All right. Hi everyone. Welcome to the May 11th. Amherst conservation commission meeting. It is seven oh three. I, the first item on the agenda is comments from the chair. That's me. I don't have anything specific. Overview of the meeting. I mean, we have three hearings. And then several other kind of business and land management things to take on. So it's a pretty full meeting. Aaron, do you think that we will do an executive session for an update on the zero Tuckerman road. Enforcement. I'll defer to you, Jen. I don't really want to give any update without being in session. Yeah. But I did proceed as the commission requested. So. Okay. I think we can do a little bit of an update. But if we want a more thorough update, we can enter or we can, if we run out of room, we can table it to the next meeting too. Cause we actually, there's no. There's no urgency in covering it tonight. It was more so just because we had scheduled the last meeting. Okay. Okay. Yeah. And that's good. So just to update if there's anyone. Okay. I'm going to turn to our Tuckerman road. We are now handling that enforcement order in executive sessions, which are closed to the public because discussing it in a public forum could have a detrimental effect on the town's litigating position. So we have a placeholder. On the agenda for this meeting and likely the coming handful of meetings as we figure out how to proceed with that enforcement of this meeting as to whether we move in that direction or not. But just so you know if you're here to learn more about ZR.com and Lane, unfortunately, that's not going to be covered in the public portion of this evening's agenda. But otherwise, as far as I know, the rest of the two NOIs and the request for determination are on for tonight. So looks like the agenda is as you see it online. So that's my update. Dave, nice you just joined. Hi, Dave. Did you have any updates or anything to report out this evening? No, I don't. I mean, there's a lot of stuff happening out there. I know you guys have a full agenda, but it's just kind of getting ready for spring and summer projects. You know, we're trying to hire summer staff, which is a challenge right now because it's hard to find staff. My thoughts actually this afternoon as I was leaving the office, my thoughts kind of went to Buffers Pond and, you know, the great weather, the great stretch of weather we're going to have here and UMass graduation. So Brad and Tyler are going to kind of be on on on call if you will, as will our police department just to help us out with Buffers Pond if things get busy up there. So lots of projects. We're starting to really Erin and I have been in a number of conversations about Hickory Ridge and we're starting to pre-plan a little bit for the Amethyst Brook Bridge replacement project, which you all have permitted and we'll have more updates on that as we go. I think we're out in the field tomorrow looking at that project. And there's there's still some questions about how that project is going to come together. So yeah. Okay. Yeah, it's that time of year where it's the air temperatures warm but the water temperature is not yet warm.   All right. Thanks, Steve. So the first item on our agenda is land management. It sounds like there's an update maybe maybe just to kind of make the KC Trail Bridge a little bit safer for pedestrian crossing. Erin or Dave, where you guys can update on that? I saw in the folder that you put in all like the permanent materials for that bridge replacement. Why don't I start for one minute and then turn it over to Erin. So the KC Trail Bridge, which is off of Southeast Street, has been a focus of our attention for a long time. This is a bridge that we actually, we, the town through the concom, are actually on the underlying fee. But it's a very narrow strip of land. It's an old farm access that actually gets the trail gets us out to the Norwatic Rail Trail. Maybe some or all of you have walked it. And there is a bridge over the Hop Brook, which again, traditional farm bridge with concrete and kind of old, quite old farm abutments. And those abutments have been eroding and kind of moving toward falling into the Hop Brook for some time. The project, a bridge replacement project was permitted through the commission some time ago. Since then, and Erin has come on board, we've really kind of begun to rethink that a little bit from a lot of standpoints, not the least of which is the cost of that potential replacement. And so short of that rethinking about the larger project, what we'd like to do, and if you've walked the trail, there's a number of layers of plywood and other wood that have gone over that old bridge. It's actually a, the bridge is supported by I believe three I beams and, and then some concrete abutments. And what we'd like to do is at least put in a safe temporary bridge on top of the abutments. So essentially no, no earthwork. We want to strip back some of the layers of the plywood just because those are rotted and not safe. And really just put a prefab, if you will, a pedestrian bridge, if you will. I mean, with a couple of stringers and some decking and, and some railings over the I beams to just get us through this year, because this is a project that we do need to rethink about. So I don't know, Erin, if you want to be a little more specific or you have any photos of the bridge, that would be helpful. But take it from here. Yeah. And I'm, I'm not really queued up with photos of the bridge. But from what I understand from talking with Brad, the plan would be to sort of mimic the, the bridge design that was approved for the sweet Alice, which had been designed by Berkshire design group. So again, not putting footings in the ground, but just not not excavating for the footings, but just having like basically setting up basically a brick in place on either side and then doing stringers across it so that it was safe to pass over. Again, is a temporary measure just to get us through until we have a more permanent solution. I can kind of describe it. So like right now there are the three I beams and the decking was like very rotted in places. And so someone wisely put a bunch of plywood sheeting over that. That was us. Yeah. Yeah. So I assumed it was Brad. Yeah. And that now is kind of degrading and like warping a little bit. So it's a pretty big trip hazard. So I think my instinct is that this is a safer solution. I should have in my intro remarks, I should have also noted that this was a historic farm bridge, but it is, I believe the only access for the farmer, and I'm blanking on the farmer's name. I know there's a fairly new owner who I still call it the mad woman farm, but it's no longer the mad woman farm. Anyway, the farm just to the south of the bridge has the right to pass and repass over the bridge to get to their APR yard hayfield. So the challenge for us is we have some obligation to recreate a bridge. There we go. This beautiful bridge. We have some obligation, legal obligation to get tractors and farm equipment over this bridge. So that is our challenge right now. And we've posted the bridge not safe for vehicular access at this point. But so that's kind of where we are. And again, I think you can see from the pictures, we simply want to place something, we're going to peel back some of the layers of the onion, peel back some of the layers of the bridge and basically see what's under there. And then we believe the I beams are perfectly safe. And we're going to place a wooden structure on top of that so that pedestrians can can move over the bridge safely.  There we go. That's a great shot. I have so many shots of it. It's just getting my fingers on them quickly. But there's a couple. And I think that that abutment, so the river descending river left abutment has actually failed further than in this picture. So that's Bob in that picture. And that's when we permitted the bridge replacement. And I know that since then, the existing conditions out there, the abutments have been like undermined during that really dry summer of 2020, they just kind of caved. Yeah, unfortunately, it's quite a pinch point for the hop brook. And there's a lot of flow through there. There's a lot of scour. Yeah. Yeah. So it's a tricky one. It's a tricky one to permit. It's a tricky one, you know, natural heritage issues. The hop brook is a really important sweet brook with lots of rare species and dwarf wedge muscle, not the least of which. So we want to we want to give ourselves a little time just to figure this out, but be safe for pedestrians. Yep. That all makes a lot of sense to me. I'm really glad I think that's good thinking because it's a big and undertaking to do a full replacement. So just making it safer in the meantime, I think makes a lot of sense commissioners. Did anyone have any questions? Any concerns? Right. Well, we will proceed and Aaron will keep you up to date. Again, I think this will happen in the next 30 days or so. Okay. So this is this is a higher priority than than some other things we're doing. So we'll get out there and put something down as per the Berkshire design plans that we used for Sweet Alice. Okay. Thank you, Dave and Aaron. Hi, Fletcher. Welcome to the party. Sorry, I'm late, but I'm here. Thanks for making it. So there was one other thing on that agenda under land management and that is 37 Bay Road emergency culvert replacement. Yes. So Dave and I have been working with the Kestrel Land Trust. They have a culvert that conveys the plumb brook under their driveway. The culvert has been in structural failure for a few months now. It's taken time obviously with everything going on. To secure an engineer, get a design concept, find a contractor to do the work and basically schedule a start date. There's a couple sort of moving parts to the project. So I just wanted to update you guys and hopefully get your approval for an emergency certification for us to proceed with the culvert replacement. Okay. So the first is I've been in contact with DEP, presented the entire scenario to DEP. The concern with it being an emergency is that the town needs access to the dam for maintenance and this structure is literally on the verge of collapse. So it's a public health and safety issue. If the culvert does go, then it could potentially be an issue for Bay Road. So we really, it is a pretty significant safety issue and we have an engineer sign off saying that it's a structural failure and a pretty significant risk right now. DEP has said they're in full support of an emergency cert for us moving forward with the permitting process for the replacement of the culvert. We also, knowing that this was going to happen and trying to figure out how to do it because the Plumb Brook is a significant water body and it really has some significant velocities. We inspected the dam, which is historically known as the Epstein pond dam, but we kind of started referring to it as the Plumb Brook pond. There's a spillway that has stop logs that control the water level to the pond. And in the course of that inspection, the engineers determined that several of the stop logs at the top of the spillway are punky and not in good condition and need to be replaced. And so knowing that our intention is that we have to replace those stop logs. And we did include that in our order of conditions for the Sweet Alice property. So that was built into our order of conditions that we needed to do that, whatever dam maintenance work was required, including potentially replacing rear boards through that order of conditions. The intention is for us to do a slow controlled drawdown with the supervision of our dam inspection engineer. We're hoping that we would only have to remove the top few rear boards, stop logs, and in the meantime fabricate new ones to replace the ones that are in bad condition. In the course of doing that, it would draw down the pond. And when we put the rear boards back in, there would be a very temporary window of a few days where the stream flow would be significantly reduced or come to a stop. And so that's when we're targeting to do the culvert replacement. So we've really been trying hard to synchronize these activities so that we can be sort of smart about doing them at one time. I've been in touch with the Office of Dam Safety. They're in full support of the repair of the replacement of the stop logs. So we have DEP. We have the Office of Dam Safety who've signed off on it. And then the last piece is the Army Corps, which we're in the process of doing a self verification with the Army Corps of Engineers, notifying them basically of the correspondence with both DEP and the Army and Office of Dam Safety, providing them with a copy of our plans. This is going from a 48 inch culvert to a 72 inch culvert. So we're significantly improving the carrying capacity of the culvert. It is not an open bottom culvert. Unfortunately, the open bottom culverts, open bottom arch concrete or a bridge would have been in the range of $150,000 to install there. We were able to find an affordable option, which is an arch culvert, which is its closed bottom, but we're going to construct a natural stream bed within the culvert itself. And it's going to be partially embedded. So to try to create a natural stream substrate underneath it, there will be armoring of the head walls on either side, which will be important in case of a failure of the spillway at some point in time to try to be able to protect the banks as much as possible in the event of a serious issue there. We have a soft start date of March 30 for the start of work. The culvert replacement would be, did I say March? I meant May. Sorry. May 30. And then the work would be completed of the culvert work would be completed by June 4. That is the intention of the contractor to get the work to replace the culvert very quickly installed. And then once the culverts installed, the additional work would take probably an additional week to do the finish grades, repaving the driveway, et cetera, final stabilization measures. So my ask of the commission is that you would support the work that we've been doing to try to get this done expeditiously and consider it to be an emergency and as such issue an emergency certification so that work can begin on May 30. And I'm happy to answer any questions. And I would give a full report on the whole project from start to finish. I've been out there dozens of times since this was discovered and worked with the engineer to design it properly. Communications with all agencies have been through me. Yeah. Good job coordinating this, Erin. I'm imagining that's a lot of moving parts. So I have a couple of questions. And then I see Michelle, I know you had a question and I'm sure other people have questions. Who's the contractor? The contractor is, let me just... My last name is Austin, I believe. Yeah. Right from Belcher Town. I'm not sure if... Yeah. It's... I'm sorry. I've got his email signature here. So the work is actually on Kestrel Land Trust property. So they are the ones who contracted with him, not us, to do the work. And just I want to note too, while Erin's looking that up for... There are some additional attendees here. I just want to note too that we're really focused on the reculvert replacement, but the dam itself is safe. There's nothing wrong with the dam. You know, just anyone listening to the call. And then the other major issue, just to point out, is that Kestrel is paying for the construction. We have helped. Erin has done a terrific job, as usual, with some of the permitting issues. But the contract to repair the culvert is actually with Kestrel and they will be paying for that work. We have chipped in around the edges because it is our access to the Plum Brook Pond and to the safety issues of maintaining that dam. But Kestrel is paying most of the freight on this, which they should. It's their property. Okay. So yeah, so stated in questions. So you said, Erin, just clarify for me. So is it possible to make those replacement wear boards? Okay, so actually, let me give you some context. I'm worried because we're having such a dry spring about also drying out the creek for five days. It's just a sensitive time for like young of year for fish, for all of the macro invertebrates that those fish in the creek then rely on throughout the year. And we're already dry, right? So and I know you know this, like I know we're trying to minimize the amount of time that we're that we're doing this. So I'm thinking, one, does this contractor have experience working in creeks? Like, are they going to understand that we're not paving this? We're building a natural substrate stream. Are they going to be able to handle it if the flow conditions are something different than what they're anticipating? And do they understand the urgency of replacing those wear boards quickly so that that this can be as short duration as possible? It's almost I would almost only because I know how hard it is to do a culvert replacement with any flow. Am I not saying you should have some minimal flow? I know that that would be a mess. I'm not going to say that. But it's tempting to almost say like, can we keep some amount of minimal flow just for some amount of refugia for what's already in the creek?  So the first is it's RG Austin Services LLC out of Belchertown that was selected. I put a call out to probably 15 or 20 contractors. They were the only ones available to do this quickly. And they are very experienced folks. They've got like three generations of this type of work in their in their experience. So they're experienced folks doing the work. One point that might kind of hopefully help some of your concerns is that as soon as Plum Brook goes under this culvert, another intermittent stream comes into it. So there will be flow in Plum Brook. It's going to be minimal. There will be water in it. But there is a intermittent stream that comes over from the Allison side and flows underneath a culvert in their driveway. So it's not going to be the stream will only be dry for the section where this culvert replacement work is happening. There it's not going to be its usual very large stream flow condition. But there will be some flow. The contractor is aware that we are hustling to get this in there. There will be an engineer on site who is supervising the compaction under the culvert, the placement of the culvert, and they understand that these design plans were done by a structural engineer who the specs are very specific about what's required as far as having riverstone within the culvert itself for the embedded culvert. So I'll be on site. Dave will be on site. We have an engineer overseeing the work on site. We have done everything we can to try to do this as responsibly as we can. And also quite frankly, this culvert could have been replaced in kind. And that's what we've been trying to avoid is let's make this significantly better because what's there now is there's basically a huge impoundment on the upstream side and there's a huge washout on the downstream side because the culvert is so significantly undersized that it's just damming up water and it's shooting through the pipe at this point. It's the structural failure is on the sides of the culvert, not on the bottom. Ordinarily in these steel corrugated metal pipes, you see the bottom. They corrode out, yeah. They corrode out. In this case, it's the sides. And right now, Kestrel has a steel plate going over the top, the steel plates on the verge of falling. So no emergency vehicle could get over it at this point. But I hope I answered all your questions. I try to get on all of them. Yeah, no. And I know that you guys are doing this with all of that in mind, but I felt like we needed to emphasize that it's just a sensitive time of year. Could I just add, and I'm sure if the commission has more questions and Erin is the person to answer them. No, I just from listening to Erin's description, you just get a sense of the thoroughness of her first or her assessment of the situation and the goals of the project. Kestrel has been very, very cooperative, obviously. And it's been great having a structural engineer on the team. And that's part of what we were able to bring to the table. The other thing just to clarify, if it wasn't clear, Jen, we and the engineer, we are on the wear board side of things. So that's not on Austin. Austin will be downstream. We'll be coordinating that. But the removal of the wear boards and the stop logs will be on us. And we're working now on how to get even a closer look at one to fabricate them in advance. So Erin and Brad are going to be coordinating that with somebody who could mill these either in advance or quickly, and then we'll make adjustments on site. So some of this is new to us. It's a big flow structure if you haven't been there.  So we will take all precautions and, you know, we're taking it very seriously, both on the, you know, keeping staff safe, but also coordinating with the contractor. Okay. Yeah, so sorry, I feel like I've taken up the air commission. Does anyone else have any comments, concerns or questions? Michelle, I know. Yeah, you sort of touched on it, just sensitive time, sensitive habitat right there. And I was just wondering if natural heritage was bringing on this or Erin sort of elades some of my concerns about flow, but it's definitely a sensitive habitat area. Yeah, so I don't believe this is in an HESP habitat area. And I believe I've checked that a couple times. So it's, I don't believe it's an HESP habitat in the area where the culver replacement is taking place. And the downstream.  Yeah, I mean, we, we were trying to do it in earlier. I know, I understand. It is what it is. We couldn't get a design completed quickly enough. We couldn't get a contractor lined up quickly enough to do this in like March when we would have wanted to do it. But it's, you know, we've been hustling to try to do it as quickly as we can. But I will double check the NHSP habitat maps just to make sure that we're not getting into, you know, any habitat areas. But I have checked it previously, and I don't believe that we're in any NHSP habitat area with the work area. Now, is there anything downstream? There may very well be. DEP will be notified. And, you know, Army Corps will be notified. And, you know, I'll check in with Dave and see, you know, we'll, we'll kind of, we'll talk to the consultant who's helping us and see what they suggest as far as the NHSP. And if there is any habitat area downstream, kind of how to approach that. But if I could quickly comment on that, no, Michelle, it's a good, good question and and one to definitely Erin have follow up on. But my recollection is that there is estimated under priority habitat downstream and upstream. If I'm not mistaken, it may be for a terrestrial turtle. So I don't believe there's anything in the stream itself. And that turtle, yeah, so we'll check it. But I think it's downstream and then upstream closer to the Mount Hoyok range, kind of upgrading toward the power lines and that area I believe is estimated in priority and priority habitat for, for certain turtles. So anyway, thank you. I think I should also say for the record that usually this time of year wouldn't be as sensitive as it is right now this year, because for whatever reason, we just, well, we haven't gotten a lot of rain, ET is kicking in and it's been wicked windy. So streams are just low. And so that's, that's why the concern, but I think you guys have, you can't plan for no rain, right? In when in a time of year when usually there's rain. So this is much better now than if it were in August or like a low flow time of year where the system is already really stressed. So I think for the record, we should point out that like all the world's planning can't prepare for how much rain we get in a month. So this is much better than waiting. We'll keep you from a fisheries and aquatic ecology perspective for sure. And let's see how the next couple of weeks we still got two and a half, three weeks before we even launched this. So let's just see what happens. It could totally turn around. Yeah. And depending on which way it goes, if things get worse, maybe we pause for a minute and say, hmm, do we do this? Do we make adjustments in the plan? What do we do? Yeah. Yeah, I have to keep track of a lot of that for work and stuff. So if it helps to check in, Erin, let me know. And I'm glad I'm glad you even mentioned that other that tributary that that other stream because I completely forgot about that stream coming in from from the southeast, I guess it is. Yeah, I think that'll help dramatically. The other thing, Jen, that I didn't answer on your initial round of questions was that we do have an emergency contingency plan in place for turbidity curtain for emergency pump around just in case we get a significant rainfall in the middle of this work. And again, we're planning it. We're trying to schedule it. Like you said, we can't schedule for the rain. But if there's significant rain, we may need to either push it off and or we may need to have dewatering in place to handle this. That's a worst case scenario. We have an upland dewatering area to settle out any flow that is turbid. And that's all incorporated as part of the plan set. What I'll do for the next meeting is prepare a folder with all the documents so that you guys have a set of the plans. You can see photos of the site. You can see all the documents. I'm working right now to compile everything so that we can provide it to the Army Corps. And so I'm just a little strapped for time in terms of preparation for sharing things with you guys. But I want you guys to see everything and understand everything. So I'll make sure that you guys have access to all those documents. That's great. Yeah, I would definitely take a look at those. Yeah, so do you need us? So is this informational or are you asking for us to issue this emergency start now? Well, so we wouldn't technically need to issue the certificate of compliance right now because we have another meeting before the work would start. However, what I'd like to do is include the emergency certification in the packet that's being sent to the Army Corps of Engineers so that they can see that the commission is deemed this to be an emergency and just provide it with the full packet of information that's going to them from the Kestrel land trust. So that's why I'm asking you guys if you'd be willing to issue it tonight. And like I said, I'll be providing an update for you at the next meeting of where we stand, start date, and all that. But the packet needs to be mailed two weeks prior to the start of work. So that's why it's on the agenda tonight. Well, I think, yeah, I mean, from a typical definition of an emergency certification that certainly fits. I mean, between a failing culvert that prevents emergency vehicular access to the property and the weir boards needing to be replaced on the dam, I think that's a no brainer. I'm 100% comfortable with that. But commission, I want to give everyone a chance to voice any concerns about issuing the emergency start now if you have any. Otherwise, it's going to do more good than harm. Yeah, I think you're fixing the problem. And, you know, I understand everybody's sensitivity to timing. But if you're able to knock this out, like the way you're talking about Aaron, you sound pretty stinking thorough, and you're going to fix something that's in that's not helping right now. Nevermind, for personal safety for the public, we're talking about the habitat here, right? So yeah, my support. Yep, I agree with that. Thanks, Fletcher. Well said. Okay, then I think we're looking for a motion to issue an emergency certification for culvert replacement at 37 Bay Road. I'll make the motion to ratify or create just to issue it to issue an emergency. 37 Bay Road for culvert replacement. And the weir boards are now just the culvert replacement, just the culvert replacement, the culvert, culvert replacement. Okay, I have Fletcher on the motion when we're in the second and we'll do a voice vote. Larry. Yes. Roy. Michelle. Hey, Andre. Hi, Fletcher. Hi. And I'm an I. Thanks, Aaron, for all the conscientious work on that. All right, so moving on. I have 738 and our NOI for the UMass Five Credit Union at 398 and 406 Northampton Road was scheduled for 730. So I think we can jump into that hearing unless there's a reason not to, Aaron. Nope, open it. Okay, will you pull people in and I'll read my thing? Of course. This public hearing is now called to order. This hearing is being held as required by the provisions of chapter 131 section 48 of the general laws of the Commonwealth and act relative to the protection of wetlands as most recently amended in article 3.31 wetlands protection under the town of Amherst general bylaws. So I'm promoting Rachel Laughler and Jess Schoendorf. And I apologize if I mispronounce your names. If there's anybody else that I should be pulling in from Berkshire design or the owner, please let me know.  I mean for the introducing and Jessica will also be presenting. Do we both have the ability to screen share? You should. Yeah, if you have any trouble, let me know and I can open it on my side. And just to give you guys welcome, just to give you a quick, I should have done this before I open the hearing, but what we've been doing lately is just because we've had such full meetings, there's so much going on, we're trying to stick to kind of a five minute overview of the NOI application from you guys and then kind of five minute-ish update from staff, including site visit pictures and then questions from the commission. And then we'll open it up to the public for kind of two minutes of very relevant comments or questions per person. So we're loosely trying to stick to that agenda just because for that plan, because our agendas have been just so incredibly full. So I appreciate your understanding on that. And if you guys wouldn't mind just introducing yourselves and kind of orienting us to the permit, that would be great. Sure. I'm Rachel Leffler, a principal with Berkshire design group, and I'm here with Jessica Schornhoff, with also with Berkshire design. And we've been working with others in our office on the project, as well as Coomeral Architects, A. Land, Terny, Charles Roberts, and Princess Gopi Dow on the project. So we're here with a complete package for review. We're here today because UMass 5 would like to have a more prominent branch in Amherst along Route 9. And there are two parcels that are ideally located for them. On Route 9 between Greenleaves Drive and University Drive. So there's an existing residence and existing maintenance garage that are going to be demolished and a new branch will be placed here. We came before you, I believe, in the end of last year, started the year to review the delineation through an ANRAN process that was delineated by Ward Smith in November 2021. And we met with you January 2022. So that serves as the basis for this project scope. Instead of looking at the garage and from the street, this is what a rendering that KRA put together for the project showing what it would look like from Route 9. It's a two-story building set back from the road with a rain garden and then in the front. And lots of landscaping around for screening and quality of experience for folks. This is, in these renderings, this is Route 9 here and here. This is the back of the site. And in the rear of the site, there's only 200 square feet of wetlands that actually sit on our property. The majority of the jurisdiction on this property is actually in the buffer zone. And that's 32% of our parcels within the buffer zone. Jess, do you want to take it from here? Sure. Okay. I'll share my screen instead. So I can point to the things. Okay. So the entire lot when it comes together for the proposed project is just under one and a half acres. As Rachel said, this back portion is the resource area. And this is a picture of where that back garage is located here. So I was looking through that resource area. And it's a severely degraded site with invasives really taking over. There's a lot of bittersweet. There's a multi-floor rose and some garlic mustard, among other invasives. There's also a lot of dumped trash and material that's accumulated over the years through the site. So the project proposes to remove all invasives throughout the site into even the 30-foot resource area buffer back to the property line of the parcels. We're hiring a certified applicator to do this and will prioritize the cut and dab process to remove the invasives over the foliar spray method. There are some trees that need to be removed. In some of these photos you can see the bittersweet has kind of suffocated them and is taking them down. So there are trees that need to be removed for that and then for the project in general. But we are working with an arborist to determine which ones need to come down and which ones can stay. We'd like to keep as many as possible in the resource area. So this is a plan of the proposed project for UMass 5 branch. This is your 100-foot wetland buffer and all the trees proposed in this buffer zone will be native species. And then we have a few more planting pallets throughout the site. We have a fern and birch grove. We have some shrubs including inkberry, bayberry, and sweet pepper bush that will add habitat value to the site. And then some sunny, seeded wildfire areas. And that rain garden in the front that Rachel was pointing out. So that kind of brings us to a quick overview of how we'll do a stormwater on site. The roof, the stormwater that goes onto the roof, the first half will be drained into that rain garden allowed to infiltrate through these terraces. And then there's an overflow drain here that moves into the catch basin that's existing for the site. And that's only for intense storm levels. And then the other half of the roof stormwater system will be drained to the back into this level lip spreader and allowed to infiltrate. And then most of the pavement on site is porous pavement, everything except for the drive, these parking spots, all of these are all porous asphalt. This is in the exit and entry in the apron areas are all standard asphalt just to make the transition smoother to the state road. And just a quick detail of how the porous pavement kind of works. We have the water infiltrating through the first two layers. And then we have these three layers of stone with void space for water to allow for storage of water and then to allow it to infiltrate slowly into the soil. So we realize any change in the resource area or wetland area will impact it just because the nature of the change, but we are generally aiming to balance the changes and hopefully actually improve the degraded site as it stands now. And I hope that was five minutes. So speed up. I will add just to clarify that we are 100% outside of the resource areas except for the clearing of invasives and trash. And there are two points that the stormwater exits the site today. One is to route nine and one is to an insisting outlet structure on the rear of the site. And the stormwater calculations and models that Chris and Liam worked on in our office with this plan shows actually a reduction in the both the volume and the velocity of water leaving both of those points. So we're improving the stormwater capacity of the site. That was great. Thank you so much, Rachel and Jas. It's a great overview. I have a couple questions, but first, Erin, do you want to, would you mind sharing any site visit photos? And I don't, if commissioners were able to attend, I'd love to hear what you guys saw out there. Yes. So I do have site visit photos from the site walk today. I was trying to find the Anrad photos and I was very limited for time today due to other meetings. So I apologize to not have those available, but I think Jess's photos very accurately represent what it looks like from the resource looking toward the existing site. So currently the site is a repair garage for vehicles. This is standing behind the repair garage looking back. There's a bunch of dumped debris and material in the woods. Wood debris and trash. Old railroad ties. Invasives on this site. I really can't emphasize enough the significance of how bad the invasives are. They basically are killing everything. They've completely taken over the entire back portion of this lot. I believe that's garlic mustard that's growing here, the green that you can see in the front. And then you can see in these photos, this is all bittersweet. I don't think I did get, did I get a picture out behind that there's, if you look out directly behind the park, the existing parking area, it's all multi-floor rows back there. So it's like take your pick of the invasives that are on this site. Yeah, so that's general overview of the site visit photos and it was just me. I think Andre showed up a little after. Unfortunately, I had another meeting at 10 o'clock, so I was only able to stay for until about 9.30. Okay, that's super helpful. Thank you. Sorry. Sorry, I did get a look at it and it looks pretty full there. Pretty full of invasives. Okay. So then another detailed question. So I see in our folder, Erin, there's a long comment letter from Jason Skeels. Some of that, I mean, not a lot of it looks jurisdictional to us. So how is that relating to this NOI? Right. So yeah, and I just to sort of boil it down, I do have a, I did have on the site, I had a bunch of comments for Jess and suggestions for Jess, which they responded to today. And then I did have some last minute stormwater questions to follow up with them as well, which they responded to today. So I would definitely like to give them a chance to address those issues that I've raised with them and their responses. As far as Jason, I had two conversations with two conversations with Jason about this site. Jason's only question that's really, I think, from from his memo that is important for us to get to the bottom of was, and I don't have the exact date, but he mentioned that a previous hydrologic calculations from a previous. I see it. It's not clear to me why the 2013 existing conditions are being used as a pre-construction benchmark for the stormwater analysis instead of the actual 2020 pre-construction conditions. So you mean? Yes, that was the question. So that that was the only, and he was just puzzled on that question, why that was used. And so that was one question that we felt like was very relevant. Okay, so it sounds like what we can do today is also collect any further questions from the commission on the project, but we'll have to continue this hearing so that you guys get a chance to respond to both Aaron's comments and Jason's comments relative to our jurisdiction before we can make issue a determination on the permit application. Is that correct? So it's really at your discretion. They did make an effort to address my comments in a revision that was submitted. And also the questions that I had regarding the stormwater were satisfactorily answered. Yeah, so I don't want to jump in too quickly. I'd like to give them a chance to kind of review what issues I raised and how they responded to them. If you guys want to address this and proceed tonight, it really depends if you guys are willing to consider the sort of last minute adjustments that were made based on staff comments. Right. Yeah, sorry. So that wasn't like a dig in any way. I really appreciate you guys getting back to Aaron immediately. And this is a very well organized application. It seems like all the information is here. It's not it's not a that was a procedural kind of question. So why don't then before we jump into Aaron's comments and responses, commissioner, does anyone commissioner, does anyone have any questions at this point? Yeah, let's just a brief one. Since we're on the invasive topic here, we're all those trees like Norway maples back there. Do you guys remember? Oh, should we answer? Should anybody go ahead, Rachel? Yeah, there's a mix. There are a lot of Norway maples on site, but there were there was one hickory, which is near the front. And there were some oaks also. So when you just I've just thrown it out there. If you talk to the arborist and stuff, and if you have an opportunity to take out the Norway maple, I would suggest go for it and go back to planting something else. But that's just me throwing that out there because you're going to. So it looks like you're going to have a lot of invasive work you're going to be doing anyway. So if you're going to get in there and hit it hard, hit it hard and bring it back to something that's a little bit better, like the hickories and the oaks. Fletcher, for the benefit of people who has joined us from the public, why would you also want to remove Norway maple? Oh, because they're kind of like zucchinis of the trees around here. So they're there. I consider them an invasive tree. And they do take tend to take over. As you can see in certain areas outside my door in my yard, it's only Norway maple that grows in there. So those are kind of treated like it and they don't offer quite the, you know, something like a hickory in the oak tree, you know, offer that really nice hard mass, whereas these Norway maples don't offer nearly the complementary characteristics as some of our more native stuff. Okay, thank you. And it's terrible firewood, but that's side effect. Yeah, okay. You almost lost me at the zucchini of trees, but I'm back. Okay, commissioners, any other questions or concerns, comments? Yeah, how are you going to be determining kind of along the same lines, but which trees you were saying that a lot of them have to be cut down because of the invasives? Essentially, because of the bittersweet, how are you going to determine which trees you're going to cut down? We've retained an arborist for this project, and he's visited the site several times and he took our plans after we developed them and walked along and looked at the drift line to see based on the species, what the impacts would be. We can share that report with you, but he has a list of each individual tree. The trees are numbered in site, what he recommends, whether he recommends air spading, cutting, trimming. So we're going tree by tree on this site. So that's for a perspective extremely thorough. So we appreciate that. Thank you. Yeah, so I guess I would say, I think this project is a net benefit to the site, to the resource at this site, especially with the reduction of volume and velocity of storm water leaving the site. I think this is going to be a net benefit to our jurisdiction. Do you want and should we go through your comments and the responses? Yeah, why don't I bomb through my comments and then I'll they can have a chance to bomb through their responses point by point. All right, so one of my concerns on the site or particularly with the plans was that the erosion and sediment control didn't have the buffer zones outlined as the other plans did. So I asked them to add the 30 foot buffer onto the erosion and sediment control plan, which they did. You know, this site goes from portions of the buffer being undeveloped to development up to the 30 foot. And so one of my comments that I emphasized with this permit was if you're going to go that close to the resource area up to the 30 foot no disturb, then there should be and we do allow up to 25 feet with parking areas under our bylaw. I should add under our current bylaw, but that there should be some net gain to the resource area. And so I think that the treatment of invasives, the removal of invasives from the site to try to restore that wetland complex right now, I would agree with them that it's a significantly degraded resource in that particular area. So improvements to restore some native species to that area would be a tremendous benefit. And so I do think that their invasive species plan does address that. The other comment that I would like to make is that I've been doing this for a decent amount of time. And this is probably the first redevelopment that I've ever seen that is incorporating 100% low impact development techniques, which we very rarely see. Porous pavement is I never see. And also rain gardens very rarely see those. And the state does give those a pretty significant TSS credit. And I think that the reason for that is because those structures provide recharge to the ground water, which other structures do not where they're just conveying the water away to another place so that it can sit in a basin somewhere and not recharge. So I think that there are some significant benefits to what's proposed in terms of the overall sort of design concept that they came up with here. I did note that they're showing overflow to a catch basin and an existing catch basin in North Hampton Road and noted that MAST DOT would have to approve that since their proposal is to have emergency overflow going into that structure emphasize the need for all native species within buffer zone and also the need for species that have habitat value and wildlife value on the site. And I think that that has definitely been addressed. Just let me move up to my stormwater comments really quickly. There was a comment about two water quality structures in the stormwater report. And I think that that may have been a typographical error. So I just wanted to confirm or make sure whether or not that was the case because I didn't see any specifications for any water quality structures. It seems as though that was an error that note about water quality structures. Was I right about that? You're correct. Yeah. It was just typographic layer. Forest pavement will provide the 80 percent TSS removal. Okay. Those are not needed. Yeah. Okay. Fair enough. I just wanted to see the specs on them if there were there, which they're not. I provided a sample operation and maintenance log to them to populate for their stormwater structures. And the reason that I do that is because frequently what happens with commercial development sites is that there is a stormwater operation maintenance log where there are required inspections and in required maintenance that has to happen in order for these stormwater structures to function properly over the long term. And a lot of times what happens are that the contractors, whoever's installing this will install everything and then the owners won't maintain it. And the problem becomes when we go to issue a certificate of compliance, I have to basically verify that everything is functioning properly and doing what it's supposed to do. And a lot of times I go to folks after the fact and say, well, where you have met operation and maintenance logs and they say, well, we don't have any. Here's an invoice from the folks who did our maintenance and that's not enough. We need to know that the inspections were done, that the vacuuming was done, that the cleaning was done, that the sweeping was done, et cetera. So I gave them a sample of the log and asked them to fill that out. And once we have that for the site, I think that that will be adequate for me to be able to monitor and make sure that the operation and maintenance plan is being followed. There was a comment about the maintenance of the porous pavement because there's kind of sort of differing information with regard to how porous pavement be maintained. In the DEP operation, DEP, BMP handbook, there's a couple different, there's different sections that describe maintenance differently. So in one section it's, I think it's like inspections as needed and sweep or sweeping or vacuuming as needed. And then in another section it says monthly vacuuming or monthly sweeping. So what they, I believe, came up with was quarterly. Is that, what are you guys going to put? No, twice a year. Twice a year. Okay. That's what we've seen with other projects in our area, once in the fall and once in the spring. Okay. Because it's the main concern, kind of salt and road sand in the winter. So yeah, okay. Kind of like the same if you were sweep, street sweeping. Okay. And then of course, I already mentioned the comment with regard to the mass DEP, basically approving that the culvert, that the catch basin that's in the existing highway layout is acceptable. These are, these may or may not be comments that I've already shared with them, but I don't think any of these are really deal breakers. I think the first is their snow storage plan does show snow being stored in the 100 foot buffer. That would be one thing that I would disagree with, like that we make sure that the snow storage is not located in the 100 foot buffer or it could be stored in areas where treatment can take place. Operation and maintenance log, we already covered DOT, use of DOT structure was already covered. Two water quality structures, that was an error in the report. The comments from Jason Steele's, which we already discussed. I would want to make sure that we have the standard boilerplate conditions. I would just make one comment, which is, our standard boilerplate conditions prohibit use of herbicides and fertilizers in the buffer zone and their work commons. Well, obviously the invasive treatment is very specific and so that would be an exception to that prohibition. But there was some comments in the notice of intent about use of fertilizers. And so I would just wanted to point out that that is a standard condition that fertilizers not be used. And that's to protect the resource from eutrophication. And then monitoring reports, which are again a standard condition, but I would want to see monitoring reports submitted throughout the construction phase as well as for the invasive species treatments to provide us with updates as those processes are underway. So I've been kind of watching Rachel and Jess, you guys have been nodding mostly. Is there anything there that we should discuss? One question about the fertilizers. I know, I don't like to use them either. I don't like what nitrogen does to our fresh water systems and phosphorus or what it does downstream further. We have had some projects where the soils really do need some nutrient amendments through compost or biosolids or something to kind of help get things established. Is that something that you guys are open to and Lou of standard fertilizers? I think our standard boiler plate allows for slow release fertilizers to be used, but otherwise not. Okay, great. Okay. Well, so this sounds like we have a pretty good boundary set on this. I think I should just check in with our public attendees and see if anyone has any questions or comments quickly. If you're joining us for this hearing about the UMass 5 proposed project on North Hampton Road and you have a comment or question relative to the jurisdiction, so relative to the adjacent resource and buffer zone, please raise your hand and I can allow you to talk. I can't see anyone. Give it a couple more seconds. Okay, so with that, I think commissioners, I'm not hearing any major concerns or questions here and I can read back kind of what Erin had as conditions for the permit for to move forward. Is that okay with everyone? Keep moving. So, Jen, my only suggestion would be for tonight just because we're kind of tight and we've gone over a little bit is that we might close the public hearing this evening and then issue at our next meeting issue the actual permit, but is that okay with you guys? Rachel and Jess, does that work with your timeline? I think so. Yeah. We'll also be going to the planning board. Okay. We're waiting to hear the one that data set, so. Okay, so if we issue this permit in the next, this condition department as we've discussed in the next meeting, that will work still. I think so. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Yeah, so I need a motion to close the public hearing for Berkshire Design Group for UMass 5 Credit Union for redevelopment at 398 and 406 North Hampton Road. So moved. Seconded. All right. We got a motion from Laura, seconded by Laura. Hi, Laura. We'll do a voice-over. Larry. Hi. Sorry, Fletcher. What? That's all right. So we're closing the public hearing. Sorry. We're not issuing the permit because we got. Because we just, we just need a second to collect all these details and we want to give Erin a chance to get back with Jason, make sure we're okay and collect this all on one permit. Like right now, it exists kind of in a, in a list on a slide, but it would be helpful to give Erin a second to get organized. So she just did the site visiting, got responses from Berkshire Design Group from Rachel and Jess this afternoon, which again, we really appreciate you guys getting that to us before the meeting. Thank you. Okay. I'm an I. Okay. So we have an I from Fletcher. Larry. Hi. Leroy. Hi. Michelle. Hi. Laura. Hi. Andre. That's an I. Okay. And I'm an I. All right. So we'll issue that permit that with the conditions we've discussed in our next meeting on May 25th. Okay. So do we need to continue the hearing itself? Okay. No, everything's all set. We just, we'll just, we'll just issue the order at the next meeting. Okay. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you very much, Rachel. Thank you, Jess. Well, okay. Nice to meet you. Thanks. Good night. All right. Thanks, Erin. So I have 812. We're running behind our next shocking, our next agenda item is an RDA. Roy Johnson for demolition of existing copper deck and construction of a 20 by 20 foot addition and patio at 109 Blackberry Lane. So, Erin, will you bring people in or let me know who to bring in? Anyone's here? And I'll read the RDA. 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 related to the protection of weapons as most recently amended in article 3.31 weapons protection under the town of Amherst general bylaws. And I see Janet Keller. Would Janet Keller be here for this? I, I'm assuming that's a general question. I believe it's Jeannie Johnson, Roy Johnson's wife, who's there we go. There they are that are joining us for this hearing, but I'm not sure. Okay. Janet may have a general question. Okay, Janet, I'm going to allow you to talk. Do you have a question for us about the meeting? I do. How much time do I have to go back to my other meeting that I left to come here? How long will roughly how long will this take? It's hard to predict. If I come back in 15, 20 minutes, would you think I'd be safe? What are you trying to be here for the next hearing, Janet? Yeah, I believe so. I'm trying to be here. Oh, for the Sunderland Road, I would say probably 10 minutes. I would try to be back. Yeah, I think this one will go quickly. Okay, thanks. Yeah, bye. All right. Jeannie, is that okay? Hello, welcome. So we can see you guys, but we can't hear you. Hi. Now we're good. Oh, yeah, now I can hear you. Okay, welcome. Thank you for being here. Thank you. So yeah, for this RDA, we have a lot of these materials, so I don't know if we need to do anything in depth, but do you want, would you be willing to just introduce yourselves and give us kind of a three-minute overview? So Jeannie and I needed to replace our deck that was over 32 years old. There's a lot of rot, and we wanted to be able to tie it to the roof because the roof that was there before wasn't tied to the roof. So we decided to put an addition in place of the deck. So we've ripped the deck out, and our architect, Tim Nyhart, had designed some plans. We submitted them to the building, her office, building inspector. And then I got a call from Aaron to find out how far we were from the stream in our neighbors. So Aaron had me go out there and we were 158 feet and too close to the stream. And I said to Aaron, but water doesn't run uphill. We'd have to go up over this little berm to get there. And Aaron said, well, that is common sense, but we need to go by the law. So I filled out my first RDA, and I can't thank Aaron enough for helping Jeannie and I through that, because there's a process that I had never done. And she was really helpful. So we filled out the RDA, and we're hoping to be able to get our plans excavated sometime within the next couple of weeks. Great. Thank you for that overview, and thank you for going through this process just to clarify. So the RDA is a request for determination. So we're deciding whether you would have to then file for a full permit. And so when we talk about this, how we move forward, when we say negative determination, that's actually good. That means that you wouldn't move to the next permit just to like clarify that language that's always throws us all for a loop. Just FYI. So when you hear negative, it's actually not bad. Thank you for that counterintuitive. Yeah. Yeah. So Aaron, do you want to just give us a quick tour of the site photos? Yes. So Jeannie and Roy have had this covered deck on the backside of their house, as well as there was a deck to the right of this covered deck. And they're, they've removed basically both of the decks are being being removed. And then the addition would be a 20 by 20 foot that basically takes the place of where this covered deck is currently located, except it would extend out just a few additional feet beyond the existing deck footprint. As far as the, so, and then they would put in a small patio to the right of the new addition. So deck sheds, patios and pools that are over 50 feet from the mean annual high waterline of a perennial stream are considered to be minor activities under the Wetland Protection Act. What triggered this filing was the 20 by 20 foot addition that's on the back of the property. As Roy said, there is a berm which runs between his home and the river. So, and also I should add that there's significant vegetation in the 158 feet in between where this addition is going and where the river is located. I don't really have any concerns about this project at all. It's very simple, very straightforward. My recommendation was to install a straw wattle around the extent of where the work is taking place and where vehicle access is going to be coming into the site. And then my other recommendation was that obviously downspouts be protected on the site for roof drainage, whether that be with stone or some sort of you know, like a concrete level spreader, you know, the small ones, they're like two feet by one foot in size, something like that, because they are going to be putting in that sit at the bottom of the gutter. Exactly. Yeah, just something to protect scour, but I mean, I don't really see any potential for this causing any alteration or any erosion to the resource area. Yeah, I agree with Aaron's assessment of that, and I just want to emphasize that we appreciate you guys coming before us for this, because a lot of the time with projects like these where it's jurisdictional for us, we hear about it when the work is already ongoing, and then it becomes like a thing, like an enforcement process, which is really, it ends up okay, but it's not fun for anyone. So we really appreciate the transparency and you guys taking the time to fill us to fill us in on this, just so we know that it's going on commissioners. Does anyone have any concerns, comments, or questions? Yeah, and so I have, oh yeah, Aaron sharing her PowerPoint, and it looks like, yeah, installation of erosion and sediment control, stabilization of downspouts, site stabilization upon completion with seed and straw, and final inspection upon completion by one's administrator would be pretty standard conditions for a negative RDA for this project. I'm not seeing any questions from commissioners. One, nope. Okay, so we're just looking for a motion. I'll make the motion. I'm sorry, just public comment, we should check. Oh, yes, thank you. I'm sorry. Thank you. I'm sorry to interrupt. No, not at all. So if you've joined us from the, you're a member of the public and you're here for the RDA for 109 Blackberry Lane and you have questions relevant to our jurisdiction, so protection of the well and resource, please raise your hand and I'll allow you to talk. Not seeing anyone. All right. All right, in that case, try this again. Looking for a motion. I'll make a motion. Motion to move to issue a negative determination of applicability with conditions from the Wetland Protection Act checking box three and a positive determination of applicability and the bylaw checking box five. I'll second that. All right, we had a motion by Laura, second by Andre voice vote. Andre. Hi, Laura. Hi, Larry. Hi, Michelle. Hi, Fletcher. Hi, Leroy. Hi, and I'm an I unanimous. Thank you both so much. Thank you. Good luck with your projects. Thanks again, Aaron for helping us through this. My pleasure. Bye. Take care. Bye. Okay, agenda. 740 NOI. Oh, this one's on. This one's agreeing. We're going, huh? Okay. So I've already opened this hearing. We've continued it a couple of times. So this is a notice of intent. Brian Waterman of Waterman Design Group for Montague Road Solar LLC for the addition of two concrete pads with meters disconnects, disconnect switches and reclosers for utility connections to the previously constructed solar array at 285 Sunderland Road. Is there anyone? Oh, I see Brian W. Is there anyone else? I am so stuffed up. I think, yeah, I see Dale. I see Brian. Good evening. I can hear Brian. Great. Yeah, I think Dale from, yeah, there she is joining us. Okay. Hi, Dale. We can see you. You're muted. Just so you know. Hi, everyone. Hi. Welcome. So, Larry, did you have a question? Your hands up. You're muted. Sorry about the accident. All right. So, yeah, so the way we've been doing this, Brian and Dale, is if you wouldn't mind giving us kind of a five minute-ish introduction and overview of the project, especially if you have plans to share, that's helpful with special attention to kind of impacts on the resource, that would be great. And then we'll do an update from Erin with any photos, any updates from any correspondence or site visits. And then we'll open it to the public for any questions or comments, and then commissioner comments and we'll go from there. So if you guys wouldn't mind kicking us off with an introduction and overview, that would be great. Sure. My name is Brian Waterman and Wetland Specials WDA Design Group, formerly Waterman Design Associates. We had worked on the solar project for next amp back in 2016 in order of conditions was issued in 2017. The project was completed in 2019 and issued a certificate of compliance on September 27th in 2019. Since that time, as part of the SMART program, which has to do with the public utilities, and Dale could expand on that more than I could, but they need to make some relocations or sizing of battery system storage and reclosers for the site, which connect out to the utility and get some of the power into the system. So since the site was closed out under a COC before, we filed a new notice of intent for work within the buffer zone. There's no work within a resource area. We did a site walk with Aaron on April 12th to review the current site conditions and outline the proposed work that next amp is looking to do during this course. The first filing we did have, we had two concrete pads along Sunderland Road. This is 285 Sunderland. The whole project is 30 acres between Montague and Sunderland, but this portion is contained on the Sunderland Road side, if you will, with access off of Sunderland Road. It goes in between the two existing ponds there. I don't know if you know this area or Aaron, when you have a chance to bring up the plans, but so you can see the existing solar array off to the east side of the site there, and then there's the existing farmers access way in between the two ponds that's been there historically. So there was an idea to put two concrete pads over here by this kind of gravel, where Aaron's arrow was just now, just the left of that. But the flood elevation has changed and that wetland actually got a little bigger since in the last three or four years. So we continued that hearing and revised the plans to move the concrete pads and the utility utilities that go on the concrete pad to the east. So as you see where Aaron is now moving, you can see where we have a little access drive off the existing gravel with the concrete pad with the two storage units. What this does is it brings it above the mapped flood line up to the FEMA working line, which is elevation approximately 168, 168.5. So the concrete pad would be pouring. It'd be about a foot and a half high and one side and five inches on the other because it's flat running parallel with the contour. And that would get them above the flood elevation. If it ever floods that high, I mean that the pond is down around 159. That'd be coming up almost 10 feet in elevation, which just looking at the surrounding area just doesn't seem possible. But that's what we have to deal with because that's what's mapped by FEMA right now. So the idea is to trench from the concrete pad down to the existing, there's an existing double riser pole with the note there, put a vault there, and then the applicants would be doing directional boring. It's like a six inch bore. Good job there, Aaron drawing that over to another vault. And then that connects into the existing utility poles there. So the directional boring would serve to bore approximately five feet down horizontally under the ground there without tearing up any of the existing driveway without impacting wetlands. It's a very, it's about a six or eight inch drill, I believe. So a machine would park on one side, dig a pit, and then the bore would go in, and then it's driven by sensors and it would cut through the sand and gravel soil that is out there over to the other side. So you wouldn't need to trench and then they pull the utility through. So it's a less invasive way of getting this done. And then there'd be two underground vaults and then the utilities would connect up to the battery storage and recloser that are on the concrete pad. So these were items that were approved back in the original permit, I believe, but they're just being relocated and resized to meet the requirements of the new, the SMART program. This is filed as a limited project under section 1053 3D for utilities. They've picked the least obtrusive. We have the entire area surrounded with erosion control barriers. When we were on site, Aaron brought up a point about maybe doing slurry pits adjacent to the drill ring just in case we do have some back slurry. And we suggested we could also surround the slurry pits with additional erosion control measures, aside from the ones that are shown there to protect the adjacent resource areas. So most of the work would be occurring in or along the edge of the gravel drive. There's no direct impact to resource area. It is filed as limited project and there's no sewer or other utilities or water needs. It's strictly doing the concrete pads, adding the utilities, running the trenches and the lines, and then be out of there. It's a pretty low impact system. Dale, I don't know if I missed on anything, or you wanted to add anything? Yeah, I was going to say, Dale, do you have anything to add to that? I don't. I think Brian pretty much covered it. Yeah, just to add some color to the project development side of things. There was just some communication with the utility that had required some back and forth, which is why we're coming with this now. We just had to clarify the location of the reclosers, which is the proposed equipment on those two pads that Brian was talking about. But yeah, if there's any questions on the system, I can definitely answer those. Okay, thanks. Yeah, so I think Erin is going to share some site photos. I just want to ask quickly, because I know this is going to come up, Brian, when is this work planned and how long will it take? I will default at Dale on that one. I don't think it's going to take very long. The drill rig, I think, is a day and then pulling the utilities through. And then pouring the concrete pad, it's not a big project there. So setting the utilities on top of it and tying the things in, that's beyond my scope. I'll let Dale comment on that. Yeah, I don't have the exact schedule in front of me, but as Brian said, this would be a pretty short process. Yeah, with all of the utility confirmation that everything's good to go, I would estimate two months at most. But the actual construction would take a week or two. So two months for what? For being kind of being mobilized at the site, you're saying? Yeah, yeah, to get final approvals from the utility. Sorry. Oh, two months from now. Okay. And then the actual work once. Yeah, the work would occur before and then just like essentially finalizing things with the utility should take one to two months. Okay, I see. Okay, those are intending on doing the work prior to receiving the interconnection from utility. We already have interconnection approval.  Okay. Can you talk a little bit about the final tests that need to be done prior to interconnection? So the solar system is already operating. It's just essentially testing equipment to make sure it fits their needs and what was agreed to in the interconnection application. Are you guys finding delays with or is there any reason that you believe that that they wouldn't give approval? I mean, everything's already approved. It's just a matter of time. You're just waiting on the utilities timeline. Yeah, yeah. For the most part, the delays occur prior to getting interconnection approval. So most of those delays are out of the way. I had a question about Brian, you mentioned a way that you're planning on pulling a less invasive way of pulling the utility line through, which is interesting. Have you guys done that elsewhere? I haven't personally, but I don't know if Dale or others have. We did some research with some other directional boring projects that have been done in mass. And it's a pretty slick system where they dig this hole and they have the machine and it has almost like a snake, like you were snaking out your drain line almost, but it drills and then it has sensors because that was one of the questions I had, well, how do you set it at five feet or six feet under, but it has sensors and then the guy driving it has the controls like an RC control and it drills along and then they pull the, from what I can tell, they just pull the conduit through that has the cables in it. Yeah. So we actually approved a utility. I can't remember where it was. Erin, you're going to have to remind me, we approved this. I can't, it might have even been an emergency cert to do horizontal drilling to pull utilities over creek recently in Amherst. Where was that? It just did the Leverett water line. Yeah. That was the one you're thinking of, I think, John. There was a utility. I just want to get a sense of if that method doesn't work, what's the alternative method? Is there an alternative method proposed or?  If that was the case, if a trench was needed, they would have to come back to us to let us know, as opposed to just moving forward with trenching it. Those are all my questions. Yeah, we would have to amend and ref, you know, submit new plans. We don't anticipate that happening based on some of the soil stuff that we've run into out here in the past. Thanks for those, Laura. So do you have to go underground or why don't you just run a line across the, is there a line already? I forget, I run my bike by it all the time. Yes, there are overhead wires now. I believe it has to do with the size of the equipment and they can't pole mount it, but again, Dale could expand on that. Yeah, so because of the way the systems are arranged, you would need two sets of pole mounts on other, the opposite side of the road. And because how the original solar poles were mounted, it would not be possible to do that. And unfortunately, you can't pole mount two sets of equipment on the same poles. So that would not be an option here, unfortunately. It's counterintuitive to horizontal drill and put a utility electric utility into conduit like between two ponds. I mean, I know it's a known technology, but I think that's a little bit of the, you know, kind of our hesitancy that it's, you know, strange to bury it, electrical utilities in a wetland. Well, it's going, it's actually going underneath it. Yeah, right. And it's in a sealed conduit. So, right. And if the flood line gets up as high as a high as this, no one's getting anywhere nearer anyway, that road would be under, I think, five feet of water. Right. But for the record too, I've seen this done statewide in many different places. Yeah. Okay. Commissioners, other questions? Okay. I'm gonna take, just open it up to the public for any questions or comments. So if you're here for the NOI permit application at 285 Sunderland Road, and you have a question relevant to the wetland resources, protecting the wetland resources on the site, please raise your hand. We'd be happy to take questions or comments. Not seeing anyone. All right. Well, if for some reason somebody raises their hand in the next couple of minutes, we can take the comment then. So I think it sounds like we have our questions answered here. It looks like the butters were notified. Did the site visit, shared site visits, public comment. We figured out duration of the project and when it will happen. Sounds like, do we? So kind of our SOP is that you would notify Erin, our wetlands administrator during the directional drilling. And we ask for a pre-permitting meeting with a pre-work meeting with contractor and erosion control inspection prior to the start of work. That's just a standard condition usually for us. Okay. Do we know who will be monitoring the site during construction? Yes. They have assigned site supervisor. I believe it's Dustin. He was on the site walk with Erin and I discussing some of the practices they be using and we went over the erosion controls and the slurry pits and things like that. So he'll be on site the entire time is from what my understanding is. Are you comfortable with that, Erin? Yes. My, I guess my concern is that during the directional drilling, if there's a lot of material that's coming out into the slurry pits, I mean, I could, I can come out and inspect the erosion controls prior to, they can notify me when the directional drilling is happening. I'm just not sure exactly how long it's going to take. So I'm not sure that I can be on site for the entire directional drilling process. So that slurry, those slurry areas are really sort of emergency backups if material starts coming out from the drilling and there's nowhere for it to go on site to prevent that material from going into the resource area. So I just want to make sure that there's somebody on site who's responsible for monitoring that and also monitoring all construction on the site. So I would suggest that we have some sort of monitoring requirement in this. I realize that the work is only expected to take one to two weeks. So I mean, I don't think that it's too much to ask for, you know, whomever's out on the site daily to report to us periodically during work, just to give us an update with photos and letting us know sort of where they're at with the process. I think that that would be reasonable. I do think that the additional ring of erosion controls around the slurry area is a good idea because it's kind of a small area. Again, they may not get any liquid material out, but if they do hit ground water and they're getting a lot of material, we should have some kind of backup plan for that. Right. And if Dustin were to have an issue someday, I could run out there and, you know, give you an update and report and photos. So we'll make sure put it in the order and we'll make sure we have coverage. So for the order, Erin, what makes sense for our monitoring report?  We want to know that it started. And then what are you comfortable with like daily during active drilling? Well, somebody should be monitoring at all times when the slurry is going on and somebody who's responsible for environmental monitoring. And if that's Dustin, that's fine as long as they're there taking pictures during the entire drilling process and then providing us with an update after that takes place. That's really my primary concern. And I would say during the one to two week period that construction is going on, just giving us benchmark updates every few days. I'm not looking for an update every single day, but just every few days and update, maybe every three days and update with where things stand.  It's a short duration. And then once it's done, I know it's over with and I have sort of the record. Sure. And we can get you Dustin's information and, you know, my information, contact information as a backup if we need or, you know, we can confirm with Dale or Dustin if there's going to be someone else on site that could be a secondary that's going to be there to full time. They can handle those duties. So I think we can make sure we have coverage that should make it comfortable. Yeah. So full time coverage. And then yep. Okay. I'm comfortable with that. Commissioners, any other questions or concerns? Not seeing anything. Good. Okay. All right. Erin, are you comfortable with issuing a motion on this one? Yeah, I think we're ready on this one. Okay. So we are looking for a motion for approval of the NOI at 285 Sunderland Road in Amherst. And if whoever issues the motion read the conditions on Erin's slide just so we have them for the record, that would be great. I may have to approve the NOI for 285 Sunderland Road with the boiler state and local permit conditions to notify Whitland's administrator during directional drilling pre-construction meeting with contractor and erosion control inspection prior to start of work additional ring of erosion controls around the slurry area contact information for Dustin monitoring updates every three days with photos and narrative update and environmental monitor full time during directional drilling monitoring of salary pit. Thanks, Michelle. Seconded. That was the second from the NOI. I'll do a voice vote. Larry. Hi. What's your? Hi. Michelle. Hi. Laura. Hi. Andre. Hi. LaRoy. Hi. I'm an I. Okay. Thank you, Brian and Dale. Good luck out there. Thank you both. Good night. Thanks. Bye. Bye. All right. So that's it for hearings. Let's see. Looking back at the agenda. So we have other business. Sounds like Beth Wilson from the DPW has a MS-Forced Stormwater Permit presentation or update for us. Is that the next thing on the next best thing on the agenda? Yes. Okay. I'll promote Beth. I'm promoting Beth Wilson. I just brought her in. Hi, Beth. Hi, everybody. Late night. I know. This is actually not late yet for us lately. Really? Yeah. It's a busy season. That's not to say we should belabor this. You know, I will be quick. I can tell. I'll be quick, but spring is always the season. For permits, enforcements, all of it. Yeah. You know it. Yeah. Well, thanks for having me. I'm during your late evening here. I'm just here to talk a little bit about the town's MS-For Permit, specifically some sampling that we're going to be doing that's required by the permit this summer. And why don't I share my screen? So MS-Forced, it's municipal separate storm sewer system, which I'm sure some of you are aware of, but I don't know how many of you are. It's just fancy language for our drainage system. And the MS-Forced Permit is our permit that the town holds to be able to discharge from our drainage system. So what's coming out of our outfalls and going into streams and rivers and wetlands, we have a permit through EPA and DEP to be allowed to discharge when we were granted that permit in 2019. So it's a relatively new permit for the town. DPW is managing it. And I just feel like it's something that there's in the next slide, I'll show there's a number of requirements under it. And a lot of them, I feel like there's definitely opportunity for collaboration with the Conservation Commission tonight, because we don't have a lot of time and I don't want to just going to talk about the sampling. We're going to do this summer very quickly. But at some point, there's other aspects of the permit that that I would like to come back and and talk some more about sort of as they get developed. It's a big permit. And as I said, we just got it in 2019. So some of these requirements are just being developed. But the sampling that we're doing this summer is under the one of the requirements is an illicit discharge detection and elimination program. An illicit discharge is anything that gets into our stormwater system that isn't stormwater. And so this part of the permit is all about trying to locate those and eliminate them. So we want to be quick. We'll go right to what we're going to be doing this summer. We have about 350 outfalls that we've been inventorying and ranking outfalls during the winter, this past winter. But I don't want to get too much into that because we don't really have time. But we have been doing that. And so we've come up with about 350 that fit what under the permit requires investigation. And this summer, we'd like to inspect about 200 outfalls. We have an intern coming. She'll be with us for about 12 weeks. And that's going to be her internship. So she'll be going to many of our outfalls and screening them and sampling them. The screening would just be to be basically looking at the overall condition of the outfall. Is the pipe buried? Is the pipe collapsing? Is there flow? Is there erosion from the flow coming out of the outfall? Those things she would be noting as part of the screening. She'd also be looking for evidence of an illicit discharge. So visual and olfactory evidence of things like oil or sanitary waste like toilet paper or something, pet waste, foam, which is an indicator of soap. And there could be some kind of an illicit connection going into our system algae, which indicates nutrients, turbidity. All those things are things that she would be noting. All the information is going to go right into our GIS, which is going to be great. She'll have a tablet, which she can just click on the outfall. And then a form is going to come up and she'll be entering all of her observations right into the form. So it's going to be stored within sort of our drainage layer, the town's drainage layer and GIS. And then she'll actually be doing some sampling. So once she they do the does the general screening, we'll be sampling for temperature, conductivity, salinity, chlorine, ammonia, surfactants, bacteria, total nitrogen and total phosphorus. So I'm using a combination of field equipment. So, you know, at the outfall, there's a YSI probe is this probe over here that you would be actually laying into the flow and that will give her her temperature and conductivity and salinity. This chlorimeter can be used for chlorine. In that case, you would be grabbing a small sample from the flow. The remaining things that we'll be sampling for will be bottles that you'll be collecting. And then we'll be running some of these back at the wastewater treatment plant lab, but some of them will also go to a commercial lab for analysis. But so basically, in terms of impact to a stream, some of our outfalls flow directly into streams, some of them some of them will be dry and she won't be able to sample. Some of them go almost right into wetland areas. And so in terms of actual impact to those resource areas, it's it's very minimal. I mean, the most would be that they'd be kind of climbing around that general area and and grabbing sample bottles. So that's the sampling. And then what will happen with all the data that we collect is we'll go back and adjust this is this is a screenshot of our ranking our ranked list of all of our outfalls. So with the results of the sampling, we're going to go back and reassess ranking outfalls that are determined to be a problem outfall as sort of defined by the permit. The next phase is to map the catchment that goes to that outfall and to do additional sampling in manholes and eventually identifying where that illicit discharge is coming from and eliminating it, you know, based on what it is, there's there's there'll be all kinds of things that will probably need to be done to eliminate some of this stuff. But so that's just the general overview of the sampling we're doing. And I just I felt like it this whole program has a lot to do with water quality and a lot to do with resource areas. And so I wanted to sort of start sharing it with you and also let you know that this is happening in case you see us out there sampling in the summer and we're, you know, right next to a stream and you're wondering what's going on. And yeah, and that is about it. That's about it. I if we have a little time. There's an intern that I brought along. I think he's still on there. His name's Joel Friedus. He's been a he's been an engineering intern for about a year. And he helped so much with looking at our drainage layer and improving it this winter and helping with the the ranking of all the outfalls. So would you mind promoting him and he could tell you a little bit if you have time? I just brought in brought him in. And while we're waiting for that, I have a quick question, Beth, for the sampling. Why just total nitrogen and total phosphorus? Why not do the speciation of both just so you can attribute sources? Right. So we are doing doing ammonia, which you are. Okay. Yeah, we're doing ammonia also. The total nitrogen and the total phosphorus are actually related to the fact that so in Long Island Sound has a TMDL for nitrogen. And so then the Connecticut River does and all the tributaries to the Connecticut River, which includes the Fort River and the Mill River. So our whole town has been categorized as having to look at total nitrogen through the MS4 program. And the phosphorus has to do with Lake Warner because Lake Warner and Hadley has a TMDL for phosphorus. So in terms of total phosphorus, we'll we'll only be doing sampling of anything that's going into the Mill River, because that's where that's ties to that TMDL. And those are the two that are going to the commercial lab, those two analysis, because they're more complicated than doing them in just the wastewater treatment plant lab. Okay. Yeah, my only it's just consider doing the speciation of the nitrogen sample as well. So that way, you know how it's proportioned in the environment and you know more about the source that way.  The next question is going to be what kind of nitrogen, what kind of phosphorus, for you to figure out how to attribute the source. So while you're running the sample, if there's any way for them to do the speciation of the nitrogen and the phosphorus, it'll save you having to go back either that or collect two bottles and freeze them. There's that's an idea. Yep. Yeah, we can think a little bit more about that because nitrate and nitrate, we can also run at the wastewater treatment plant pretty easily. So yeah, so we'll think about just grab two bottles. It's harder to have the water than and like just freeze them, you know, so you've got them there. My other question was just one thing to consider. So carbon like dissolved organic carbon can make water look brown and be like have be foamy and it's just it can be naturally occurring from like a high wetland source or tannins like a stream that's upstream of any culvert that's running through like lots of hemlocks, for example. So that might be another thing just to rule out like anthropogenic impacts if the wetland system is already high in DOC. It just might help with the troubleshooting of the source. Yeah, all the impairment, it's just an idea. I mean, I know that all of this is like very prescriptive in MMS4 programs. And so I'm saying this knowing that you probably don't have a lot of choices, but mentioning it in case you can grab an extra bottle and freeze it so that if you guys are interested in this down the road when it comes to figuring out where some of these discharges are coming from, it can be helpful. Yeah, that's all really helpful because you know these are the things that we're required to sample for under MMS4, but you know certainly like TOC again is something that I know they run at the wastewater treatment plant. So if we grab a sample of it, if we have the funds for the actual analysis, it's a thing, but that's good. Those are good ideas, thanks. Yeah, it's cheaper to grab an extra bottle now than like remobilize to do it again next summer, right? So I do that all the time just to grab it, freeze it. Yeah, sorry. Okay, so I'm sure other teachers have comments or questions, but first Joel, thank you for being here. Do you want to just give us a quick introduction? Hi, I'm Joel. I've been an intern at the DPW since last summer, the beginning of last summer. I've been working with Beth on doing some of the MMS4 stuff. Mostly what I've been doing is locating the outfalls on the existing GIS map. So we obviously have an existing drainage layer and what I've been doing is just going through it and sort of trying to apply a common sense to areas where things may not seem correct. So if there's a pipe that is connected to a bunch of catch basins and then the pipe just stops at a stream, there's probably an outfall there. And so I'd mark that and then Beth and I would go out and just confirm that it is actually there. So yeah, that's what I've been doing. And then if you go to the table, each time there's an outfall that's identified, whether it's existing or it's one that we've had to go out and see if it's actually there, we're ranking it so that you want to sort of focus on higher priority outfalls before lower priority ones. And so we use this table, which I think was adapted from somewhere in New Hampshire, the table that they made. A lot of it is like the first four just have to do with whether or not there's previous screening. If it's just charging to an area of public health, pass complaints, receiving water quality, that's all stuff that is out of my hands. That's more stuff that Beth would know because I've only been here for a year, obviously. But things like the density of generating sites, is it an industrial area? Is it just a couple of houses that have a catch basin in between them? And then the age of the development or the infrastructure, most of that was things like if there are old sewer pipes crossing over drain lines, stuff like that. And then there's stuff about septic culvertage streams. How long might the drainage pipe be? And then just additional characteristics was a case by case type of thing. And that's how that was created. I hope it is of use in the future. Oh yeah. Super important to me. Thank you for that hard work. I think it's like some of the most important probably foundational work for it's going to have a huge impact on water quality, figuring this stuff out in our town. And Joel is underestimating, I mean, underestimating his assessment. He took our drainage layer and found these incredibly fast ways to go through and identify where outfalls were missing, where outfalls were either private or municipal, you know, municipally owned, just finding interconnections. We have to identify all of our interconnections with UMass's MS4 and he just was a huge help. So thank you, Joel. Yeah. He's probably benefited from some of that work with the tan brook delineation, if I'm not off base. Aaron, that's like for one of our more impacted streams, we're trying to figure out what the actual drainage area is. So I have a feeling this work directly impacted us in a major way. So really appreciated, Joel. Thank you. And thank you for being here so late. Yeah. So, Beth, thank you. And Aaron, thank you for bringing this up. This is huge and really important for our resource. And also, I think, Beth, you're probably underselling how much work it's been to get this under control. I know that those permits are super detailed and can be really unwieldy. So this is like this beginning of a whole new program essentially in the town. I'm sure the scope tends to balloon. So it is. There's a lot of facets to it. And it's sort of like slowly we're getting a grasp on all of it and figuring out the phases of how to do it here in Amherst, but it is good. It's all good. Yeah, progress. Commissures, if anyone have any clarifying questions or further comments? Are you working at all with Amherst College and maybe probably UMass? They're also doing water quality stuff for Fearingbrook. And does this have any weight? Is there any collaboration with that? Or does that overlap at all? Yeah, I've been definitely working with the folks at Amherst College that are doing the Fearingbrook study, but that really has more to do with what's going on with the Fearingbrook. Well, I mean, it does. Because at this point, the outfalls that we've identified right off right off from the beginning as problem outfalls are the Fearingbrook outfalls because we have sampling data already going back to like 2015 from there. So they're already listed in that ranking as problem and need further investigation. So actually all the data that those Amherst College students are collecting will get used in this too. And then UMass, they actually have their own MS4. It's kind of interesting to have two MS4s within the same municipality, actually, but they are responsible for their own MS4 area and it's mapped. So their drainage, they're technically responsible for what comes out of the outfalls coming off of their MS4 area and then we have interconnections with them. So, you know, we're responsible for our drainage up to the point where it connects with theirs. So yeah, so I'm working closely with the woman at facilities who is overseeing their MS4 and talking about talking about the interconnections, but also then talking about larger projects in terms of phosphorus loading with the Mill River and, you know, really using the sampling that they've been doing and we've been doing to come up with phosphorus loading numbers and then ways to reduce it and larger projects eventually. But that's a little down the road at this point. That's all good. It's good. It's foundational. All right. Well, thank you for listening to it. And like I said, I felt like this was sort of an introduction to it and we will be coming back to you guys with some other aspects of the program probably later in the summer. Sounds good. Good to see you, Beth. Yeah. Good to see you guys. Glad you're so doing your jobs. Good luck. Good luck with this, Beth. Thank you all again. Have a good night. Yep, you too. All right. That was interesting. Have some water quality sampling. All I need is a couple of frozen bottles I learned. I mean, it's really one that's like the main thing I learned in like all grad school. It's like the hardest part is getting to the stream and getting the water. Research-based doesn't cost much. All right. What else? Corresponding monitoring parts enforcement. So did you have anything in correspondence or monitoring reports? I didn't see it. I saw there was one monitoring report. Erin, was there anything you specifically wanted to call our attention to? Yeah. So I guess one of those slides, there was kind of a carryover from last week, but I just wanted to say that Southeast Commons hasn't been submitting monitoring reports. Well, they've been submitting their SWIP reports and I've emphasized to them that they need to start submitting their regular monitoring reports. Their consultant has been unavailable and so I suggested that they get a replacement, but so we're getting SWIP reports and we're getting photos from the construction supervisor, but they're not doing otherwise doing wetland monitoring. I let them know that this is the time of year for them to be doing their replication plantings and that that needs to be overseen by a wetland specialist or a wetlands professional. And so they've been advised that they need to do that. I'm mostly just putting them sort of on notice, thank you, that they need to take some action here. We're willing to be patient as far as they're paying attention to what's going on and taking photos and stuff, but we need to get somebody on board and get those re-established. As far as correspondence, there's a lot of things that are just more or less like notifications of things starting, like the hydro raking at UMass. Also UMass is exploring some geothermal. The geothermal is non-jurisdictional. It's mostly just like a courtesy heads up that they're exploring it and that there's work going on. It's just not in jurisdiction. So I'm going to try to pop those things into the correspondence folders for you guys as the weeks go on if we get those kind of notifications, just because meetings have been so busy that I don't want to have to go through these things detail by detail. I'm trying to think if there was anything else. I don't think that it's really necessary for us to enter into executive session tonight because I am following up from our previous executive session and will continue to do so. But in the interim, I think because it's late and it's been a little bit of an intense meeting that I would give you guys an update at the next meeting. So if we could schedule the executive session for the next meeting, the next meeting is there aren't going to be any application hearings on the next meeting. It's going to be our bylaw regulation hearing and I'm hoping that we could set aside an hour to cover our bylaw regulations and we can issue our permit for UMass 5 College and then do a brief executive session to give you guys an update. And I'm sorry again to everybody for not the... I apologize, Erin, it's fine. Everyone's juggling a lot. No apologies necessary. I think it's good. We'll have a good focus session on it next time. Okay. And Michelle and Laura, I thank you for getting all that bylaw stuff together. I know you guys are working on presentation and everything. So thank you for all the hard work. So I would say we should just schedule an executive session for our for our upcoming meeting. And so this doesn't say for May 25th. May 25th. Okay. Get a motion folks. Yeah, I'll make a motion to move to reschedule or schedule executive session for May 25th, 2022. Do you need... Okay. Yes. I'm pursuing of GLC 30A section 21A3 to discuss strategy with respect to litigation. If an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the litigating position of the public body in the chair, so declares to having a discussion open session would have a detrimental effect on the town's litigating position. Got it. Almost feels smart. Yeah. Okay. Motion from Pletcher. Second from Larry. Voice vote, Larry. Aye. Pletcher. Aye. Andre. Aye. LaRoy. Aye. Michelle. Aye. Laura. Aye. And I'm an aye. Okay. And we're all good. Thank you everyone for making it tonight. I know everyone probably had to hustle back, hustle around. Thanks for joining us late, Laura. Yeah, so I think we just need a motion to adjourn. I'm gonna keep it going. Make a motion to adjourn at 9.12. That was an unanimous second. Yeah. Do a voice vote, Larry. Aye. Pletcher. Aye. Andre. Aye. LaRoy. Aye. Michelle. Aye. Laura. Okay. And I'm an aye. Yay. Thank you, Erin. Thank you guys. Hang in there. Have a good night. Keep up the good work, Erin. Good night. Bye.