do whatever works for everybody. It's conservation land and so we have final say in my opinion. I mean granted, you know, we're not going to word Smith. Remember, blue meadow. That's where it's missing going on. After I said that, yeah. That's fine with us. What's going to what would happen. Pardon. No, I think I think this is a great conversation we're having and, you know, I too am supportive of the project as it as it moves forward. And it'll be up to CPA to decide eligibility and all of that. I think these are all good questions for for Meg and Jessica. I mean, I see this quite differently than the storybook project. There are similarities, but to be honest, I see that as a temporary installation. And I don't think that has the longevity that these would have. And so I think, as as Meg and Jessica and others think about a budget for this project.  We really need to on the on the front side of this think about what the signs are made of both the posts as well as the signs themselves. Oftentimes what happens in these projects is the applicant or the contractor. Or the town, whoever might be or the federal or state government, if it's at a park or a historic park, they'll order multiple copies of the sign in case of vandalism, but even the choice of of material is very important and what it is covered with or covered by or protected by is really important. You know, if the if a storybook post and I was just up there this weekend I just sent some photos to Aaron. If you haven't seen the storybook walk it's really it's really quite nicely done. Yeah, but if one of those gets damaged you're really talking about a, you know, there'll be a little work involved but you're probably talking about less than $50 to replace a post and and the attached signboard if you will. But you know if one of these these these I see as a permanent installation as part of the historic nature and the historic Bushman Brook and Mill River. So, so those are some of my thoughts but I am very supportive. I do think Meg and Jessica the more we really need we have some experience with volunteer trail development and sign development, and it's been a mixed bag. We've learned some lessons so I do think that the Commission, who is really the town and has care and control function over conservation land really needs to be involved all the way through. And, and there might be a liaison even you know certainly staff would be involved but there might be a liaison from the Commission, who is with you and us every step of the way. Join our committee. That'd be great. We'd love that. Yes, yes. I've already signed my husband up. Yeah, the committee. There are professionals. There, it is a profession out there of interpreters nature or history or historical interpreters and so if it's possibility of building into the budget to have some of them. You know we're all very well intention but it's hard to design a good sign that is robust enough yet simple enough and right. What's interesting the advice we're getting is, do you really have to pay somebody for that can't what if you do that, or you should really hire a professional who knows what they're doing on us on a number of points, like the archaeologist you really need an archaeologist anyway, it's, but I'm we're we want to do this properly with the right. Just what what you said, Brett, we wrote something for you that unfortunately we didn't send until last night and you might not have had a chance to see it. I know Aaron is going to send it to you and you can it'll fill you in. I'm aware it's uploaded on the one drive. So folks can look at it some memo. And then there's another document which was the original document that we've modified our the original project was a little grandiose because we we laid out our whole vision about community archaeology and how students being involved and really the CPA just wants to fund research to preserve the rocks. So the proposal that you the the memo that we wrote to you that we sent last night is paired dramatically pared down but we can still after we get this research done we can engage high school students in the community and just we said we've got a couple of these examples we've got the story walk of the storybook walk it along the, the middle river. We have, we now have in storage we do have the bluebird meadow signs they have arrived and we have them. We also have signs that Beth Wilson developed for the Fort River fearing Brooke project. And so, you know it might be beneficial for all of us to, you know and I can take some photographs of those. And in storage take them out of the boxes many of them are out of the boxes anyway and and share them with Megan just again the Commission to give you an idea. There's a wonderful, a pretty nice sign example I think up in Turner's Falls along the old historic canal. And those are fairly simple they're probably three by four I can't recall but they were part of a project I worked on many years ago up there at the Great Falls Discovery Center. So, that's a nearby example of some well done natural history interpretation signs and, and they're on. I think they're on some sort of aluminum or broad iron. Oh, they're nicely done. We're also going to take a field trip in the better weather to act in, because they have put in place a trail very much like the one that we want to establish. So, yeah, in their conservation land along with a show but Brooke with both first peoples and early settler remains. So, my apologies but I'm going to try and move us along so we have. And I mean this is really deep and extremely interesting but I think we could talk about it for a long time and so what's important, I want to open it up to the public I see your hand as well Larry. And then make sure that we have a path forward. And so first I just want to see if there's anybody from the public. So you can just use that little raise hand icon. If you have any comments. I don't see any so Larry did you have something. The main thing was that I really like this project, but my rate, my concern is that it be done well, because I think it's a significant for the town. But there was a hand, it went away but if you want to ask again and maybe give it a little bit longer. You know, Bruce a hand. Name was Patricia I think that. Yep. Okay, so I don't don't say anything at this point but yeah if you do have something please. So, path forward. So this was kind of informational tonight which is again extremely helpful thank you. And so you will be developing your proposal and so yeah it'd be great if you can be in touch with either David Aaron, and they can definitely sort of fill us in. If there is somebody from the concom who is, you know, passionate about this and would love to work on this, you know, that would be great. But yeah I mean we all have a lot of other things going on as well I understand one question I have is that we are possibly going to hire an archaeologist to do site surveys is there any permitting that we need to have. Take care of before he goes in and starts measuring and photographing and things like that. Are they going to be disturbing earth or will it be noninvasive noninvasive. This week we know there's a permit we need from the state which is because it's not invasive it sees but is there a permit from the town that we need. I think you could suggest that this could be handled through your, you know, the form the activity form that that anyone fills out if they'd like to use conservation areas for a wedding or research. I think the commission could handle it that way. It is not invasive, as long as it doesn't involve digging or removing stones or anything else I think it could be handled that way. The form very pro forma. So, right, any issues with that as long as the form is on the town website. Yep, we're getting much with Aaron as well. Yeah, if you shoot me an email I can send it to you. Okay, thank you. Thank you so much very much. So just one final call to the public because. Okay, I'm five. Okay, we're good. So my apologies. So thank you both and yeah we look forward to seeing this in the future. Thank you. Bye bye. Thank you everybody so much. Bye bye. So, I just wanted to jump in really quickly there was another person who had submitted who is supposed to be. I guess presenting or putting in a request tonight. I did see some graduate research that they were doing and wanted to use conservation land and talk about it with the board I don't see them in the attendee list so I'm not sure that they're. I don't think they're here tonight, but I did put the request the written request in the drop box so that you guys could familiarize yourself with it because I don't think that they're in attendance tonight. Can we just verify so if you are here for that, can you just use a little raise hand thing. And I had some questions about that one but if they're not here I guess we could talk about it after we get through our normal. Yeah, and I'll they, you know where I sent the information for the meeting tonight but maybe just all through or whatever so I'll follow up with them and maybe at the next meeting they could present. Sounds good. Okay, so I have 734 so I think that we are okay to move forward with our what's listed 730 on our agenda. And this is a notice of intent for 84 East Leverett road so if if you're a part of that if you want to raise your hand and I will formally open this. This hearing is being held is required by the provisions of chapter 131 section 40 the general laws of the Commonwealth and act relative to the protection of wetlands as most recently amended in the town of Amherst protection by law. And this is a notice of intent that is being presented by Meredith Orenstein for Joseph, I am for construction of single family home well and septic outside of resource area proposed driveways located in 200 foot riverfront area to Cushman broke the address 84 Leverett road map 3 C lot 12. Okay, so Meredith I see you you are now a panelist. And Deborah, see you. So we might just want to make sure that we're distinguishing between the folks who are presenting verse people from the public who have comment on this because just just to make that clear because I think that there's a number of a butters who might be present. Okay, yep, thank you so yeah so what we're looking for is only people so Meredith is do you know if there's anybody else here who is presenting, or are these. Are you presenting or a presenter, do you know. I think, I think that the last name. AI MUA on the attendee list might be. Um, that should be Joseph. Okay, so I see diverse hand up so I'm just going to let Deborah in sometimes people have different names, but we can just check real quick. So Deborah you should be able to speak now are you part are you presenting or are you just a butter.  So but please. Okay, and somebody else with their hand up. So Patricia I think is in the same boat. So, okay. So, Meredith, do you want to go ahead and present for us. Thank you. And I was wondering, can I share my screen eventually. Okay, because I have a plan to show and I also have some photos. I can show everybody. I'm just going to make a button on the bottom of the screen that says share screen. Oh yeah okay it's like regular zoom now okay. Can you hear me okay I think I lost. Okay, no we can hear you okay it looks like you're searching for the buttons and. Okay, sorry. So I'm going to share my, I'm going to share plan. So you can see what we're talking about here and see if this works. Now can you guys see if I jump around from plan to plan. Yes. Okay perfect. Okay, because we have revised the plans a few times. So this is the most updated plan we actually updated it today with this minor revision that I'll talk about in a few minutes but first of all. My name is Meredith Borenstein I filed this notice of intent on behalf of Joseph and why he's the applicant, the engineer and the contractor for this project. I'm serious. I'm a wetland scientist and I'm doing this for myself actually. So, so this project is for a single family home located at 84 East Leveret Road, you probably know this. Getting a lot of feedback. I think Joseph you need to mute. Okay Meredith so you should be muted at this point. Thank you. We should be good to go. Okay I'm going to try that again. So back to my plan. So you. Sorry. So this lot is located across the street from Cushman Brook over here. There is an existing egress here and I'll show you some photos in a few minutes that will be utilizing or they'll be utilizing to access the lot. So the driveway is located in the riverfront area. The house and the septic system will be located outside of all resource areas. So, so during construction to protect the resource areas, we will be installing a compost filter tube around the entire limit of work here. So this is a 30 foot, 30 foot gravel wash pad to collect any sediment as trucks are going in and out of here. Also, there is a, there is an existing catch basin. Here it is that recurrently receives any water from the driveway. So that will be protected with a silt sack and then filter tubes or hay bales around that. This is also, this will have double protection because there is grass, then there'll be a compost filter tube and then there's the driveway and then the catch basin so it will have double protection there. So, as they're putting in the driveway there'll be some minor excavation to get the foundation and the driveway in and any soil stockpiles that that come out of that will be stored up here outside of resource areas, and will ultimately be used, you know, around the house to kind of level out this area but it's mostly flat up there. So, we did a site walk today. And I thought that was really helpful. There is a small wetland located over here but we're going to be outside of the 100 foot buffer zone, which is this line here. Also noted there is an intermittent stream on this north side of the property, and we measured, and I believe we came up with, was it 160 feet about. It might have been more 160 to the property line and then it was an additional, I think 30 feet to the work area. Okay, thank you and then there was there's actually a hump here you can kind of see it in the contours there's a hump here so I'm very confident that this stream will we're well away from it and it will be protected by the natural topography out there. So, really minor tree clearing back here outside of any buffers or riverfront area. Really the reason we're here is because we're here tonight is because we're located in the 200 foot riverfront area and we are complying with the regulations. We're doing that by one. And we, we received DP comments and one of their comments was this needs to be 10% this driveway needs to be 10% of the riverfront area on the lot. So we decrease the width of the driveway from 13 feet to 10 feet. And that got us down to. Originally we were looking at 1700 square feet of impacts and now we're looking at 1483 feet square feet. So, another way we're complying with the regulations is that because we're working in the riverfront area we're going to do we need to do some mitigation. So we're going to propose some native shrubs over here, sort of between the neighbors over here at 66 East Leverett Road and then this is all grass right now. So I'm proposing some shrubs there I was thinking Shadbush, witch hazel and dogwood something to give it some color, I think in there would be nice. And so we're open to suggestions on the native plantings that the Commission would like to see in there. I wasn't going to propose any seed because it's already grassed. So, I wasn't sure if seed would take but we could, we could do wildlife seed mix in there too. So I think that covers the majority of what we're proposing out there and I don't know if you'd like to the commission has questions or I can show some photos. Should I do the photos, the photos would be great because my, I didn't get too many of them on site. Okay, I took a bunch so hang let me see. All right. Okay, can you guys see that photo. Yes. So this is the East Leverett Road over here this is the existing catch basin existing driveway. This goes up to 86 East Leverett, which is the neighbor to the north. Let me just see if I can I scroll through there we go. Okay, so these aren't in order but this is the proposed this is the, let me try to get a better picture to orient you guys. The existing houses I'm sure everybody knows this, this location as you drive by you can see these houses on the road there. Okay, so let's start here this is me standing in East Leverett Road looking up towards the existing driveway here so this is going to be the egress then the driveway will calm up the slope. So these trees, and the house would be located kind of at the top of the hill there. So now if I scroll through my make a little oops, this is the proposed planting area the native plantings will be in here. Here's a better picture that. So that would provide sort of a buffer between the neighbor, neighboring house and the driveway there again driveway location looking up this steak is sort of where the house will be up house location. Now I'm gonna have to scroll backwards sorry. Okay so house and then looking back towards where the leach field is proposed. And now this is where the perk test is a perk test to looking down is where leach field will be frozen the house over here looking down towards East Leverett Road leach field location leach field location and then back to the catch basin. I had some better photos in my notice of intent. If folks show a couple more photos and then I'll stop. There's ready to go. You guys see that. Okay, so again, driveway where it's going. Probably a lot of the same but I thought they were kind of a better angle. You know the driveway is going to come up through here, and then the house will be facing out. I'm sorry there's actually going to be a garage at the ground level. But it's just going to be, and then the house will be on top of that the garage. Sorry yeah these are some of the same photos just a different time of year. So let me stop sharing. I think that covers everything you guys have questions. Thank you very much, Meredith so have some pieces that you'd like to kick off with. Yeah, so I just to, you know, kind of sum up with the board that I've had some communication with several butters that are downslope of this site. And I did upload some concerns raised as far as water. And I did upload several documents to the drop box which contain a butter comments and questions and I tried to respond to all of them but I wanted to make sure that you guys knew that they were there so you could view them. So, just to kind of summarize really briefly that the decisions that I would recommend to try to mitigate some of the concern. And, and again, a lot of these are outside of our jurisdiction related to the house, but asking the applicant to focus downspouts from the house. To the north side of the house and preferably into some kind of like French drain system so that it can infiltrate up on top of the hill. Now I understand even at the toe of the slope groundwater is four feet deep so because of the location of the river you know there there is a relatively low groundwater table there even though the neighbors do experience water issues so just to kind of recap on that. So the downspouts being being dealt with dealing with any runoff from the house up on the hill as opposed to directing it down the slope. Also I would recommend that the driveway. Flood to the north side of the site and preferably into some kind of a grassed swale like a very, you know, low gradient grassed swale so that any runoff can be gathered in that swale and then run downhill toward the catch basin that's at the toe of the slope. And then one of the concerns that was raised was regarding. If there were any groundwater seeps in the hillside because the way that construction is going to work. And again, it's outside of our jurisdiction, but they're carving into the hill to put the garage in and the garage will be lower than. So the garage will go in and then it'll be a four foot lift into the basement and then the main floor of the house is on the second floor. So they're doing quite a bit of cut and fill and then back filling the back of the house. And so if they hit a groundwater seep in the course of constructing the driveway or the house that would have to come up with some kind of a plan to mitigate that and I've seen this happen in the past on hillsides, where they install like a French drain system and a French drain system could be filtered into that same swale, if that condition arises where water is coming out very, very rare and not super likely but if it happened, we could condition it so that they would have to deal with it and come back to us. Another comment that was received that I think was a really important one was that the initial plan said that we received had been completed by a surveyor and it was signed and stamped the plan that we've received this time around doesn't have a stamp or a signature on it and it does appear that the wetland flagging was possibly picked up via survey or maybe it was shared CAD data. But the riverfront area flags, if you look at the plan they appear to be in the center line of the river and we actually approved flagging at the top of bank so I wanted to make sure that that wasn't a graphics issue and that the flagging was actually picked up along the top of bank for Cushman Brook and that that was being accurately reflected in the distance offset to the 200 foot riverfront area and also just to make sure that the applicant knows that we will need for the final plan, the plan set will need to be stamped and signed by architect landscape architect surveyor, somebody who's signing off on the accuracy of all of the points that are being provided on the plan. Thank you Erin. And so just as a reminder we've been out there on this property before I don't know if people remember it and I don't remember how long ago that was Erin maybe a year or two when we did the initial delineation so if you weren't out here for here you were you may have been out there for that as well. Yeah, I'd also just want to reiterate what you started off with Erin and so just for the applicants and everybody. We as a concom as the you know wetlands commission we have certain jurisdiction, and we have no jurisdiction outside of that area. We can provide recommendations, but for those who are here from the public with. We're happy to talk about everything that's within our jurisdiction, but some of those other comments will need to be brought in front of assumed zoning Aaron, or who they talked to about that. A couple of the questions should go to Board of Health related to the leach field up on the hill and then there was also some questions about the house design, which those would be building inspector, or they could speak to you know the applicant directly to get the design plan. The other thing is that the question with water runoff is kind of a tricky one from a conservation commission perspective. We certainly can do what we can. But the building inspector also has an authority as far as reviewing plans and making sure that landowners are not displacing water from their property onto a neighbor's property so that's also written into the building code so that's something you know, discussing with the building inspector would be a really good thing to do. And I also advise them, you know, if you're concerned about water start documenting now take pictures seasonally of, you know, the conditions that are outside because if all of a sudden after construction, you have pools of water that are forming all around your house, it's good to have documentation and that's just for your own personal, you know, protection. So those are kind of all conversations that we've had. Yeah, and we're not trying to shirk any responsibilities here we're just trying to, you know, let people know, you know what we have per view over. Also, as always, if you have any questions about which board to to talk to, you know, Aaron or Dave can help point you in the right direction as well. Okay, so how we're going to run this is we will open it up to the commissioners first and so we'll go through a round or two of comments so we'll see if people have any questions and then we will start opening it up to the public. For those who are here from the public, if you can raise your hand as I see one person has now please do that and then once we come to the open comment period will call each person who has their hand up. Okay, so kind of like what I was saying before I just want to start off with, you know, a lot of this work that's being done is outside of any resource area. So that's not really within, you know, our jurisdiction or our purview, the piece that's down towards the bottom, and it's also a super steep slope on the other side down to Cushman Brook, for what that's worth. And so but yeah that part that's down towards the bottom the beginning of the driveway, that's sort of the biggest most direct concern that we have. And Brett what's the, or do we know what the driveway is going to be made of is it pervious or impervious material. So, Meredith or. Yeah, I can answer that it's going to be so during construction they're going to gravel it and but ultimately it will be paved. Just for sedimentation issues they don't want to leave it open and it, if, if we get approval and if this moves forward we can't pave until April or something so. And then if you're planning to incorporate the swale and the northern cheat runoff, that's right word right term that Aaron was using. Is that something that you guys are doing murder. We're planning on having the driveway pitch to the north. Yes. And then it's all grass there now so it was all planning to be remain it's going to remain grass. And we would have to update to plant the plan to put on like a formal grassed swale in there, but ultimately everything will go back to being vegetated. And I think the area is naturally sloped to the north there I think the plan. It will actually form almost a basin, if you're raising the driveway up a little bit and then being grassed area on the other side. But I mean, there's no harm in putting a little indicator on there that it's going to be made for the purpose of capturing water and. Yeah, I think a note should be added to the plan that says, you know, driveway pitch to the north and. So grass swale. I have a question just as far as like precedent and history goes. I noticed like a lot of a lot of homes who presumably have driveways built within that same 200 foot buffer zone. Are those older homes or has this commission reviewed any of those plans in the past I'm just wondering what precedent has been sort of said. Yeah, I mean, people are allowed access to property, you know with it within due restrictions I can't remember anything. I don't know if you can fletcher anything specifically that's come before us during our tenure. A lot of those are older than yeah. But yeah I mean they are there but yeah, sometimes laws change and yeah there's some stuff that people put in that we don't know how the hell they got allowed to why they're allowed to do it. It probably was before wetlands protection. Yeah, like houses that are the house across the street and like on the Cushman brook. Really nice though. Well, Laura, to your question I mean most of those houses along East Leverett Road predate the Rivers Protection Act. The simple answer. I don't know the date of that Aaron do you know, August 6 1996. Here we go. Approximately. I do have a question about conditioning. I know we've gone through this before but actually, I forget about impervious surfaces. Is that something we can request I know it's sometimes it's actually not I know many times not even feasible. But for this particular section. Doesn't matter does it work. I don't know, but that's something we can something to consider. Yeah, definitely something we can ask about so I mean, Meredith or Aaron do you see any issues, or will it work. So are you asking I'm sorry Mr Chairman, are you guys asking if it can be pervious rather than impervious. So we're looking for very often we'll have these pavers or something along those lines as a alternative to simply paving over. I don't have a problem with that I don't know if Joseph wants to speak to that. He's also the contractor in using pervious pavers. I think it's just a matter of maintenance, and it is on a hill there. Can you pay can you pave pervious. Those pavers. Or is that something you kind of maintained by shoveling. I'm just thinking of snow snow removal. You mean can you plow them. I'm sorry, you don't pay. Yeah, you can plow them carefully. They also have to be after winter storms they have to be maintained using sort of like a best management practice where they, you know you might sweep sweep sediment that accumulates in between the pavers to make sure that they're still infiltrating properly. I think on the hillside slope like that it may might be challenging for plow catching edges and things of because they're they're essentially, it's like, you know bricks, but. But I mean, if it's something that the applicant is willing to consider then you know I think all options are on the table for, you know request so. I can unmute. Nope, still on mute. I can unmute. One sec one sec. Ask to unmute. You're muted Joseph. I can only asked to unmute. So Joseph, if you hover over your face on the screen in the top right hand corner there should be an unmute in a little blue button right over your face on the screen. Nope, no good yet. Oh wait I think. No. The host should be able to unmute now. We can mute people we can unmute them. Oh, I see. Which makes sense. Yeah, that's fair enough. Yeah, that's fine. Yeah. So email on some. Yeah, I mean, I, I don't think we should get too hung up on it. If, if we can figure it out as we go on, maybe we should keep moving on with questions and then agree. Okay. I guess I do. Have one more question about the mitigation. Is that something that's just for the commission or is that something that was that obviously doing like a replication like a wetland but like the mitigation is that sufficient. You know, the plantings along that border of the, of the property line there. I don't know.  I see it seems good, but I don't know if there's like anything else that might be better. Yeah, just strengthen it. Yeah. There's definitely going to be sheep will come off that hill. Like there's going to be water coming in. I know those houses have wet basements. I know people used to live there. Like, yeah. Those are wet basements there, but that's nothing we can do, but I wonder if that's the best option we can do. There's also an existing wetland in one of the corners. I don't know if there's an option to sort of build off of that, or do something with that and then actually increase some infiltration there. That's a spot where that is. Yeah, I mean, if it was a, if there was wetland alteration taking place, I think, allowing replication to be piggybacked on a wetland like that is a is a good thing and that would probably be required but where this is riverfront area. I'm not interested in about this because this was related to one of the DEP comments is, you know, converting lawn back to native vegetation is the preferred manner of riverfront restoration. And in this case, what I had suggested was one to one. So like whatever the alteration was for the driveway to require that amount of mitigation for natural plantings and those plantings would be conditioned to not be disturbed in perpetuity. So like somebody couldn't come in and tear them out and put in lawn in their place they'd have to stay native native area, but the commission could require additional area of riverfront restoration as well. Additional square footage I should say. And how so and the only way that would be demarcated obviously beyond the deed but we know that that does not always. It's not always seen. For the area, the native area, it would be conditioned in the order of conditions and then it would be an ongoing condition in the certificate of compliance that would be recorded on the property. But so sometimes we will ask for some demarcation so stones or something like that just to make sure it's not disturbed as well. Yep. Yeah, Mr. Chair, can I make a comment on that. Please. Would bird houses be applicable once you decide how big, because I also am concerned about that too because it is adjacent to a lawn area that gets a moan. I don't know something permanent, some sort of permanent marker. But signage I don't know really would fit in wouldn't fit that well there. Yeah, we have conditioned bird houses as long as they're on some sort of permanent steak type of thing before the stones are even more permanent. So kind of depends on what you'd be proposing for the stakes I think is what it really comes down to. Yeah, stones maybe stones are, I think would be. I guess it's up to the applicant, I shouldn't speak for him. That's a good thing to consider to add to the plan. Okay, yeah, so. Yeah, so we definitely will need to see some additional stuff before we can approve it so I don't think we're voting in any ways on plans need to get revised and all of that. Yeah, so if you can come back with the proposal for next time on some sort of demarcation, that'd be great. And commissioners, any feeling on the amount. I mean one to one is that acceptable. That's reasonable. Total was 1480 something square feet right. Yeah, that seems reasonable. Okay. So, I'm going to go ahead and open it up for people who have comments from the public so at this point Patricia you should be able to unmute yourself and. Yeah, this is Robert that's going to be speaking. Hi. I live across the street and I own the east side of the road the very steep bank that goes into the river. I have two quick straightforward questions. One is I would request that the wetlands would be clearly demarcated on the proposed housing map, because I feel as being pretty vague right now. And secondly, I would like to question the reference point used to calculate the 100 foot 200 foot buffered stone, because by the map it's in the middle of the river. And I have read that it's a real estate law that it should be the edge of the river. So that's substantially 2025 feet difference talking here. Yeah, and fully agree with you Robert. Yeah, so that's something that needs to be particularly that second point needs to be corrected that's not acceptable how it is. And so on the revised plans that will need to be something that happens and the area being of impact it will need to be recalculated and the replication area would have to be adjusted as well. To clarify Brett it sounded like there was question as to whether the current delineation is off the bank or off the center line so it could be that it remains the same we just need clarification on that. Okay, good point Jen so yep we need to make sure that and you are right Robert it is off of the bank. Should be off of the top of bank we don't know if currently it's from 200 feet from the top of bank or 200 feet from the center line of the river and that needs to be clarified. Correct, and fixed if need be. And then the other point that you're bringing up Robert about the wetlands lines. Yeah, so if there's any wetlands that are not on there if those can be made clearer. That would be important as well. And so Robert I think you have your hand up still do you have another question. Oh, okay, I will actually lower your hand. So there we go. Thank you very much. And so Brian. Okay, I should be my my hair. You can hear you. Excellent. Okay, we just have two quick questions we live right next door at 66. And last year we look to purchase this lot. The way to do that is two things one is that the lot has changed. Pretty dramatically it was 0.7 acres then and this law looks to be 1.1 it was saying so we just, this might be a question for for Dave about the status of what this lot is and if the new borders have been approved. And what the process is on that. So I will touch on that briefly. So my understanding is that the, the applicant went through approval not required for the original lot boundary, but and then filed, and then the notice, a notice of intent was filed earlier in 2020. And so we began review of that application that was submitted DEP would not issue a file number on it. And I also, there was, there was substantial issues with it because of the amount of alteration that was proposed in the riverfront area. And so I had a conversation with the owner and the consultant at the time. And I think the consensus was that they were there exploring the basically reconfiguration of the lot to see if this house could be permitted with the new application. But they don't want to permanently change the lot boundary, until they know that they're going to get the house approved because carving up the lot again. And going through the legal procedure to do that if they don't know that they're going to be granted a permit to put in the house. So they just wanted to go through this process before they do that to make sure that it's feasible. And when that would happen, would there be more, I mean, what, I guess, does that just go through a zoning process or a planning board to That's a good question and I, I'm assuming it would just be a revision of the approval not required which would be a planning board or zoning board sign off but I'm not super, super familiar with the procedures. I think it would just be a revision but that would be something that we would need to get clarification from another department on. Okay, thanks. And then, so the second part of this is that when You know, we had looked to purchase it and in the process of that we had an inspector come to look at the land and that is actually when the current wetland designations were made. And we looked into that in 2019 the wetlands in the back, or in the, the Southwest corner of that property were not designated as wetlands yet. And so if this. So, I guess going forward looking to see if this house could be built on the proposed site. There's another inspection of that land because at the time in 2019 it seemed like we could, like a house could be built in what is now designated as a wetland and if that hadn't been inspected. We wouldn't have known that so we just are wondering if the new site would have an inspection to look into any environmental issues. And that's kind of the process we went through and so, yeah, that was very useful and very important for that initial site assessment to be done. And that's why we were out there or why that process went through and thank you if you're the one who sort of instigated that. The lines are approved and so they did come in front of the conservation commission and we did approve those lines. And we do that so that you know future the current landowner future landowners know what their opportunities are so that's kind of a. So that's kind of set for you know a given period of time at this point. So Aaron do you have some additional clarification on that. Yeah, so and just to touch on that a little bit more. When the initial delineation was completed we did walk the entire site we walked lots one and two. And the, they were walked in their entirety and checked in their entirety the there was one area which is north of the existing two homes, where there was a intermittent stream that flows in the back of the property and it goes down underneath East Leverett Road as well. At the time, I brought that up to the landowner that there was a stream there, and that there was actually flagging there at the time. And I said, you know, if you're going to confirm on lot one, you're going to need to include this and that the time they made the determination of the decision. To include those flags, and so we only approved the delineation for lot two as it was shown in that configuration. When I was out there today, that was one of the things I was looking for was what is the proximity of that intermittent stream and the ordering wetlands on it to this work on the in the new lot configuration. The flagging was still there from the original delineation and we took a measurement and it was 160 feet from the wetland boundary to the property line and then another 30 feet to the proposed leech field to the north. So there's a significant offset back there where there's no. We're not in any proximity to a wetland on that side for what's proposed here. It's an area where the perk test was done and the house is situated. Our, our upland areas so just to kind of address that holistically. Does that answer your questions Brian. Yeah, that's if it both the lots were covered I guess the issues since the lot had changed boundaries so much. We didn't know what had been reviewed. Yep. Okay. Thank you Brian. Okay. So are there any other questions from the public or anything else from the commission. Okay, so there are a couple of things that we have asked of the applicant so we'll need to, you know, see some revisions and see all of this. Aaron, can you give a proposed date and time for a continuation of this hearing. Yeah, so it would be the January 27 meeting and we could start the hearing at 730. And so is that enough time for the applicant to get together what you need to. Yes, absolutely will. We'll get those revisions as soon as possible to Aaron and be ready for the next meeting. Okay. So with that we are looking for emotion. I move we continue this hearing to January 27 at 730pm. I second that. Okay, thank you so voice vote Larry. Yes. Laura. Hi. Anna. Hi. Jen. Hi. Fletcher. Hi. Roy. Hi. And I as well. So we will see you later this month. Okay. Thank you so much you guys have a great night. Hi. Okay, so just switching up roles here. Okay, so I think we are good. And so we are going to move on to our 735. Which is a request for determination. So. Let me get my paperwork here. And for those who are here, so this is the Amherst college one. If you could raise your hand and we will promote you to a panelist. I'll be abstaining from this one as that is my employer. Okay. Thank you. Okay, so this public meeting is now called to order. This meeting is being held as required by the provisions of chapter 131 section 40 of the general laws of the Commonwealth and act relative to the protections of wetlands is most recently amended the town of Amherst wetlands bylaw. This is a request for determination being presented by Kenneth lozier on behalf of Amherst college for replacement and repair for foot bridges on Amherst college property. Footbridge are located in wetlands and buffer zones within Amherst college. So this is a request for determination. Priority habitat areas. At map 14 D and lot one. Okay. So. So, okay. You should be able to go. And. So Ken here before. Ken might show up as Julia. I bet she he is. To panelist. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Even though it says UMass, I assume that's actually an Amherst college person. So is an Amherst college person. Yes. So Kenny or Kate. I'm not sure which one of you would like to present, but if you would like to provide an overview for us, that would be much appreciated. Absolutely. I will start and let me. Yeah, that's a little bit better. A little less UMass. Okay. Okay. Headphones. Can you hear me? Yes. Can everybody hear me? Yes. Perfect. Good. Okay. So allow me to. Share screen. Okay. And can everybody see that? You're good. Excellent. So just for. And can you just reference point as to what we're looking at. And can you also just introduce yourself before that's college street running. East to West on the left side of the map is. The railroad up and down the middle is the ever source right of way. I'm going to toggle back and forth between this screen and some of the individual bridge descriptions we have pertaining to each individual site. I think. Original submittal. We're going to. Sorry. Go ahead, Brett. Yeah. If you could just introduce yourself real straight. Nobody can. I've got my headphones out. Hold just one sec. While Kenny is getting his headphones on. Let me just introduce myself. You can hear me. Sorry about that. Go ahead. Yep. So the request was if you can just introduce yourself so we know. Don't, don't just dive all the way in. Yeah. And then. That'd be great. Yeah. Cause you're a supervisor of landscaping grounds at Amherst college. Thank you. And Kate Sims. I teach economics and environmental studies at Emerson college. Thank you, Ken. And so yeah, if you want to jump back in, that'd be great. Sure. So I'm going to toggle back and forth between this screen and those individual bridge. Pictures. The original. Paper work that we submitted with. Bridge. to further remove bridges from any resource areas. So I'll start with site one over here on the west side of the map closest to East Drive and Merrill Apartments on Amherst College campus. So that is pictured here. This picture is, let's see, we are standing on the north side facing south just for reference point. Initially we were planning on a more modest lengthening of this bridge but after further inspection we believe due to the erosion of this bank it's probably best to length it even further. All bridges are going to remain the same style that you see in these pictures. They're going to remain the exact same width and they will remain being non-permanent structures. There will be no digging, dredging, trenching, no permanent footings of any kind but we will use, we will raise these and lengthen them. So the new proposal for this bridge would be to, on the northwest side, increased by four feet, I'm sorry, and on the southeast side, six to eight feet. Does everybody, does that make sense? Okay and then this is, so I'll move to bridge two, traveling eastbound on the trail right here just south of the pond and on this one we are facing north. The new proposal would be to rotate this clockwise, roughly 10 to 15 degrees, taking the north side of the bridge a little further east away from that down treat and further into the center of that pathway and out of the bank. We would propose a three foot extension on the northeast side and a five foot on the southwest side and then on to bridge three. We now get much closer to College Street for a frame of reference kind of across the street from Subway and on this one we are facing north. The new proposal remains the same as from this prior, it would be a two foot extension on both sides, also raising this to be a little closer to grade with the bog bridge on the north side and on the south side and then the final bridge, bridge four crossing Fearingbrook near College Street. This one would have a six foot extension on the north side and a four foot extension on the south side and that is essentially, let's see, all work would be done by hand bringing in materials, bringing out old materials and once again we would not be implementing any digging of any kind so I will stop sharing my screen and there we go. Thank you Kenny. Kate did you have anything to add before I turn it over to Erin? Sure let me just add a tiny bit of context which is that all of these bridges had sustained some damage earlier in the fall and were unsafe for various reasons at different points. One of them we fear is going to fall into the brook, one of them is tilted pretty heavily so that if it's slippery we're worried about people falling off. One of them had a tree on top of it which was taken off and temporarily repaired and then the other one is down pretty low and as Erin pointed out this morning at the site visit really could be obstructing water flow underneath so I think the hope is in all of this to try to make these more usable but also in a way that's going to help actually protect the resource in the long run by lifting them up out of the out of the streams and out of the bank area. So Erin gave us several great suggestions this morning on how to do that in terms of getting them up and out but I think we would love to also hear other thoughts from the commission on how to do this in a way that's going to protect the resource. I don't think there's any question that this is in a very sensitive area in terms of resource use that's why the college likes to have students out there they're able to do things like a bio blitz where they go out and identify different species. There's experiments and research that's happening in this area and so I think the request for determination was motivated by the thought that we would be doing this in a way that that doesn't affect the resource area not that it's not in a resource area because it clearly is. Okay thank you Kate. So Erin? Yeah so this is this is kind of a tricky one for me just because of my background permitting trail bridges. I would ordinarily recommend notice of intent filings for these. In this case they are existing bridges. I don't know how long they've been in for I don't know if there was permitting for the original bridge but if somebody was to come forward proposing a new footbridge I would always require notice of intent. It's just because you're a lot of times talking about bank impacts, wetlands impacts, etc. In this case they're existing bridges so that's a consideration. Also adjusting these bridges will be a tremendous improvement to existing conditions on the site and if you see the bridges and what's going on out there you would see that it's really they're they're damaging the resources at this point causing erosion underneath where they're situated. So those are kind of my first initial comments. The initial submission did not include bridge plans so I spoke with Kenny about that today. They came up with a sort of a standard design and also I've talked to Kenny about for each of the sites providing measurements of what the bridge dimensions would be including you know bankful estimates to make sure that we're staying outside of bankful for the placement of the footings on either side. Also because each of these bridges had no footings they were basically just these platforms that were set on the ground that they should have some kind of a structural foundation under each and that doesn't necessarily mean digging them in or ground disturbance what it means is it could be as simple as setting a block and having the bridge be up on top of a block of some sort. It could be a flat stone it could be you know a cinder block type just set in place on a stable surface to raise it up a little bit so that you get better openness ratio underneath the bridge. So the bridge they're going to be submitting bridge plans to us. The other thing that's kind of shaky about it is the there's no delineation here you know ordinarily for a project we want to see where the wetlands are located where the bank is located and that sort of thing and that's not included here and after speaking with the applicant I can understand kind of why they took the approach they did it is a sort of a precedent setting situation in terms of saying okay we're going to allow you to do this work without doing a delineation. All that said like I said it's doing damage right now this will be an improvement to existing conditions so I'm not going to obstruct it moving forward for that reason. What I will say is that a lot of the footings are in existing wetland that was pretty clear but by making the spans of the bridges longer and putting in a foundation of some sort it will greatly improve the openness so that light can penetrate underneath the bridge air can penetrate underneath the bridge you can get some greater water flow underneath the bridge without causing additional erosion underneath it. So yeah I mean the way that we sort of left things was that the bridges were going to be the designs were going to be revised and sort of provided to us in writing and then at that point I would feel much more comfortable with with what has been proposed here. Thank you one other just quick thing is that there is an endangered fern that's located on this site and I know Eversource is transplanting it for the structure replacement project that's happening and I just mentioned to the applicant that they should be in touch with natural heritage because there may be other endangered species on this site that we're unaware of and there may be time of year restrictions or other issues and they should also familiarize themselves with the species out there so they can identify them and not impact them. So thank you Erin and yeah one comment so LaRoy and I were out there today as well and so it's great to actually see it because actually some of that erosion that's going on you just can't capture that in some of those pictures particularly that first I think it's site number one that's closest to the campus that has some serious issues and when that sucker goes down it's not going to be good so I agree with you Erin that yeah overall it will be a big improvement. When we did similar work on some of our trails on concom land we did go through and did do delineation for that and so that would be our preferred mode for that so when they come in front of us if that could happen you know so if you can look into that as a possibility it should be fairly straightforward I know that you guys had some challenges on the initial go at that but if there's something that's reasonable if there's some mitigating factor let us know but that is definitely our standard operating procedure including for our own lands. So I'll open up to other commissioners and we'll go to the general public so comments or questions and yeah particularly for LaRoy if you had other observations I'm sorry Kate. Can I just ask you a quick follow-up question on what you just said can you just tell us a little bit more about what specifically needs to be delineated because there's there's a lot of wetlands there oh yeah I think part of what happened to us is that we quickly got overwhelmed by the cost of being offered to delineate all of the wetlands so tell us what's in scope yeah I mean so Erin can you specify a little bit more I have an idea in my head Kate but yeah Erin would be able to specify you know so many feet on each side sort of thing so yeah so it would just be looking at the the footprint of the area where the work is being done and I mean I think really ultimately it's up to the commission to make a decision on whether for this specific project they would want to see that delineated or because this is these are existing bridges and you're trying to make improvements if that's something that you know we think the board was willing to kind of wave at this point I can say that on at least three out of four of the bridges if not four out of four that the the bridges are set directly in wetland that is adjacent to the intermittent streams so they are already there in the wetland and they're getting carved out underneath so picking the bridges up increasing the span is going to be a dramatic improvement to what's happening already but I would say for future projects we should definitely get you guys set up or you know suggest some folks that you guys can get on board that will be more financially uh in reach to do the work for you to do the delineating for you all right go ahead Jen thanks yeah I was just gonna say that I think since these are there's like no question whether or not these are in the resource area and because they're hazard currently we should consider not reading not doing a formal delineation here but instead making sure that the new bridges are higher and wider than the existing bridges because we know we're improving and chances of building the type of infrastructure that would take us truly out of the resource here is infeasible and probably unnecessary but I think that there is a fine line you know for projects with more significant infrastructure like we do need to do these delineations they're very important um for both the existing projects in the future of the protection of their resource so um that's my two cents on that and then just just to add on to what Jen was saying there it's just um it's termed infrastructure that you guys see have you ever can you ever use those diamond piers before you know what I'm talking about I I do not know they're actually pretty sweet they come in all different sizes there were there pieces of cement with four holes and you literally impact pipes into it and they cross in do you know what you're talking about and actually uh I had brought that up as a potential uh footing today yeah so exactly yes those seem to be working pretty good for some people been doing on on hitchcock center did them and whatever the guys at conservation works use them all the time but that's one option I think that makes perfect get the stuff that's what Jen was saying and Aaron was saying get it up and out yep so whatever those things are they're actually they only yeah they're super sturdy and they only go down a couple inches the the the pier itself so the pipes go down so anyway the other trick kind of trick of the trade is sauna tubes so usually you have to pour you know mix cement and that can be hard to do at these sensitive sites what you can do is get cement mix that usually you would add water to put them in the ground as a footing and they'll absorb water from the soil moisture over time too so they're like tricks in order to low impact do like a pretty significant footing up and out away from the stream that will better support the bridge in the long term so one question I have for the commissioners about the delineation so no matter what they do it's going to be an improvement so I fully agree with that my big question is how far out you know they should they should make these and so I think that the delineation could potentially help with that yeah but to what extent yeah I just I think the whole thing is so low and so wet right whole place is wet yeah they're gonna they're not they're not gonna be able to leave the adjacent wetland without entering another wetland not the wetland but they'd at least be able to identify more concretely what is the top of bank would be more what I'd be looking for okay so that's more along Aaron's comments of trying to get an estimate of bank full which I think is yes kind of so maybe there's some synergy there where we could do some bank full calculations wetted with I mean that's they're very easy available online tools for making those estimates that are pretty reliable so that might be another middle ground there like we could say maybe condition that we want them x feet I mean for mass stream crossing standards it's 1.2 times bank fall for the width of a bridge and I don't know what the clearance regulations are Aaron maybe you know off the top of your head but you know we could say that that's a good starting point and they have to be wider than that something like that exactly and that's what we talked about in the on the site visit today and the question is just what is 1.0 is what I'm trying to get a so yeah well yep so you can do that in stream stats pretty easily okay and I actually have one more question is there work going to be done mitigation work going to be done on Fearing Brook from the apartment building being built yeah I remember there is something else going on in there I'm sorry guys this is kind of not here yeah I know what you're talking about but sure and that member the southeast street commons there was going to be an in-kind payment to replacing the spot on Fearing Brook where it goes underneath that main inner southeast Amherst like center intersection I don't know what the status of that is but that's significantly downstream of what we're talking about it's downstream though I'm just wondering exactly where the location was yeah it's down like near Florence Bank yeah behind the back oh yeah it's just that yeah I know you're talking about all right sorry yeah and the the openness ratio just to touch on that question really quickly I mean it can be calculated based on it like the minimum open this ratio is 1.64 feet but that's like a bare minimum but I mean requiring up to six feet from the from the water level to the to the decking you know on a flashy stream that is not you know I mean particularly that that one that we saw that was that was the first I think site one I think in that case it's even more than six feet I mean you're talking a pretty significant height off of the water level so it really it really depends on the specifics of the of the channel to make sure that it's done right and there's a calculation that you can do it's an educational process but the the bankful process that Jen was talking about it's looking at a cross section and understanding sort of where that bankful mark is in terms of where water would overtop the channel if it flooded and then taking that measurement and saying 1.2 times that so that you know that your footings are outside of that area but there are there's a mass stream crossings handbook that I could send you a link to that provides more information on that so it's kind of like you know talking about it without having the document in front of you but it's it's I can tell you this it's very straightforward and I'd be happy to even do like a zoom and go through it with you just so you could kind of see that we're not shooting from the hip here that it's actually something that you can measure out in the field using sort of common sense tools yes I yes I'm sorry if we got jargony on you guys but the point of what we're trying to say is that this can be done without a formal delineation in a way that will achieve all the goals we're discussing and Aaron I was just going to say if there's something I can do to help provide resources for this let me know absolutely great so Dave did you have a comment on this I saw you leaning forward kind of listen Brett um I did just squeeze in dinner there while I was gone but I was listening the whole time um no um I think this is all a great discussion um I do see some parallels between the the the work that the commission just did to permit the trail improvements over that and you know kind of the limited scope and and Aaron correct me if I'm wrong but kind of the limited scope of the delineation that was done there I think allowed the commission to move forward and provided information that DEP I think we haven't really heard formally from DEP but I think was more in line with what DEP was was uh hoping we would do the other thing while while um Kenny and Kate are on the call I I think I'd be remiss whenever I see a map of the Fearing Brook I I feel compelled to mention that you know Amherst has and continues to invest a significant amount of money to and resources time to improve the water quality in the Fearing Brook and if I'm not mistaken I mean most of these streams today are they flowing into the Fearing from there are they flowing downstream into the Fort um certainly one of these bridges crosses the Fearing Brook but um we would very much like to have Amherst College um an active partner with us to improve the water quality and um uh other attributes of the uh of the Fearing Brook um I think I'm I'm on fairly solid ground to say that Fearing Brook is probably um the most compromised tributary of the Fort River and Amherst it may be the most compromised tributary on the on the entire Fort River watershed but I'm not sure about that and Amherst we take some responsibility for that because it drains about a quarter to a half a half of our downtown but um we are going to do a very significant um uh floodplain restoration project downstream but there's no question that section in the Amherst College Sanctuary um could really use some some um some design and improvements uh it is um a really you know compromised stretch there and and and I'm sure you guys are aware of it so anyway in the future 2021-22-23 we'd love to work with you guys on on that stream quality there and water quality there's that absolutely that incredible perched uh culvert that comes out of the the parking lot there below the power plant um it's it's kind of like Niagara Falls that enters the Fearing Brook in it on certain days that's a great little kayak run there but it really shouldn't be and and we can improve that thanks we we would absolutely uh have no problem partnering on that my my understanding is that the uh college in the past has done just that um I know Jim Brassard has implored my predecessor Bob Shada um provide resources in the past in terms of manpower and would be more than willing to in the future that's great thanks well we certainly will be talking thanks Dave I wanted to add also that yeah that would be wonderful and I think part of the purpose of all of this is to get the sanctuary back on the map so to speak I think that the college sometimes forgets that that land is there and uh the more that we get people out on it and aware of it I think that the more attention will be paid to its preservation in the long run but one more quick comment Brad along those lines Kate you know I'm a birder also and spend a lot of time on our trails but you know one thing you could do is on the western end of the sanctuary near the Amherst farmer supply it is a very um underwhelming entrance shall we say but you know putting up some sort of a sign there the fence is falling in there's a gate there it's really not you know I know there are multiple entrances to the sanctuary but that's one that the public uses quite frequently and I think a lot of alums use that because they remember it in a different way than it currently is but it's um it's not well marked and it just doesn't say welcome to the Amherst college sanctuary so just an idea signage and marking is all absolutely a piece of the greater project that we're looking at here so those are all definitely things we're looking at okay and then also moving forward Erin they're going to require DEP and heritage letters hope Erin we can't hear you DEP issued comments on the RDA for this one um and and they responded to those comments and I did send those to Mark Simpson he he definitely had his eye on this and he was he inquired with me whether I wanted him to come to the meeting tonight and I was like um I think we should just you know let's let things see where things go um before we before that is necessary um but he definitely had some issues so but I think the revisions are going to be a tremendous improvement to that um from a DEP standpoint from the natural heritage standpoint I'm not sure if they actually need to um because it's not estimated habitat I'm not sure that they actually need to file with natural heritage I was more suggesting that they reach out to natural heritage and just have a conversation okay good and so I must have missed the the DEP letter so my apologies for that um was what was their take on delineation they asked for one okay they did they did mention that because they that you know they don't like people using the um the the DEP wetland layer and hydrology layer in applications because they're they're really inaccurate you can show wetlands where there's no wetlands no wetlands where there are wetlands uh wetlands change so dramatically that they they just they discourage that they like to see sort of on the ground delineation um so yeah okay good that's that was one of the comments okay okay so um anything from the other commissioners before I'll open it up to the public and then I'll bring it back in and we can do um sort of final round of what we think is needed so nothing from the commissioner so anybody from the general public if you just want to use the little icon raise your hand okay um so not seeing any at this point um and so obviously we're going to need to continue so there's you know a couple of additional pieces um you know so it sounds like obviously there's going to be some redesign work so we'd love to see that uh or we'd like to see that um there's a request for a delineation so if that is feasible that is something that you know would be would help um so what are the other pieces that commissioners would like to see or correct what I said we're just saying we're just saying uh bridge design we want to see bridge design we talked about well not the delineation but show the extent and just bridge design showing the dimensions that will pass a bank fall event so just to clarify that there is a request for the the bank fold the the delineation of the banks for sure that we got and then where did we end up on broader delineation yeah I don't see any need for any sort of broader delineation yeah it's all wetland down there but I mean so yeah as long as we have some delineation yeah I think that'd be very helpful yeah just within the scope of work as well yeah and what Brett means is just like show us on the plans where the bank fall like top of bank and bank fall which I'm guessing is pretty close to each other in these creeks and show us where we are relative to that just so we can make an easy evaluation of where the bridges are located relative to the stream and likely stream what elevations that makes perfect sense so you can basically just see that we follow the map map map on the bridge lengths appropriately exactly yeah okay that makes perfect sense yeah anything else Erin that we're missing I just I just sent you an email Kenny with the link to the stream crossing handbook and you know just for your reference a couple consultants for the future but yeah I just want to agree with what the board is saying I think my primary concern is keeping the bridge abutments outside of the bank so that it's not going to be eroding and causing future damage and I agree there's bvw on either side of those streams so it's it's um it's going to be an improvement over the existing conditions yeah okay um and so all of this work Kenny and Kate um is two weeks enough time do you guys need more than that I think that seems reasonable okay so are we looking at 735 then Erin that's what I would recommend okay so looking for a motion I think that was the 27th correct correct I'm looking I'll make a motion to consider to continue at I'm sorry January 27th at 7 25 p.m 35 yes second okay so so Anna you recuse or steam yep Jen I pleasure I Larry I Laura I the Roy and I from me as well so thank you Kenny thank you Kate um yeah really great stuff it's going to be a huge improvement and yeah we look to even more fruitful collaborations between the college and town as we move forward so thank you very much and we appreciate your time yeah thanks for your patience and helping to educate us a little bit have a good day okay so just switching up a couple of things okay so I think we are good okay um so those are the only two items that we had um as official hearing so Erin is there a certain direction that you want to go is there something that other maybe that the attendees are potentially here for that we might want to address sooner so people can obviously people can stay as long as you want but yeah um so I just I'd like to just handle the one remaining request for certificate of compliance because it's I believe just an really administrative and I think it'll go really quickly and then move to the enforcement items okay because there's a couple people here from the enforcement side and I don't want to take their time but I also want to get the um you know minor quick thing out of the way so that we can dig into the enforcement sounds good um so we received a request for certificate of compliance um this is basically at our last meeting there was a request for certificate of compliance or three of them for lot seven on the applebrook subdivision um off of west street and um that was for lot seven but we received the same series of requests for the three certificates of compliance for lot eight and lot eight is actually located outside of any concom jurisdictional areas so um and I went out to the site it's fully stable the house is constructed and I would just recommend that we um issue a certificate of compliance for the three um outstanding DEP file numbers sounds good yep sounds straightforward so looking for a motion for certificates of compliance and these are the three numbers right here I'll highlight them yeah so I moved to uh you go I moved to uh we'll do it um to accept the certificate of compliance for applebrook subdivision DEP file number 0 8 9 0 5 7 4 0 8 9 5 0 5 2 7 and 0 8 9 0 6 2 6 just on lot eight though just on lot eight okay so thank you um so voice votes I'll do the opposite order so la roe hi Anna hi uh larry hi letcher hi laura Jen hi and I as well okay so that is done which enforcement would you like to go into Erin um I'd like to start with carver av um do a little update on that because I see there's several um butters here for that is it correct enough did I say what did I say carver yeah carver canton right I was like I don't know why it's like the eastern mass names I keep switching them so my apologies okay so but it's canton that we're talking about canton okay is it canton or carver I can never remember canton canton avenue there's no carver eastern mass that's cranberry land yeah we do have a harvard but that's different um different that's near there though so I'll I'll just kind I'll just kind of give a brief a brief overview um over to have sort of what has transpired since um the last because we because I don't know if the board recalls but we issued an enforcement we also issued a continuation to the end of February and um I don't want to wait on this one I want to just keep the board regularly updated and kind of have have the board ready to make a decision of how you want to proceed and and keep you up to date because some stuff has happened um so the last at the last you know we had requested that they get a surveyor out there to replace the flags on the lot where work had been done um in violation of the order of conditions I had reached out prior to the last meeting to the landowner to the wilson construction who's the landowner and said what's the status of this could you give us an update before the last meeting which I never heard from them and then about a week later we got a request for a forest cutting plan on the entire site um I reached out to the service forester for our for our town and basically explained we have an existing enforcement order out here and we will not allow any work to move forward with any forest cutting until this enforcement issues resolve so the forest cutting plan got denied and I eventually made contact with Pete and I said what is the status because we're waiting to do a site visit and we want to see where the wetland was and what's going on and he said his surveyor couldn't get out there until April and the order of conditions expires at the end of February and so for me personally um like what I did as a result of this was I contacted Bucky Sparkle who did the original plan and worked with the original surveyor and original wetland people out there and I said Bucky could could we what would it cost to have the flags replaced out there and so he got back to me with a quote of what that would be and I think it was like in the range of 600 to like $1,100 to have the flags replaced and it sounded like yeah they could just get out there and do it relatively quickly um and um I just don't want this to be like a tactic that's used to stall our progress or to sort of um cause the commission to feel like they need to give additional extensions when it would have been very simple for them to make quick phone call to Bucky to have this taken care of and so that we could just move forward I don't know who their surveyor is I asked who was their surveyor and I asked them for a correspondence saying that you know they were booked out until April but um in the meantime I was contacted by several um butters who caught wind of the forest cutting plan and had witnessed the cutting that had happened and um I did put in the one drive um some PDFs of emails that they had sent to us but I see Gaston is on the call and Ben Bailey is on the call there may be other people on the call um as well who are who are neighbors to that project so that's where things stand right now and I asked them to attend so that they could just kind of give you a quick snapshot of what they saw Erin did you see those emails were in the I'm just I just didn't see them in the folder where I didn't see them mother um I'll double check oh I saw the emails but I was just a part of those threads outside of that so I see them I think in in enforcements under um yeah I see email from Pete Wilson that's not it there's there's there's there's there's some documents there Thursday 9th or 7th Pete Wilson yeah so on yeah I'll I will make sure I'll I'll just double check and grab them right now so you guys have Pete Wilson isn't the about our Pete Wilson is the no thanks Erin yeah I'm not sure the attachments are there I just I just pulled them in so you can grab them and see there's some pictures as well and and you know one of the things I'll just note quickly um and uh Ben and Gaston if you want to talk feel free to raise your hand but um you know when we in the meeting we were told no work had taken place in the wetlands um I don't think that that was accurate and if you they they said they were just out there with chainsaws cutting trees it was an excavator parked in the area where the wetland was which I you know is in those documents so anyways I see Ben raising his hand I'll go ahead and make it well actually before we get there I just want to see if the applicant is here or anybody representing the applicant no I mean I um I didn't even you you haven't heard anything from them I see you I you clearly just said you you reached out to them a number of times you haven't heard anything no I've I've had communication with them they said they the last communication was that they had reached out to their their surveyor and that they um couldn't get out there until April and I said I would recommend seeking out alternate alternate people to do the work and I said I I will personally recommend I will not recommend an additional extension and that what I said was I would rather the commission independently have somebody go out and place the flags almost as a peer review type process to replace the flags in by a third party independent person because quite frankly I'm not sure that we're getting accurate information and I'm not sure placement of the flags would be accurate if they didn't contact the original surveyor who placed the points and they didn't do that I know that because I reached out to them so did the cutting plan show any of those wetlands that were conversation no but um just for context the cutting plan was developed by a forester but the cutting was to be done by wilson construction not by an outside company and to me it just was a very sketchy very sketchy um situation because that does happen the town of carver okay yeah all right so um I'm going to open up to the public so Benjamin you should be able to speak at this point okay uh can you hear me yes okay so um when wilson construction started clearing this law back in December November December 2019 my wife and I went out and confronted them they had heavy machinery coming in and they were chainsawing everything in a big rectangle coming in from Canton Ave um I asked them if they had the plans with them they had no plan with them they had no math with them there were no flags for the wetlands at that point when we asked them we told them that they were on wetlands they said no the wetlands were up there and just pointed in a general direction to the north I knew the lot you know I knew from the plans that Bucky Sparkle had done there was a curious driveway that went down and followed the south border of the property very carefully because that was to avoid wetlands so I knew if they were coming in with machinery they had to be taking this little tight you know catwalk along that property they did nothing of the sort they just came in through their with their machines through the whole thing uh let me read a a couple of lines from an email I sent to our neighbors other butters in December 11th 2019 so this was shortly after uh on a more general note Wilson properties started clearing part of one of the lots when we approached them they had no maps or measurements with them about where they could clear they just seemed to be cutting down trees in a way that would be convenient for the for them the huge corridor that they cleared in from Canton Ave has little resemblance to the careful designs with limited impact that were presented to the conservation committee in the zba so that's the text of an email that I've got a copy of sent out right at this time when when this happened they could not even identify where the corner pins were for the property and basically didn't seem interested in in finding out where they were where the property lines were or anything okay thank you Benjamin um anything else Benjamin or any questions for Benjamin then we'll go next to Gaston okay so Gaston uh you should be able to speak at this point okay you can hear me yes we can okay thank you so uh I'm the buyer of the the FABOS house and as you know it was the FABOS with the leadership of their son Adrian FABOS who prepared the subdivision plan and we acquired the FABOS house with that plan and you know had no input on any part of that um you know so we obviously have a lot of interest in how the the land is developed it's right across from us and right next to our house um we've I've approached the the wilson's and they've been pleasant um to talk to um however when I went to ask about their cutting they did not tell me that they needed any plans or that there was any guidance or restriction and and certainly they had heavy equipment on the day um when they had the hearing December of 2019 that morning I snapped a picture because there was a large digger parked close to the street my request was can you at least please park this further from the street so it's less of an eyesore um I will say that it's um I was at that hearing upset with the other butters because part of the request for the extension involved a request for a waiver of the condition that they notify a butters and place a newspaper ad when they submitted or revised their plans and so neighbors spoke out against this I invited Pete Wilson to withdraw his request for that waiver and he did uh when we conferred afterwards he said that that had been uh suggested by uh the person taking his application in the town as a way to avoid uh spending money on the newspaper ad which you know I don't know if that's I don't know if that's true um I mean I will say that I don't I don't like to see a force flattened for housing development in a way that breaches uh the conditions and laws that govern activity for the sake of protecting this ecosystem um and uh that may have already happened apparently and at the lot across the street the one acre lot certainly I don't want to see that happen in in the larger four acre lot which as you know is contiguous with an 18 acre lot owned by Mary Anderson and these uh you know 20 plus acres um really represent the kind of largest and last space of of nature in the set in central Amherst and so I just think it's important to make sure that any any work is done well and um I'm happy to answer any questions I can um these would be my my general remarks thank you Gaston so any questions for or comments for Gaston at this point or I want to say that that the permit he was referencing there was a zoning approval I believe for the waiver of the conditions notify butters that request I think came through the zoning board okay and so um Janie um you should be able to speak at this time at you okay yep you're thank you yeah we're the residents of 179 North Whitney uh abutting the property uh and yeah I mean I guess from you know I'm not sure how many of you were were around in 2017 2018 when this was approved but but those of you that were will recall um very significant details can you guys hear me all right yeah we can there was some feedback there for a second but before that we were good um so you may recall that bucky sparkle uh brought very very significant plans where he literally amapped every single tree and you you went tree by tree of approving which trees could be removed and which ones couldn't um so I I'm not sure that there's good faith here on behalf of Mr Wilson when he sent in people to clear cut the land that you very distinctly did not give him approval to do there were only certain trees that were allowed to be removed in those original plans for the lot one and we're obviously rather terrified that uh you know the majority of the wetland abuts directly at the back of my property and Mary's property and I've been in touch with Mary she's in California and wasn't able to join tonight but um you know she's obviously significantly worried as well um that there's going to be clear cutting of you know the majority of the forest behind us and obviously the the the integral part of the trees to the wetland uh is something that needs to be taken into consideration particularly as you took many months to to go to the extent of looking literally tree by tree of of what you would approve and what you wouldn't and and I think that he's really completely ignored you and and needs to play face the consequences of that thank you thank you Jamie um so I'm going to go to Mary next because and then I'll go back to you Gaston so hi um oh yeah thank you for calling on me yes so Jamie thank you and um I wanted to report about one incident I had with Wilson this past April I was notified by Freddie Munger that someone had flagged had put little tags and they did not appear to be on the actual property line so I hired somebody to go out there and use the city's plans and compare the city plans or the town plans to the the little markers that were there and they were for sure off obviously in favor of Wilson onto my property substantially like 10 yards 15 yards onto my property I contacted Mr Wilson who seemed to be quite surprised by the whole thing and he said he would look into it and get back to me and I've not heard anything from him since and I think it's just another example of people who like to who would prefer to apologize than do things right in the first place and he's hoping if he apologizes whoops whoops didn't mean to wherever he's going to say it's okay I think that we've played this game long enough they've already they have already done substantial damage substantial damage to that property um and the people who live lower it actually doesn't even bother me very much but the people who live lower the people behind down off of Canton Avenue have already a water problem due to earlier work Phobos did when he owned the land years ago and now there's going to be more damage so in the letter that Mr Wilson mailed which I finally received two days ago dated December 19th he said something about a 200 foot perimeter my request is that they be required I like the third party survey or suggestion I think that is totally appropriate in this case my request is that they be required to flag with a line not with a little ribbon on some twig that a deer steps on and knocks down but to actually flag and delineate clearly the 200 feet from the property line of all the abotters they don't have to do the railroad tracks but they need to do all the rest of us and they need to line that out so that anybody could look at it and could walk in there and see where the cut zone is allowed to be not with flood not with ribbons but with an actual strength and all the way around on three sides that's the first request the second request is that given the damage they've done and given the problems that occur every year in the in the spring and again in the fall when rains and so on occur that mother nature be given a year to recover from what they have done and they not be allowed to do anything in there for a year and let's see what mother nature does now that they filled in part of her wetlands there was a stream when babus owned that property from what I can tell in the pictures that Gaston sent me I think the area they filled in is where that little stream was that babus had to build a bridge over his little trail because that stream ran all the time who knows where that water is going to go now so I think mother nature needs a year to recover and I think they need to be required to come back with real honest god plans and if that if this commission approves those plans you need to send somebody out there on a weekly basis to supervise and survey because time after time they Wilson has demonstrated he's not reliable I emailed him the other day I called the other day of course he has no phone number on his literature so you have to look him up on the white pages but I did find a phone number for him of course he didn't return my phone call I just don't think that they are shall we say responsible neighbors and I think that we need to attend very carefully to anything that they do in there and that doesn't even talk about the fact that it shouldn't be have been allowed in the first place thank you for listening okay thank you Mary and I just want to make it clear that there are certain things that about this that are within our purview and certain things that are not and so when we're talking about the pieces that are directly related to the wetlands 100% those are things that we need to deal with there's going to be other pieces that would have to be dealt with by another board oh okay but just but just to just to make sure that we're addressing this Mary that forest cutting plan got denied it is not they should not be cutting anything they're they have a cease and desist and there's no approved forest cutting plan out there until their enforcement issues resolved so and point taken as far as site monitoring you know that they should be paying for a third party to monitor any work going on out there in the future because um okay thank you yep yeah that's one of the reasons that we have orders of conditions and then when they violate them then yeah there need to be round so thank you so guest on did you have another comment you'd like to make sure sure thank you so I mean I guess that my general comment is that um given the the pattern of conduct we don't have confidence that the the wilson's development philosophy is is consistent with uh and designed to adhere to the development and conservation principles um of amherst and the commonwealth that's the first point um the second point is that um they invested I think if I'm not mistaken $210,000 for these two lots and so they're business people they're looking to make a return and so I have concern that the incentive for the incentive to to breach is is quite high and so I I just request that the the commission um take that into into consideration and then my third and final point is uh my concern for what remediation is is appropriate uh with respect to the the cutting and filling that has been done yeah thank you and yeah there definitely needs to be yeah some work done because of that so there's no doubt about that so thank you okay so uh julia hi I just uh julia rushamir and I am in a butter as well and I just have a quick follow-up question in terms of yeah one the damage that's already been done and the trees that have already been cut down I don't know if it's a remediation plan that they have to put forth or whether there's some kind of penalty or some kind of financial penalty that you know what what is the what do you do when when that happens that's my first question and then the second question is I'm I guess I'm kind of it sounds a little bit like it would make sense to deny their request for an extension because they've had lots of time to be able to do this um and if that request for an extension is denied do they have to then come up with a whole new plan regarding the wetlands or are they still held to the original plan that you all sort of reviewed and we all you know worked on together in 2017 yeah okay so um the first piece is um what happens to the land that they have already altered that is a discussion that we as a commission need to come to conclusion on um you know at a minimum it would need to be restored um to you know something that is resembling the the pre-disturbed condition and granted those were mature trees so it can't come back exactly to that by any means um you know if there are additional ramifications are there fines are there other issues is there something that that is a possibility but that would be something that we would need to discuss if the order of conditions if the extension is denied then they would have to reapply and at that point it is basically starting anew they can definitely bring the plan before us that they submitted before and it would be open but it would be a complete new set of hearings they would have to um contact all of the butters again and we'd be basically starting from square one again thank you thank you Jamie uh very briefly Brett just uh wanted to clarification on uh the what's under your remit and what's not um it seems like the forest cutting piece he went for approval from somebody else not from you is that correct and if that is correct is there any coordination between that body and your body because you were the ones that approved very specific trees that could be cut and which couldn't so I guess and as an addendum to the request that Mary made I'd like them to very clearly mark the trees that you allowed to be cut if you're going to allow them to move on which is a big if I imagine but if you did do that I would want to be sure you know the reason that the rest of us are butters all stood down in the end was because we would have thought that you acted very reasonably in being very very detailed on what could and couldn't you know we obviously didn't want property back there but you did it in the the way that would maintain the wetland and the wildlife and and you know we're all of you know more than a little bit shocked it should also be noted that these these people came and and cut at the weekend they didn't come during the week um it was quite extraordinary it was sort of as if they were doing it under you know uh trying to not get caught yeah um so Jamie the question that you were bringing up regarding cutting plans and so cutting plans as long as they are removing above a certain amount of wood they have to be approved by the Department of Conservation and Recreation DCR in Massachusetts if the cutting is within the town and if the cutting is on wetlands or adjacent to wetlands then they will contact us regarding that and so there is some coordination but if it is just uplands no we don't have any purview related to that um and so Fletcher do you have anything you want to add on the cutting plans piece here obviously right um no you pretty much nailed it but I think um but Aaron already said it that we already have an enforcement order and conditions on this property so that's therefore the the cutting plan was denied because of that so there is no cutting plan um we are the jurisdiction on for the for the wetlands on this property and so we're here we are with an enforcement order okay so Benjamin um kind of uh I talked with Aaron about a meeting you had where the Wilson's came around November and it sounded like they acted in pretty bad faith they denied that they had done anything wrong at that meeting uh they brought in a septic tank person who said he had looked at the property and that they had followed the plan uh to me that shows really bad faith and I would encourage the committee not to extend uh extend the permit make them start from the beginning thank you Benjamin yeah I just make one request before people stop start jumping off this call anybody who hasn't already been in touch with me as far as being in a butter on this site could you just coordinate somehow and send me your email addresses because for future um uh discussions on this I think it would be worthwhile for you guys to be included on the discussion and so I'd just like to copy you on emails if if we're going to be having um you know meeting discussions where this property is discussed okay so thank you Aaron that'd be great okay so is there anybody else from the public um who'd like to weigh in at this point okay so um back to us um to the commissioners on this one and yeah there's definitely some yeah some weird and bad stuff that's happened on this one um they've been given of you know I think a very fair chance on this one I mean initially when they were coming before us and we needed to do a short term extension I thought we were pretty generous with that um yeah so I'm not really I'm not feeling very compelled by their argument that they can't find someone especially given what you were saying Aaron um yeah I don't quite know why that is if they only have certain people who want to work with if it's some tactic I cannot you know say one way or the other what's going on there um we have our deadline at this point um and particularly it seems did they mention Aaron why they weren't showing up tonight I mean that feels very weird to me um the lack of news very so so this was this wasn't I wasn't anticipating this tonight all these are butters showing up um and so this was merely meant to just give you guys an update on my communication with them so that you guys were in the loop but as it turned out like a day or two ago I was contacted and I told them if you want to listen in on the meeting you can but they obviously know one another and so everybody showed up um so that was I merely was just going to give you guys sort of a status update like I did at the beginning of the meeting I didn't anticipate this at all so I didn't like extend an invite for them to be involved because I didn't know that this was going to happen okay yeah and I mean as the butters know as well as anyone I think it was just you Fletcher you and I who were on the commission at that point but yeah this was a pretty big deal when it happened and at least my recollection was I get the two lots confused but the bigger lot was the one that I recollect actually concentrating more on and the first time I went out there I was confused um and so but yeah we definitely dealt dealt with both of them and I thought actually the other one was more complex they're not easy I mean just to build in there all the replication we they have to do the rain gardens I mean the crossing yeah we did we individually treat individual trees it was so I wouldn't want to build it I'm playing a little bit of catch-up when does the enforcement order or when does the extension sorry expire right the end of February end of February okay and what are the reasons to further extend that aside from the fact that they can't find a surveyor are there any other reason well that I think I'm agreeing with you guys this yeah so they they had requested the extension first and that's when the import the violation was discovered so and then they claimed that it wasn't a violation they said no no we didn't do anything to damage any wetlands and so they were going to but there was wetland flags missing out there obviously it looks like a wetland's been filled in um so um long story short we issued a very short term extension to give them the benefit of the doubt so that they could go out there and reflag and demonstrate that they had done nothing wrong but now they're not proceeding with that flagging um in a timely way and the permit's going to expire before they get the the wetland flags rehung as I recall we that extension was longer than some of us felt was necessary right we were generous larry I think yes we were generous yeah I I think we should anyway I think that was our mistake we shouldn't have extended it that long no I mean I'm okay with giving we need some sort of there needs to be some sort of time a reasonable time I don't quite know what that is nobody does but they still have plenty of time I mean so you know end of February you know so if they really want to get their butts in gear they can still do it granted they're gonna have to come back before us and we're gonna need to approve those points as well so it's not just they're gonna come back and we're like okay we're all good to go that's just gonna you know continue the conversation yeah and the enforcement at this point is not going away um they're gonna have to deal with the enforcement if their permit expires their permit expires but they're gonna have to restore the area that's been damaged regardless um from my perspective I guess it's like what what's the next step I mean I could reach out to Pete and say hey I got this quote from the original surveyor this is what they've asked to do it they can do it right now what's the hold up you know you guys can do it and get it done or we can just leave the ball in their court to the clock is ticking you know it's really um I don't want to I didn't want to do too much due diligence on their behalf it was more like for me to know has has bucky been contacted is there anything we can do because if if they don't respond to this enforcement what's our next step I mean it's gonna end up being finding or something and if we can avoid that I would rather work with them to get it done than to start finding them by the day but if it comes down to that then it may when we have time when we get to the point of attempting to renew can we tell them now that we expect to see some of the remediation they're supposed to do by that time to show their good faith absolutely and that's one of the reasons why I wanted to bring it up tonight was to give you guys some lead time if you want to say hey if you guys want an extension you have to do x y and z by this date otherwise you're not going to get your extension and I mean there's a lot of new information it's been presented tonight so maybe you guys want to think about it and talk about it at the next meeting to kind of come up with something or maybe you're ready tonight I don't know I just I would like to see us say that they should show some good faith that they're going to restore the things they were asked to restore they should begin that process well Erin it seems like you've gone above and beyond already and in so many ways that I'm having a really hard time finding that the drive to continue to literally give them the answers when they're not taking any of them yeah I mean the biggest thing for me is and why this is sort of um it has made me feel better to talk to the butters is because at that meeting I was basically told I didn't know what I was talking about and that you know no wetlands were filled in you know I've been out to the site know what I've been doing this for 35 years no wetlands were filled in and it's like if you just look at the plan and stand on the site you can kind of see where the wetland was supposed to be and it's not there anymore and there's no flags so it kind of just I needed to redeem myself and feel like I was doing that I hadn't you know that this wasn't just me making a bad judgment call like other people saw it too you know yeah and I guess on that note to the butters who are still on the call like thank you for advocating I guess like even though it was not necessarily even though it may have been somewhat of a surprise it's it was really good that was really helpful um thank you okay could I just weigh in for a sec please so I've been listening to everything and I was around the table when when when the project when the lots were permitted a couple of years ago so number one I think Erin has has done a tremendous job gone above and beyond and from a from a staff resource standpoint I I'm not really in favor of spending any more town time helping this developer um and happy to go on record with that um I think the commission it would be very helpful if the commission gave Erin some direction um tonight on how to how to proceed or how to communicate I think with Mr. Wilson um I think you've given him the benefit of the doubt multiple times and there is adequate evidence here that um he is not proceeding in good faith so um I I think you've been more than generous with extended deadlines and and the conversations you've had with him as has Erin and and I think we just need to be as clear as possible with our communication with him and then take the necessary steps um whether it's not granting that extension obviously keeping the um the um um you know the cease and desist in a work order in place and making it clear that there there will be replication I think Erin's very early point was that with the flags gone on the ground you don't you know you can you can bring the plan but you really don't know where the wetlands were and the streams were because the site is such a mess so um I think I feel like we've reached the point of enough is enough and it's really in Mr. Wilson's uh court to do something or not um but I don't think we should bend any you should bend any longer further and and um I don't want to spend any more staff time on this project if uh from the town standpoint thanks yeah I agree with what everybody's been saying and yeah Erin I think that you've done a phenomenal job and have gone above and beyond and so yeah nobody ever doubted your your take um but yeah you've been vindicated many times over and so yeah I mean one of the actions I think we can take is basically sort of a no action meaning that plan set out at this point and so he needs to get surveys done by that date if that doesn't happen by that date there is no continuation period um once the so that's one scenario other scenario is that they actually do get the surveys done by then if that happens then that needs to come before us and then we need to figure out next steps then um and so that's obviously not the end all be all but I mean that's just the beginning but without that we can't even start we don't know the total area that's been impacted obviously stuff has been impacted but we need that to start with before we can really move forward and that's been spelled out for him already so I think Brett that's it we just wait until the next meeting comes and we already we already told them what we're looking for in order just to proceed to even look at the extension and they clearly know that their extension is up because they called to get the extension so but if I could yeah sorry I just want to be clear though that you spell out and if Aaron needs to send them another letter to confirm what it is the commission needs before we put this on another agenda because I think it's a complete waste of staff time and your time if we're just going over these things again and again and again what do you you know what do you need um you know there are other parallels here I think we have another enforcement issue farther south um uh where the commission has clearly asked for um you know flags to be reset survey um a wetland scientist to be hired have we have we required Mr. Wilson to hire a wetland scientist to uh consult with him on this project moving forward I mean I'm just I just don't want to be back two weeks from now and have him come in and say you know what do you what do you need from me or or you know or or we we rediscuss the same thing that's been discussed I agree with what David said I think we've got to go on strong and it's and demand some expectation of why we should continue with this can you I mean do do have we can you remind us or are there things that haven't been communicated with him yet or can we re-communicate uh what we need what the commission needs from him moving forward yeah I agree that it's worth I think we're overdoing it but I do think that it's worth having a final I'll just call a final communication with him um just reiterating that this is the deadline this is what we need so it needs to be surveyed um before we can you know so that's the first step after that we are going to be requiring some sort of proposal on his point for um for remediation of that site and that is up to the applicant to propose that and so that's the point Dave where I think you're trying to um go is that that is going to require a wetland scientist to develop some sort of plan and then that will be coming that'll need to come before us but we will need to be okay with that delineation and then obviously we're going to have to have discussions about what that plan is so I would argue that those I don't want to see us I was gonna say I don't want to see us ask for more things like a delineation that allows him to postpone beyond the next deadline yeah but I think but didn't we already asked what Aaron asked him is that put the original flags back so we can therefore see what has been done so we don't even know the extent so I think it's I think sticking with the simple thing like there were flags out there already delineated put them back and a verification they're correct of course yeah and I mean that's not going to be enough for a continuation I mean maybe he gets a you know um you know a so many mont