Okay, we're good. I don't know what happened there. Yeah. Okay. Welcome everyone to Amherst conservation commission meeting. It's April 13th, 2022. Our first agenda item. Or comments from the chair. That's me. I think we have a really full agenda tonight, but there is one hearing that requested to continue it. Continuation of the next meeting. So I'm looking for which one that is stand by. Yep. So the notice of intent for 285 Sunderland road. Brian Waterman of warm and design group requested a continuance to the April 27th meeting. So if you've joined us tonight, I see we already have. Five people in attendance. If you're joining us for that, I know why it will be continued and we won't open the hearing until. April 27th. Otherwise again, very full agenda tonight. So we'll follow our usual protocol of. Open the hearing. Have a short introduction to the project from. Any project representatives who've joined us tonight, we'll have a short introduction to the project. We'll have a short introduction to the project. And then we'll have a few visits from staff and any commissioners who are able to attend and then we'll open for public comment. Keep public comments relevant to our jurisdiction, which is protecting the. What are resources of Amherst. And keep it down to two minutes per person. Just so people understand how we can keep things moving. And these very full hearings. And my understanding is. This meeting is full, but. So thank you commissioners for being here. And your continued attendance through this busy, busy time of the year. That's all I have. In terms of introduction. Dave, I see that you're here. Hi, Dave. Do you have any updates for us? Sure. Hello, everybody. Good evening. I'll be brief because I know the agenda is full. Nice to see. See folks tonight on this beautiful evening. Yeah, just a couple of quick updates on, on project related. Matters around town. Mostly good news, all good news. We are moving forward on at least staging for the Amethyst Brook. Foot bridge, the pedestrian bridge over the Amethyst Brook that was permitted by the commission. Oh. In the past, let's put it that way. I think it was probably in 21 or 20. And the good news is we're finally getting the delivery of telephone polls, which has been delayed quite extensively. So those will be delivered in the next two days. So we'll get staging out there and Aaron will. We'll be kind of overseeing, you know, Brad and his team, but I don't anticipate doing any real work in or near the stream until low water later on in the spring or early summer. But you will probably hear from constituents who are using Amethyst Brook that there'll be three very large telephone polls stored out by the side of the trail there at Amethyst Brook. So that's going to be quite an operation getting those off the trucks and getting them out in the field there for a month or two as we stage that project. So that's exciting. And most of that project was funded by private funds. So from donors. So that's really cool. We're also getting going at the Fort River farm on the other side of the trail. So we're also getting going on to Amethyst. Working with Stephanie Chikarello, our sustainability coordinator and a healthy Hampshire, which is a nonprofit group working on providing more residents of Amherst with healthy options for both growing their own food, but also purchasing food at. At reasonable prices for their families and for themselves. So that's really cool. I think we're going to have a lot of updates on that in the future. We do want to, we do want to kind of have a ribbon cutting on those community gardens sometime in May. So we will let the commission know it'll probably be late May before we do kind of a ribbon cutting on those. The garden inside the fence at Fort River form. I think what we want to try to do is do a, a dual ribbon cutting for both the Fearingbrook restoration project, which is really looking nice down there. Sorry, my daughter is calling me in the middle of the meeting. But anyway, so we'll do kind of a dual ribbon cutting for both the, the community gardens as well as the completion of the, the Fearingbrook restoration project down there and feel free to take a walk down there. The Beth Wilson from DPW has been kind of overseeing the final stages of that. And then lastly, I can't remember the last time I was with you, but we of course did close on Hickory Ridge. We are the proud owners of Hickory Ridge golf course, former golf course. And we're beginning to kind of kick off the summer, spring, summer outreach events and communication around more, you know, more and more people are gathering more community input on Hickory. We will be developing a master plan, which of course the commission and various boards and committees in town will be involved with. I will say that the solar on the site is probably moving the quickest. We are going, Aaron and I will be part of a kickoff meeting, probably around the 25th or 26th of this month. So the solar company, which is AMP energy. AMP energy did not start out as the solar developer there, but they ended up as the solar developer. And we will be kicking off that project. So I could see construction happening or starting in June. For the 26 acres of solar. So that'll be the first real. Earth moving you'll see on that site. We are at the same time, developing a notice of intent for the improved trails there. And one of my other staff, Ben Brager is going to be working of course with Aaron on bringing a notice of intent to you later this spring for the core trail going north to south on Hickory Ridge. So we'll have more on that as the spring unfolds. So I think I'll stop there. There's lots more going on, but I know you have a full agenda. Dave, they looked at me like there was something happening in the in the clubhouse a couple of nights ago. There was cars out there and. Yeah. Thank you, Larry. I have been. I have been hosting some informational tours of the property and the and the clubhouse in particular. There are a number of nonprofits and Amherst that are looking for homes. And so through the town manager. And I think it's been a long time since I've been here. Paul Bachman has, has kind of delegated me as the project manager there to say. Could you show them around? I will. Kind of frame this as that building is in very, very difficult shape. It is, it is in very poor shape. We are having our building commissioner on our fire department. Do kind of an assessment of that building. And I will say that early, early returns are not good. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. So the town's stance is quite conservative on reuse of that building. And anything that would happen there would have to go through an RFP process. We cannot sell it. Give it away. Lease it without a very robust process. But I will say the, the combination of dry rot. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. It's not good. Which it doesn't have sprinklers. All leads us to conclude that that building is, is probably beyond its useful life, but we're, we're not quite there yet on paper. But I think that's likely where we're, we're headed. But I am obligated to kind of meet with some of these groups. I did was, I was there over the weekend twice because there was no overflow parking. So I thought that was quite intriguing as well. So that's probably why you saw so many cars in the last four or five days. Thanks. Any other questions for Dave? Okay. Yeah, I just to step back a sec. Congratulations on that. Property. I know that for town staff, that's been a huge effort and you don't even have to go there. You don't have to live in South Amherst. If you just look on Google Earth at that property, and just look at the road to the city. I almost feel like. If the commission has.  At an upcoming meeting. I would love to give a more kind of full. about in-stream restoration, floodplain restoration, bank restoration. So there's a lot of exciting things, but I don't want to take up too much of your time tonight, but I think it would be kind of interesting for Aaron and I to do a little brief presentation to you with some maps that we've developed and whatnot. So happy to do that when your schedule allows. I clearly get questions from people in the neighborhood about that. So there's a lot of interest in the area about what's going on there. So that's one of the reasons I ask the questions. Well, please channel them toward Engage Amherst on our website. That is a place where anybody resident or non-resident can chime in and leave their comment. What they'd like to see there, what their goals or objectives or hopes or dreams are for Hickory. With the buildings, the site, the trails, the river. We've got over 125 comments on that site. So please channel them toward Engage Amherst. Thank you. OK, so the next item on the agenda moving on. Thank you, Dave, is review of minutes. I think we have minutes from the March 9th meeting in our packets. So if everyone's had a chance to review those, I think we're looking for a motion to. I move to approve the minutes of three nine twenty two. Second. That's Michelle and Larry on a motion. Michelle in the second voice vote, Michelle. Hi, Larry. You're muted. I. Andre. I wasn't there, so I'm going to have to abstain. Thank you, Leroy. And I'm an eye. OK, a long time to read it. It was, it was a full one. Um, OK, going back to the agenda, land management. It looks like we have a suggestion from Aaron and I agree to table work on the mission statement until a meeting in May when we have some more room. Is that OK with the commission? I'm seeing nods across the board. All right, we're going with that, Aaron. Nice. Let's put it in next time we have time. And then the other thing under land management, I see, see our planting request nine, 10 Southeast Street. Yes. So, Jen, there should be some folks in the. Audience. There is a gentleman named Juan and a woman named Joy. May have a hand. Rings. Yep, I got one. Don't get joy. OK, that they're probably on the same. Just to give a little brief background while they're coming on. Joy and Juan reached out to me via email about putting some plantings in and they have a CR and so we read the language in the CR and it does say that plantings are allowed with written permission. And so Dave and I touched base and we thought it would be good to have them speak to the commission and just review it collectively before. Giving any approvals on it. OK, great. Yeah, Juan, Joy, welcome. Thank you. Thanks for being here tonight. If you just want to introduce yourselves and give us a brief kind of overview of what you're hoping to accomplish, that would be great. Sure, sure. So I'm I'm Joy. That's Juan. We're married to have our two kids here. We just moved here in August from southern New Hampshire. We lived on an apple orchard and had 20 plus acres. Some of it also in conservation easement. So we're familiar with how all this kind of operates, but not in Massachusetts. So it not an Amherst mass. So we moved here in August and are doing a lot of work to keep up the house and the property sounds similar to the clubhouse on the Hickory Bridge. It just needed a lot of love. The previous owners didn't do a whole lot. And part of that also includes the land itself here. So we're we're doing landscaping around the house itself, which is within the pocket, but on the conservation restricted land. We are hoping to plant 10 or so serviceberry trees, partially to help kind of along the perimeter fence, kind of kind of cover a bit of a view of a very industrial looking barn, but also to provide some more bird habitat, because there's a lot of bird activity here, a lot, a lot, a lot. Our neighbors actually lead an Audubon Walk every every fall, and we were talking to them about landscaping and others have also suggested serviceberries as a the good kind of hedge plants and attracting different animals and so forth. So so that's it. Basically, 10 10 trees on the land towards the east side, kind of near the fence. Oh, and we we've been working with whirlwind whirlwind landscaping. And they're the ones that actually suggested reaching out to you all to make sure, because they've worked with other folks with this type of land and have said that it's a good idea to make sure that things are in the clear. That's great. I Dave, you have your hand raised and you're muted. Sure, I just if I could, it's great to meet you both. And I just wanted to give the Commission a little background if you didn't already have it. And Erin, I'm not sure. Did the Commission members have the copy of the C.R. in advance in their back hit or not? I don't believe they did. I do have the C.R. here. Yeah, that would that would be helpful. But just to give all the Commission members, we have it, Erin, we have. Oh, you do. Oh, OK. Sorry, I wasn't sure if it made it in. Yeah, give one and enjoy. And perhaps the Commission members a little background. This predates me working for the town, but I'll give the quick synopsis. So the property that you you purchased was part of a much larger conservation effort to to protect over 100 acres of land along Station Road. So the town through the Conservation Commission actually owns the property to the east of you. So the farm that is farmed by Ali and others, I believe her husband, the horse farm to the east of you and then the farm east of that the old farm east of that is all owned by the town of Amherst under the care and control of the Conservation Commission and putting a 10 acre roughly 10 acre C.R. on the property that you recently purchased was all part of that preservation effort and your home site was excluded from that. And that made all the numbers work, right? I mean, a wonderful conservation director named Keith Westover made this all happen. And there was going to be, I don't recall the number, but some dozens of homes would have been scattered all along Station Road out in all that farmland. So I think the purpose of your 10 acre C.R. as this is really a conservation restriction with an agricultural a real strong agricultural purpose. I think, you know, there you can see the purposes there, the scenic views, the agricultural land, aquifer protection, our wells for the town of Amherst, a couple of our wells are down in Lawrence Swamp, so it had multiple purposes.  I think as I suggested in an email, I would love to get out there with you and Aaron and walk the land and do a little talking about about it. I don't have any strong reservations about the planting other than I just want to make sure that we don't kind of incrementally plant things on the agricultural land that might somehow undermine the agricultural purposes down the road. It has remained essentially open in Hayfield, but that's not a requirement of the C.R. as you've probably read it. So and I understand that the adjacent riding ring building, riding a rebuilding is not the most attractive building to be looking back to the east. So I just wanted to put that in context that this was all part of the effort, probably 20 years ago, 20 plus years ago to preserve all that land on Station Road north of Station Road. Nice. So if we one day we wanted to make it all into an orchard, that would be. We would have to know, actually, we would have to look at the C.R. to see if that is is precluded. I haven't looked at this in a while, and I apologize. I didn't get a chance to look at it again and refresh my memory before the evening. But, you know, that is I was joking. I was joking. I had we had over 10 acres of apple trees in New Hampshire and hundred trees. That was that that was too too much if you're trying to do something else in addition. Yeah, I've had some training in farming in a different part of my life. But I do not intend to, at this point, to farm it in a significant way. So I was curious if the Commission, members of the Commission had other questions or concerns about this. And again, my only stated concern is that that we want to make sure that, you know, even incremental kind of changes or plantings don't undermine the overall purposes, particularly, you know, in this case, the agricultural purpose as stated in the first part of the C.R. Yeah, I think that's a good point, Dave. I think I'm really appreciative that you guys came to us with this because that's not always the case. So thank you. I also just, you know, service fairies are a great native flowering tree. Like they're also called Shad Bush, so you know, the Shad are running. Yeah, yeah, blooming, which is cool. I don't know if we don't think we've got Shad in the hot brook, but, you know, point stands, yeah, well enough. I want to open it up to the Commission, Commissioners. And does anyone have any questions or concerns? With this, Michelle, yeah, go ahead. I mean, it seems consistent with the conservation restriction. So I don't have any concerns. And, you know, thank you for going forward with native plantings and contacting us first. We totally appreciate that. Actually, I'm just curious how this follows like the documentation follows the conservation restriction, if at all. Or is you mean, Michelle? Yeah, just like, you know, in line with what Dave was saying, like, you know, to not be incrementally encroaching, encroaching, encroaching upon the intended restrictions. Does this get documented and follow it at all? Or do we just sort of make decisions case by case basis and move on? Yeah. And for context for that, I want to enjoy it's just like when the property changes hands, like it's not that we immediately distrust your intentions with situations like this. We just have to be careful because the CR will be here, you know, ideally in perpetuity. So we just want to make sure we are mindful of that, I guess. Yeah, that's a great point, Michelle. Dave has his hand up. Maybe he has an answer to this question.  So it's wonderful to have her as part of the commission and we absolutely welcome her input. But this might be a great opportunity. Again, I don't want to bite off more than we can chew here. And again, I appreciate Juan and Joy coming forward. But Aaron and I have talked about I think embarking on a more thorough review of our CRs. We don't we, I'm talking we, the commission, the town don't hold that many CRs over private property. We have lots of APRs, agricultural preservation restrictions. But those are held and monitored by the state for the most part. But these CRs really should be more closely monitored by the town. So I think to your question, Michelle, I actually think we should be. We really should be doing annual site visits and monitoring reports. And I think in my mind, that's where something like this could be a monument, a monument, you know, noted for the record. I don't think we have to record such a minor change here. But I think having it in the minutes of the of the commission meeting and then really embarking on, I think we have five to seven CRs. I have to look at the list, but we should be doing annual monitoring of them. And I think in that we would document, oh, if the commission would would allow or authorize you to plant these service berries trees in 2022, that was agreed upon and voted on on this date. And that way, I think we could at least address or make sure we don't get into these incremental changes that somehow might undermine the purposes of the CR. In this case, you know, the agricultural purposes, because Service Berry, really, I don't, you know, I don't think it has an agricultural purpose per se, right? You can make jam. I don't know how many people grow it just for that, but you can you can harvest the berries and make jam. Right. Michelle, does that make sense? Yeah, that's what you describe as what I'm used to is sort of a monitoring and annual or otherwise reporting to keep track of things. And this would be documented in it. And otherwise, like maybe a memo that gets attached somehow to to the conservation, like that, I don't know, the folder or something just to in lieu of such monitoring reports. It's a vice. That sounds perfect. Yeah. Yeah, that's kind of my intent is for each CR to have in our in our land files to have each CR documented anything like this. Like, I don't know if you guys recall a year or so ago, the Commission approved the placement of a solar panel on a a CR up on Montague Road, and we issued a formal letter which went in the file for that landowner so that we knew that that was approved by the Commission. So it's kind of my goal to establish a folder like that and track any any change that's approved by the board on the CR. Yeah, and I would just add some years ago, five or seven years ago. And I can't remember which owner it was, honestly, it doesn't matter. But the back ten acre field was actually not being farmed very regularly, and the neighbors began to complain because it was getting overgrown with woody plants and and they came to the Commission and said, isn't there a CR and shouldn't it be in more active agriculture? And I think that was not the last owner, but maybe the owner before that. So it kind of went fallow. And I think it was it was a kind of a wake up call to the then Commission members to kind of say, oh, well, this should really be brought back into agriculture, more active agriculture. So it's so good. Interesting. Yeah, I live I live just a little bit up the street from you guys in Southeast Street, actually, and we have a very strong birding community here. So that field is very popular for the early successional kind of bird habitat, especially among some former commissioners, if I'm sure. Oh, nice point. So, yes. Yeah, well, it's great to keep notice the bird activity. Our cats and you may have heard one right here was notice the bird activity. You know, yeah, yes. Indoor cats, too many, too many coyotes and raptors here for. Yeah, yeah, we have an 80 pound dog I worry about with the coyotes. So yeah, and there was one last question, Jen, which came through from from Joy, I think, on the on email, which was about trails. And I think I'm quite clear that there is no right of neighbors to mow your property, the sea art property or any party of property. The only trail of Aaron put the diagram back up. I believe the slow body farm. I believe they're the town retained the right to put a trail. I think that green in the lower. Yeah, yeah, lower right hand corner of this slide right down there. I believe the town reserved the right to put a trail there. A trail was never never built there, never mowed there. But I think it is in the the deed or in the sea are there for that to be possible. I think, of course, we would communicate with you. And I'm not sure exactly what the vision was. Would where would that trail go? What was the purpose? I have never fully explored it. Right. We were here like, oh, sorry. Go ahead, Joy. Oh, I was going to say we kind of walk that way not long ago. Yeah, we we walked. I walked a few times more because the kids were just playing around. Yeah, yeah. And there's no trace of a trail there. I did see the easement or the permission or I don't know exactly what the technical term is for the path there. Right. It does not cover. It's separate from where we're hoping to. Right. But but what David's referring to, we noticed that the house in the lower left hand corner, I think here has a path going from the house to the barn across the property west to east. And we're, you know, we're still new and we don't even know all the neighbors yet, but we're like, is that is that a lot? Was that maybe earlier? Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's that house back there. Yeah, that are the next one. Yeah, I would just, yeah, as I said, I would just encourage you to reach out to them and that's really between you and them.  So OK, OK, but it wouldn't be a public trail. It's not maintained by us. It's on your property and it's your responsibility. Right, perhaps some of the kids that live in one of those houses do writing lessons. Oh, yeah, yeah, that would make sense. Yeah, because it's very direct to the barn. Yeah, I might be seeing my after school traffic there. Like, you know, we've seen people walk in there, but not kids. Not not so. Oh, really? OK. But but it could be, I don't know, maybe somebody. Yeah. All right. Well, I think so I think that's a green light, Joy and Juan. Thank you. And it sounds like Aaron will work on just drafting a little bit of a formal memo just so we have record of it. But in the meantime, it's memorialized in the minutes from this meeting. So I think we're all set, commissioners, last chance. Any other comments, questions? Would you take a vote on this to approve the request? I think it'd probably be a good idea just to take a vote to approve the request. Sure. Let me set it up. We approve the request for planting of service berries. Right. In concert with the C.R. in place for 910 Southeast Street. Yes. Second that. All right. So it was a motion from Larry, a second from Andre voice vote. Michelle. Hi, Larry. Hi, Andre. Hi, LaRoy. Hi. And I'm an I. All right. Thank you guys. Thank you. Thank you so much. Any time you want to walk the land, let us know. Have a good night. Thank you. OK. OK. Moving forward. So I just want to we have a lot of it's we have 13 attendees on our meeting now. So I just want to again, remind people that if you're here for lost the PowerPoint, the notice of intent for 285 Sunderland Road, that project has requested a continuance to the April 27th meeting. So we will not be opening that hearing in this meeting. So please, if you're here for that, join us again on the 27th. All right. So, Erin, I have 736. Should I jump in? OK. I pull up the agenda. So we have our 730 agenda item, which is a request for determination ever sourced for a targeted application of herbicide to manage non-native invasive plant species to enhance habitat, stateless and rare plant species at four locations along the Montague to Fairmont Electrical Utility right away. So I'm going to open this up. This public meeting is now called to order. This meeting is being held as required by the provisions of chapter one, thirty one, section 40 of the general laws of the Commonwealth and act relative to the protection of wetlands as most recently amended in article three point three one well and protection under the town's town of Amherst general bylaws. So, Erin, do we know if anyone is coming? So if you're here up, you already brought him in. Hello. Can you hear me? Yeah. Hi, Simon, thanks for being here. So our usual plan is just if you can take three to five minutes to introduce yourself and give us an overview of the application, then we'll go to kind of site visit photos and any comments from staff and then questions from the commissioner, commissions. Thank you. So I'm Simon Hill, representing ever sourced energy. And the reason that we're here tonight is for the RDA that we submitted for some habitat enhancement for some stateless and rare plants along the Montague to Fairmont Project, which you're all very familiar with. It's it's in full swing right now. We've just about finished up all the line work that's north of Amherst substation by College Street there. And we're working on the portion south of College Street. So the purpose of this work here is in the area south of College Street and north and south of Strong Street. There are some colonies of state-listed rare plants that we have been working with natural heritage. We have a conservation management permit in place to do work in those areas that has involved some temporary matting on top of the colonies of rare plants and also some transplanting of rare plants where we had to have matting for sustained durations. And as a part of the conservation management permit, they actually asked us to do some habitat enhancement in the form of rare species control. So the target species in these areas is false Colossi buckthorn, which is pretty prevalent in both the areas around Strong Street and College Street. Did a site visit with Aaron and Larry on Monday to take a look at some of those so that they could see the densities of the rare plants as well as the densities of the invasive plants. So this work will involve use of herbicides, glyphosate, namely within wetlands and buffer zone. Essentially, the protocols that we're going to be adhering to are not not using the herbicide when we have periods of precipitation forecast or high winds forecast. It's going to be generally used in a cut and dab format, which is basically cutting the stems and actually you're brushing or a light spray onto the cut stem being that we're working within areas of very dense colonies of rare plants. Those will be shielded in some area or another. It may be plastic sheeting laid down on top of plants while we're using herbicides or another method of shielding. And it's just going to be painstaking and delicate work in order to do what we need to do to control the invasives in there and increase the habitat for the species, the rare plants that are out there to hopefully give them a better chance to to spread throughout the area. The work will involve three seasons worth of treatments. So the first treatment would happen around June of this year. And then the next two years, we'd also have additional treatments, likely just treating seedlings that come up from seedstock that's in the ground. That is generally just a bit. Another protocol is not using herbicides where there is standing water present. So again, treating in June, hopefully in most of the wetlands are going to have that condition. But if there is standing water, the plant, the invasive plants would simply be cut and removed from the wetlands rather than any herbicide being used in those areas. I think that generally sums it up. So if anybody has questions. That's a great overview. Thank you, Simon. That sounds very thorough. Erin, do you want to just run us through? I know you showed us site, but site, but I was you want to just kind of like in nary. Sure. Yeah. Do you have any anything to add? Please chime in. Thank you for attending. Yeah, so the areas are demarcated with these with the tape and the signage to keep to protect the rare plant, which we won't announce the name of just for the sake of protecting it. But there's some photos. That went too fast. There's some photos here showing the glossy buck gloss, a false glossy buckthorn in the area, areas where it'll be removed. And then the other note that we just I took pictures of while we were out there is the fact that the fairing brook flows underneath the timber matting there. This isn't in the area of treatment. I more or less just am documenting when I see it on sites where it is and where it goes underground. So that's what those photos show. That's not part of the project here. Just just we noted that it was there. Got it. Larry, anything to add? No comment about it was wonderful to go out and see it. And I was very happy to see fairing brook. I was we talk about it, but seeing it there was also nice. But they they're doing a good job. Great. Yeah, I don't have any concerns. This seems very thorough. Commissioners, any questions for Simon about the work plan? Yeah, right. I don't have a question but a comment. It is one of the nicer plans I've ever heard of. So I really appreciate taking the time to come here and taking the time to do the plan, obviously. If you're sticking to what you're saying, especially standing water cut and removed with no pesticide use and wherever you're using pesticides, the cut and dab. Those are the two highlights for me. So if you can stick to that, I'm 100 percent in. Awesome. Thanks, Larry. And so I'm going to briefly open this up for any public questions or comments. We still have about. Oh, I saw I see a hand briefly. One hand. Oh, no. Raise your hand if you have any questions or comments about this. There's a bit of a rdx. All right, it looks like we have two. So one. Julian, I'm going to promote you to panelist so you can ask any questions. Sorry. Julian, yeah, I can see you and hear you. OK, great. I was just wondering if you mentioned the cut and dab method of herbicide application, but I was wondering if you were planning on actually spraying the plants with herbicide as well, if that was part of the proposed agreement as well, or if you were just strictly adhering to the cut and dab method with that. Thanks. So it's going to be kind of will be the primary application method because we're working within colonies of rare plants and a lot of areas within wetlands and buffer zone within areas of uplands. There will be some foliar spray used where it's appropriate to do that. And likely in the second and third year, where we're dealing more with ceilings, where there's not really much of a stem to cut and dab, that foliar spray may be maybe more appropriate. But again, because we're going to be in wetlands, because we're going to be working very close to colonies of rare plants, we're going to be it's going to be slow and just painstaking work. And we're going to have a wetland scientist and rare species biologist on site at all times. OK, thank you for that explanation. I think if I could just make one more comment on that, I would suggest to remove the foliar sprang from the from the plan and strictly adhere to the cut and dab method just as a precautionary measure to ensure that that you're not negatively affecting non-target flora and fauna and that you can really be selective with what you're managing and just to reduce the overall amount of herbicide used. Thank you. Again, I'd say, Julian, that the purpose of this is habitat enhancement for our species. So I give you my word that we're going to be very deliberate and careful with the application. And again, this is something that's been prescribed by the State Rare Species Agency. So it's something that's not only something that they have asked for, but it's something that they will be overseeing as well. I really appreciate you coming out, Julian. That was a very good comment. I don't know that I can support spraying glyphosate under any conditions, but I'd be open to hearing what you are spraying up. What chemical will be used? Yeah. Glyphosate is going to be the main chemical that's going to be used. Previously, it was called Rodeo, that I guess is being discontinued. But that is the main ingredient. It's a chemical. I'm not a fan of herbicides either, but it's a chemical that's on Mass Department of Agriculture's sensitive chemicals list. So it's at least something that has a short life in the environment. So it breaks down relatively quicker, I understand. But again, it's not something we're not doing this to clear the right away of vegetation. We're not doing this to, you know, remove vegetation that could otherwise be managed in an effective way. This is strictly to open up an area that's densely populated with these false glossy buckthorn. As Erin and Larry saw when we were out there and in the areas that we're going to be trading, it's almost 100 percent cover with glossy buckthorn. So it will do it as carefully as we possibly can. And again, I just want to say that shielding will be used. So in a lot of cases, Julian, we're going to be, as I said, placing plastic sheeting on the ground or some other method so that we're making sure that we're really just targeting the plants that we're after. Can I ask a clarifying question? You said like if you're doing any kind of like spraying, it would be in upland areas. Is that like a hard rule? You know, like can we say without a doubt that we would limit spraying to upland areas outside of, you know, actual wetland and bordering? Yeah, sorry if I misspoke about that. In general, when we're when we're working within wetlands or within areas of our plants, cut and dab will be the primary method. And again, that's something that's really only effective with with plants that are, I guess, probably over probably a centimeter or at least a half a centimeter in diameter, smaller than that. The stem just from what I understand is not it's not effective to do it that way. So again, it's not going to be we're not flying an airplane in there and spraying overhead or anything like that. It's going to be spritzes as targeted as possible. Michelle, did you have a question? Oh, as far as like effective of smaller diameter plants that what I understand about buckthorn is that the dab method is actually the most effective for controlling that particular species. So when you say not effective, is is that sort of like the the balance of time versus application or are you actually meaning ecologically not effective? You caught me in the show. I'm not the actually the herbicide applicator. SWICA or SWCA, formerly New England Environmental, is going to be the herbicide applicator. And I'm really kind of following the the information that they've given as far as what the appropriate protocols are in line with the plant protection plan that we developed for natural heritage. So whether or not cut and dab is effective with smaller diameter plants. I my sense is from from the information that I've been provided is that it's it's not really for seedlings that are just popping out of the ground. But again, in any case, where where that is an option, that's that's what we'll push for. OK. So with my exposure to this, I this is a standard practice. And I think that the plan that we have in front of us is really kind of the most developed plan I've seen in terms of precautions when it comes to this kind of application. So just given my exposure and experience of this from this commission, I'm still comfortable with the way that they've laid out this plan. I'm simultaneously kind of looking at the application and seeing this all in writing. So, Julian, thank you. These are great questions that you're raising, and we really appreciate you being here. I want to we have one more question or comment from the public. So let's let that person have a chance to ask a question or make a comment. And then maybe commission, we can discuss. You can kind of check in on everyone's comfort level with this, if that's all right. So, Julian, unless you have more to add, I'm going to remove you from the panel. Actually, one can I just super quick, what do you think it would be since like the the ceilings that you were going to be sprang or like quite small, do you think that like mechanically removing them might be like a easy alternative instead of spraying them on their side? It's it's possible, but based on the density, I mean, we'll have to really see what happens after the first year of treatment based on the densities of the shrub layer that's out there right now. You know, shrubs are generally roughly 10 feet tall out there, I think, from what we've seen at Max. So we'll really have to see. I mean, if it's if it's a carpet of of nothing but glossy buckthorn, the most practical thing may be to use a foliar spray. If it's if they're smaller and scattered than that, then that it might be possible to pull them. Well, I think it was just kind of see when we get out there is a mechanical is mechanically pulling just hand pulling one option outlined in the WCA protocol. Do you know, Simon, it's not something that they specifically mentioned in their protection plan that was submitted to natural heritage. But I mean, again, if there's if there's a small cluster of plants, I mean, we'll do what we can to limit the use of herbicide as much as possible. OK. All right. Again, Julian, thank you for being here. These are all really good questions. So stick with us in the in the stay in attendance and we'll discuss it more once we take the rest of the public comments. OK, I see Rebecca Matthews. I'm going to move you in. We can hear. OK, we. Hello, we can see you and hear you. Welcome. I think so. I'm very opposed to the use of glyphosate in especially in wetlands. And it's my understanding that there's currently bill before the Massachusetts State Senate that would ban the use of glyphosate on public lands without a special permit. And so there must be alternatives. And, you know, Julian was talking about mechanical pulling. You know, I know glyphosate is banned in many countries in the world. There are other options to using this very toxic carcinogenic pesticide in wetlands. So that's the point that I wanted to make again. I mean, we're going to be following the Department of Agriculture's sensitive application guidelines as far as not applying where they're standing water, not within 10 feet of standing water, not applying when it's precipitation is forecasted or or there's going to be any high wind events. This is again, this is a chemical that's at least listed currently on the state's list of some sensitive chemicals or for use in sensitive areas, at least. And this is something, again, that has been prescribed essentially by the State Division of Efficient Game, Natural Natural Heritage Endangered Species. So currently. But in the next year, it could be, you know, banned in the state. So I don't know if Erin and Larry and Larry were out on site with me and I think got a sense of the density of of the invasives that were out there. As far as the shrub layer that's established right now, I don't think it's mechanical removal is feasible. You'd essentially be tearing up the entire right away and you'd be doing damage to certainly the rare plants that are out there as well as essentially the entire, you know, topsoil layer. As far as, you know, the second and third year of treatment when when if we've knocked back the shrubs and we're just dealing with with the seedling layer, again, I will I will say that personally, I'm with you. I'm not a fan of herbicide either. And and we're working in concert with Natural Heritage and really trying to make sure that we do this in a surgical way. And if there is the potential for other means, whether it's just extreme shielding with with whatever whatever types of materials we need to to make sure that the herbicide only lands where it needs to or or mechanical, if it's possible. You know, I assure you, we'll do what we can to really minimize use. This is not something that we're looking forward to doing, but it's something that has been asked of us by the state. Yeah, OK, so Aaron, one second. Yes, I was just going to say, it's it's not lost on me that we're trying to protect a rare plant species and then also spring in herbicide or hand applicating to a cut stem and herbicide in a wetland. So I definitely appreciate your input, Rebecca, and the red flags involved here. Aaron, so Rebecca, did you have any other comments or questions? We're going to have a comment. Is there you haven't brought up anything about my name is Jeff Sharp and I'm Becca's husband. We haven't brought up anything about the the animal life or the the, you know, species of reptiles or anything else that that may get affected. Have there been studies to to show what glyphosate does to the frogs in the area, for instance, toxic tampibians? OK, my other my other comment is if if you have to use this, then, you know, why couldn't you do the the the cut and dab method in the first season and see how effective that is? Because, you know, it's my understanding that glyphosate goes down into the roots of the plant and kills the entire root system and not just, you know, the the visible plant that you see. And it might take care of the problem altogether without ever having the need to go to your non primary method of spraying. Yeah, I just want to say that you're you're you're on point and that that will be the the primary cut and dab will be our primary method. I don't know if any of the photos that Aaron was shared really demonstrated that the density of the plants that we have out there. But in a lot of areas, there's there's a carpet of the plant that we're trying to protect. So cut and dab will be the primary method in the first year because the plants that we are targeting are at the level right now. They're not generally at seedling. So I am hopeful, too, that that the cut and dab will take care of what's established out there, but we're being that these are invasives. And this is the nature of these types of species. We're confident that there is seed stock in the ground and there will be seedlings that come up after this first year. And we need to address those as appropriate. So it's something like moving towards something of like a tiered approach and somehow conditioning that here might make sense. I really appreciate that. I'm sorry, Mr. Your name was it Jack. Yeah, yes. Thank you. I really appreciate the like that approach. And that's really good thinking with something that we can work in to kind of what our statutory like requirements are here in terms of natural heritage. So do you, Becca and Jeff, I really appreciate you guys being here. Did you have any more questions or comments? Because I think otherwise we'll just move it to a commissioner discussion here. Aside from the addressing the issue of the reptiles and, you know, is there a study? I mean, I'm not a I'm not a biologist or, you know, I don't have, you know, the the the credentials to to know. But I do know that that this is a pretty toxic chemical. And I do live, you know, within if I open my window right now, I could hear the peepers from the same area that you're talking about. I care about them. Yeah, absolutely. Well, I certainly don't know the answer that. I don't know if we're going to have a final answer to that for in this meeting. But it's something that we can certainly follow up with natural heritage about. So another thing I'll just put out there is that we mentioned in our RDA that part of our permit with natural heritage is monitoring and reporting to natural heritage on, you know, the how things go out there and basically at the end of this year, at the end of this treatment cycle, we need to report to them our findings and then basically map out our plan for the next year. So that's something that we can certainly provide to the commission to make sure that everybody is in the loop. And, you know, you understand our reasoning going forward. Thanks, Simon. Thank you, Jeff and Rebecca for being here. Thank you. You're welcome. Have a good night.  Andre, I see you. Give me a behind here. And we also have another comment from the public. So, Erin, do you have any comments or? Well, I just wanted to say that my understanding is that this is an optional for ever source, that this is something that the natural heritage is requiring. So I just wanted to make sure that that was clear. It's not like ever sources doing this because they want to. It was something that as part of their their permit for the line work that the state, it was a condition of them of their permit that they do this work. So I just wanted to make sure that that was clear. Yeah. And so my next question was kind of going to be like, you know, if we oppose what natural heritage is is kind of requiring here, or if we have questions from natural heritage, like how we navigate that because I see that kind of being the next step. You know, I I wouldn't feel comfortable answering questions about kind of the impact on amphibians, you know, for example. So is there any opportunity to ask questions or have questions answered by natural heritage for something like this? That would be helpful. Andre, did you have a question or comment? Yes, just just briefly and out of curiosity and knowing that kind of addressing one of the points brought up is what alternatives in terms of dabbing or spaying in terms of herbicide? Would there be to the glyphosate? Yeah, I don't know. I don't know if we're going to have the answer to that here. So, Michelle, did you have a I mean, I can wait till the next comment. I just the organization I work for, which is a land trust, which specializes in managing a dangerous species, uses glyphosate for non-native control and restoration. And it is toxic to the amphibians, especially in the aquatic life cycle stage. So so there's that. And it's there's California voted, put it up to vote for ban and decided not to. And a lot of the land like ecological land managing organizations were opposed to banning it because it is actually a useful tool for restoration. So I'm not a fan of herbicide. I'm just saying that it's it's actively used as a tool in restoration. That said, I've seen it burn broadcast spray or even spraying burn sensitive species that it was meant to protect or make space for. So just, you know, another consideration for the type of application there. But it's that's just that's that's all I want to say about, you know, use of glyphosate in different realms. Yeah, that's super helpful context, Michelle. Again, like, I think this is probably walking a fine line between trying to protect a very sensitive rare and dangerous plant species and then using an herbicide to do that job, which is seems like a quite a balance to strike. We have one more comment from our public public people in attendance. So I'm going to allow Michelle Miller to ask a question or make a comment. Aaron, did you have something while we wait for? I was just getting a little worried about the time because we spent almost 40 minutes on this and we've got two other hearings. Yep, I am also worried about that. OK, yeah, with that in mind, Michelle, if you want to introduce yourself and make any comments, but we need to keep this moving along. Oh, you're muted. I can see you. Yes, yep. Thank you. Yeah, I'm as fascinating as this is. I'm actually here as in a butter to the Montague Road solar and my notice says seven forty five. So I just wanted to see if it's not a problem. I understand how these meetings go. But if there's a time that I should come back, you know, that's the hearing that was requested for continuation. So they requested a continuance and they're going to be continued to well, assuming the board issues a continuance, which I assume they will, it would be April 27th at seven thirty, that that hearing would be continued to. Yeah, sorry, Michelle. I've made that announcement a couple of times this meeting because I assume we had some people in attendance for that hearing. I'm sorry that I didn't get you. But yeah, it won't happen until likely till April 27. It won't be notified again. So you have to write on the agenda that's posted on the Conservation Commission website. OK, and just a quick question about that. So my neighbor is also in a butter and did not receive notification initially. So I might be in contact with about that. So the best thing to do is go to the Conservation Commission website and email Aaron Jock. Her email is available on the website. Perfect. OK, excellent. Thank you. OK, have a good night. Yeah, have a good night. Bye bye. All right, so back to the RDA at hand. So it sounds like there's some outstanding questions here. I don't quite know, Aaron, how to navigate this from a kind of permit standpoint. You know, I understand that this is a very detailed and conservative way to go about creating protecting habitat for this rare and endangered species. I also hear all the concerns about this herbicide application. And I also understand that this is something that the state is requiring of ever source. So I don't quite know where what are. I mean, aside from my understanding of permit process, I don't quite know like what we can change. Like it seems to me like a middle road might be in the first year that we do only cut and stem application with all of the original kind of avoiding when it's going to rain, not doing in areas of open water, like avoiding any kind of circumstance where we could be exposing this to the early lifecycle stages of the amphibian species living in this area. And then assessing after year one for what needs to happen in year two. So we're instead of we're kind of taking spraying off the table for the first year, doing the best we can with like a cut and stem application approach. That seems like that might be the safest way to navigate this. But I'm open to commissioners comments. It seems like we could probably condition the negative RDA that way. Um, yeah, Michelle, go ahead. Well, is there a way that we can run that idea by natural heritage? Because my only concern is that by not controlling like the emerging buckthorn, we're just kind of, you know, letting it spread in the first year, you know, it might just have to be like a blanket treatment to actually be effective. And so rather than prolong it to just sort of anyway, I just would be interested in natural heritage weighing in on an alternative. So I just want to I just want to I don't think that what Jen is suggesting is an alternate to what Simon was saying. What I understood Simon to say was that in the first year, they're doing the cut and dab method, there may be some failure spray. So Jen understands. I think in general, cut and dab is is the most careful and precise way to apply this stuff in areas where, again, I am not a licensed server side applicator. So I will defer to others. Unfortunately, Naomi Valentine from SWCA couldn't join us tonight. So there may be some areas where it makes more sense to use a full air spray. Cut and dab is going to be used certainly in areas where we have replants. And I think for the most part in wetlands. But I would say if the commission is not comfortable at this point, I would prefer to continue and, you know, maybe I don't know what other information natural heritage would be able to provide. But. Yeah. Yeah. If we're going to continue, I want to be really clear about what information we would need in order to close this hearing. You know, I don't want to kind of leave it with questions. And this is to your benefit, Simon, and our SWCA and natural heritage. So commissioners, it sounds like our question is, is there kind of a more rigid it? What would there be a benefit to a more rigid tiered approach? Or do we really feel like spraying needs to be on the table in the first year? Buckthorn is nasty. It is nasty to get it out. You know, if these are 10 foot high shrubs, that root mass is giant and interwoven, and it's going to be hard to attack this. So I do hear Michelle's point that we need expert kind of guidance on like the best possible approach, keeping in mind that the whole point of this is to protect a plant species. So my recommendation would be that we continue this to April 27th at 735. And in the meantime, Simon and I can get some correspondence from natural heritage that basically sort of aligns with the questions that the commission has on the full airspring, just so that we can get some guidance from them and then just take it from there. And the backup for that, Erin, would be asking the SWCA, like licensed herbicide application person to join the next meeting just to answer some of these technical questions, just so that we're not kind of I don't know, just so we're we're working with a full set of information. That is not a knock, Simon. I'm not I don't do the spring. So yeah, yeah, in the RDA, we do we do state that cut and dab will be used wherever we're within at least 10 feet of within 10 feet or within colonies of their plants. And also beyond that, the method would be dictated by basically the height of the plant and the proximity to standing or flowing water. So I mean, that's that's basically what we've called up for year one as far as year two, two and three. It says we're primarily targeting seedlings and small saplings. And so again, if it I'll leave it up to the applicators to know what would be the most effective way to control these so that we can be done and not have to have this linger as Michelle had mentioned before. Yeah. OK, so, Simon, are you comfortable with continuing and you and Aaron and possibly SWCA can kind of come up with a plan so we can answer some of these questions in the next meeting. As the things that were given to us, the RDA given to us, is that shared with the state? Do they approve what you said in the RDA? Yeah, the RDA, I mean, the language that we included in the RDA is taken directly from the invasive species control plan that was submitted to natural heritage. So I mean, they're not going to disagree with with anything that we've said here. But and I honestly, I don't know that they're going to offer any information that's going to make everybody more comfortable because herbicides are not great. But again, they have a utility. So when you do describe the things you're going to do in that RDA, it's very decent. I mean, everything that Simon has been saying is very, very clearly outlined in this RDA application. I'm looking at it on the screen. Yeah, we got to keep this moving. We have two other folks who are waiting for us. And it's yeah, we've really got to either continue this or move on. This is always going to be a hot button issue. This is a tough one that we're trying to do a balancing act. So I think we need a motion to continue this. And Simon, I appreciate your patience and answering all these questions. And we'll keep this moving and come to a resolution in the next meeting. OK, so commissioners, I'm looking for a motion to continue the RDA for Eversource at four locations. It's targeted application of herbicide to manage non-native, invasive plant species, Dan Hansa, habitat, blah, blah at four locations along the Montague to Fairmont Electrical Utility right of way. To the meeting on April 27th at what time, Erin? 735. 735. I move that we move that we continue the Eversource hearing at the aforementioned date and time. Thank you, Laura. I'll second that. OK. And voice vote, Andre. Hi. Michelle. Hi. Larry. Hi. LaRoy. Hi. And I'm an I. Thank you, Simon. Great. Thanks very much. And Michelle, hi. Long time since you mess. I thought you were familiar. Thank you. Have a good night. Yeah. All right. Sorry. Thanks, everyone. Thank you, people who were in attendance on that one. OK. Moving on. I'm just pulling up the agenda. So our 735 hearing. This is an RDA Michael Campbell for work associated with construction of a single family home and septic system in close proximity to the 100 foot buffer zone to an intermittent stream at 729 North East Street. And so we'll follow our usual plan. Hopefully Michael or if our representative Michael is in attendance. If you can raise your hand. Erin already brought him in once up ahead. Hello. Hello. Hello. Welcome. I'm sorry. We're running so behind. Thank you for being here. If you wouldn't mind taking a couple of minutes to introduce yourself and give us a brief overview of the project, then we can look at some site photos. Sure. My name is Michael Campbell. This is my wife Karen Fern. Do you know we're looking at building a one single family home on Northeast Street?  What more do you need from us now? Nope. That's good. We just usually just give you a chance to share anything about your project. Erin, do you want to pull up a site map? Yes. And take photos? Yeah. And just to give you guys a sense, this project is actually sort of on the outskirts of the 100-foot buffer zone. So this is more or less just an overabundance of caution and because the outer extent of the proposed leech field was literally just touching the 100-foot buffer. Bear with me. Yeah. While we're waiting, I really appreciate you guys filing this RDA and sticking with us and giving us a chance to weigh in. Sometimes that's a detail that's often overlooked and we only hear about it when it's already happened. So I very much appreciate you guys being here tonight. Easier to do it now than later. Exactly. Yeah. Our feelings, exactly. So I'm just orienting this plan because it's rotated a little funny and I'll share it. Okay. So here's the plan. I'm going to zoom in because it's difficult to see. But let me just get the annotate tool here so you guys can see. This is the 100-foot buffer right here. And so it literally it's like the edge of one of their test pits for the leech field was right there. This is a small intermittent stream here.  Just bear with me for one moment. So these are the, this is the photo. This swale here is the intermittent stream. This is where the intermittent stream comes out of the woods. There's a dead cedar. Cedar spruce tree in the middle of the yard. And the house is sort of on the outer. Yeah, sorry. We're just seeing the thumbnail image. Oh, weird. Sorry about that. Sorry, Loree. Thanks. Weird. Okay. Let me try again. I don't know why I did that. So here's the swale. This is the other side of the swale coming out of the woods. It's the spruce tree, the dead spruce, right in the middle of the field. And then the house, as I understand it, is sort of on the outer edge of this field where it's going to go. And the driveway is outside of 100 feet. Yeah. So this is barely jurisdictional. I mean, erosion, my only concern would just be erosion controls during construction, making sure they're right along that 100 foot buffer. And before they're removed, just making sure that Aaron can come out and do a final look at the site just to make sure that, you know, the erosion controls have been effective. That would be my only concern. Commissioner, does any questions, comments? Looks good. Aaron, did you have, I'm going back to the power point, recommend the conditions. Erosion controls installed prior to the start of work. Erosion controls maintained throughout construction. Inspection must be conducted by Welland's Administrator prior to removal of erosion controls. Yeah, we're right on the same page. I think just public comment is really all we need on this one. That's pretty straightforward. Okay. If you are here to make a comment or have a question about the RDA for the private residents on Northeast, straight raise your hand. Not seeing anyone. Okay. Well, so I think commissioners, we need a motion to issue a negative determination checking box three for the Welland's Protection Act and a positive determination, checking back box five for the town bylaw. And just to be clear, Michael, this is a negative determination is good in this case. It means that we're not asking you to file a full permit and we can go forward. We can go forward with this. You can go forward with the work as commissioned. Is there a 10-day period of public comment after this meeting? So after we issue the permit to you, Michael, there's a 10-day appeal period. And generally it's kind of like proceed at your own risk during that 10-day appeal period. Thank you. I move to issue a negative determination of applicability checking box three and a positive determination of applicability checking box five with the recommended conditions of erosion controls installed prior to the start of work. Erosion controls must be maintained throughout the construction until the site is fully stable and inspection must be conducted by the Welland's Administrator prior to the removal of erosion controls. Motion from Michelle. Second from Larry. Voice vote. LaRoy. All right. Andre. Hi. Larry. Hi. Michelle. Hi. And I'm an I. Did I get everyone? Yeah. Yep. So we should be all set. Oh, thank you. Thank you. Thank you all for being here. All right. Take care. Hey, guys. Good night. All right. Moving on. The next RDA is for Ben White of Duke's LLC on behalf of Kiran Harte for work to restore unpermitted tree removal on the bank of an intermittent stream and within the 100 foot buffer zone at 1107 North Pleasant Street. So I'm going to open 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 acts relative to the protection of wetlands as most recently amended and article 3.31 the wetlands protection under the town of Amherst general bylaws. Did we have anyone joining us for this Aaron? Yeah, I'm promoting Ben White of Duke's LLC is representing the owner tonight. Okay. Great. And while Ben is coming online, so Ben is assisting the owner because Ben's company was assisted the owner with a tree removal and so he wanted to assist with the remediation. And so that's why he's here tonight. Ben did submit an RDA application. He worked with me to put that together. Was very cooperative and initially sort of I think his proposal was to put crab apple trees along the boundary of the stream. I met him on site for a site visit. I can share those photos but tried to suggest some adjustments to the planting plan to suggest some there was some drainage issues on the site and some issues with mold and mildew on the house branches falling and stuff on the roof. And so that's why the trees were removed in the first place. So I just was trying to suggest sort of some some native shrubs along the edge of the house and then the larger trees in the back of the house and in front of the house. And then to establish like a no disturb zone along the stream that would be demarcating some manner to prevent this from happening again. But I'll let Ben speak. I just wanted to kind of preface that because I've been working with him for a while to get to this point. And so I just wanted to remind you guys sort of the background of the situation. Okay, thanks Erin. Yeah, looking at this planting plan I don't know if we're going to need some more info I think. Hi, Ben, we can see you. Good evening. Welcome, thanks for being here. Thank you for having me. Thank you. Do you want to just give us a brief overview of the plan for planting on the site? And I know it's very informal. We were on the site and we were doing some pruning on the opposite side of the site. And the homeowner asked actually my foreman to remove some dead trees that were over the house and falling into the stream, debris into the stream. So unfortunately it's come to our attention that some of the trees were removed that shouldn't have been. So we'd like to rectify the situation and forgive me but I did a very simple hand drawing and I did a site visit with Erin. And Erin and I felt that, well, let me go back. What I believe was removed from the site was cherry and silver maple and walnut. And what Erin and I had discussed was planting some blueberry bushes as well as three trees back along the side of the house. And Erin did bring up a point that the site had a, the site has a very serious, the house has a very serious water issue. And I think the homeowner was trying to get some more sunlight in there and get the trees that were falling, had falling debris into the stream just removed. But anyway, so at any rate, so I put together this very obviously very, very simple drawing in hopes that we can do something to rectify the situation. Well, first Ben, thanks for your willingness to cooperate on this and being open about the removal that happened on the site and your willingness to do some restoration. So this, what you're sharing, Erin, it looks like that, that's kind of what was there. Or no, blueberry bushes, okay, so planting. Yes, this is what was there. Okay, I see, I see. Okay, thanks. Do you have site visit photos you want to share? I do. So this is standing sort of in front of the house looking down at the stream and then facing back towards the road. There was three large stumps sort of in the front yard along the stream. And then two large stumps that were next to the house, sort of fairly close to the house. And then there was a couple of stumps in the back as well. And it does look like there was, that was weird. It does look like there was material removed in the back as well. And there's some ground disturbance there. So my observations on the site were basically that the back of the lot needs to be stabilized in some form or fashion. And I suggested seed and mulch in the back to stabilize the ground. There is still a low growing shrub buffer along the stream in most places. There's a couple of places where it's a little more sparse. But when I was out there, there was a lot of, there was a lot of buds popping on the shrubs that are growing along the stream. So it's already starting to bounce back a little bit. What is difficult here is that a lot of these stumps are actually fairly close together. So these three stumps are fairly close and it would be difficult to plant a large diameter tree in between those stumps without removing them. My suggestion to Ben was there is a, if you can see this stump here, between this stump and the other two stumps, there's kind of a larger area there where a tree could be planted. And then my suggestion was that a larger tree be planted in the front yard as well, sort of away from the other stumps. And then in the back that there were one or two trees planted a little further up on the bank away from the stumps in the backyard area. And that we establish a, like just to sort of annotate this, like sort of in this area, put a couple more larger diameter trees. And then along this buffer to establish like a no disturb that would be an unmowed area and remain in a natural condition and try to prevent this from happening in the future or any vegetation removal along the stream in the future. That makes sense. Yeah, I think we definitely don't want to put anything that's going to get big back next to the house there, right? Like those could have been borderline hazard trees, it looks like anyway. Right. That's not plant future hazard trees, but I agree keeping future NOMO and keeping kind of future clearing out of that area makes a lot of sense. Yeah, this seems like a good compromise. Yeah, and I agree, definitely don't remove any of those stumps. Instead, putting in lower bushes, we love those blueberries is a good compromise. Yeah, commissioners, any questions or comments on thoughts on this? Okay, looks like no. So, Erin, I'm looking at your notes. So are you comfortable moving forward with these conditions or do you want to wait for like any more detailed plan? It seems like this is pretty. So I'm comfortable with pretty much the entire discussion that we've had and what Ben is proposing to do. I do have some suggestions after just having a little time to think this over. So as far as the no disturb area, I do think that we should demarcate that in some way. Sometimes Ben folks put in boulders, sometimes folks put in like a rebar wetland marker.  And there is a 35 foot no disturb from banks of streams and bvw. So it's not far fetched and the commission does ask for that quite frequently. So that's just something to consider and we can maybe talk that out. I did also suggest that the saplings that are planted are four to five feet minimum and five gallon bucket minimum and that the shrubs be at least 24 inches tall. And that's like a two to three year old blueberry bush just to try to encourage success so that we're not coming back again in a year and a half with all of them dead and needing to replant again. Because I think we want to establish something that's going to be a healthy buffer and that's going to survive and not continue to be an issue. So those are kind of the additional things. And so if you guys want to just talk those out or suggest anything. I think those are all great ideas. I think they'll ultimately benefit the resource but also the property. It'll stabilize the property and make sure that this doesn't happen again for the next person. Yeah, so I'm comfortable with this. Ben, does this all resonate on your end? It does. Yeah, and I may have a just question here and some of the details again just to make sure I get it right. But yeah, the plan works for me. Okay, great. So commissioners, unless there are any more questions. Oh, let me just make sure that there's no public. Oh, Michelle, did you have a question? Just I guess a comment as far as the barriers just to like visual demarcation of where the no disturbance since this is a rental property probably. I'd probably like to know it's not it's not a rental.  So it's it's owner occupied in other words. Okay, I mean it still sounds sort of temporary but regardless of that, I guess the rebar when the grass is you know growing high is might be hard to see. So I think just like rocks or something more visual than rebar just if it's not mowed and they're just as rebar rebar can sort of disappear. You can also tear up your lawn mower. Yeah, that too. Yep, I think we've been trending towards boulders lately. I think that makes sense. Okay, let me just see if anyone in attendance, any of our attendees, have any questions or comments if you can raise your hand. This is for RDA at 1107 North Pleasant. Not seeing anyone. All right, then I think we're looking for a motion, folks.  Commissioners. I move that we ensure negative determination of the clickability on the Wetlands Protection Act checking box three and a positive determination and clickability under a bylaw checking box five. We have the list of conditions one through seven. Oh, I heard Larry on the second. So that's a motion by LaRoy. A second by Larry. We'll do a voice vote. Andre. Yay. Larry. Hi. Michelle. Hi. LaRoy. Hi. And I'm an I. Okay, Ben. Thank you very much for being here and for your willingness to restore this site. We appreciate it. Great. Thank you. And I'm sorry it happened. Thank you very much. Thank you. Have a good night. You too. Bye. Bye. All right. And this is the last hearing. This is the one that they've requested. Wait, am I? Yep. I'll be right. Okay. So one of they've requested a continuous. Okay. So do I open the NOI, Erin? And then we can hear it. I would just suggest that we continue. Just announce that we're going to be opening it at the next meeting. Okay. Yeah. So we'll be opening a notice of intent for 285 Sunderland Road. And this is for Brian Waterman of Waterman Design Group for Montague Road Solar LLC for the addition of two concrete pads with meters, disconnected switches and reclosers for utility connections into the previously constructed solar array at 285 Sunderland Road. And we'll be opening that hearing at the next meeting on April 27th.  And please join us again for the 427-22 meeting. So commissioners, I'm looking for a motion for continuing that public hearing. Make a motion to move. I'm going to move to continue the public hearing for 285 Sunderland Road to April 27th, 2022 at 7.30 p.m. Second. Oh boy. I don't care. Leroy, we're giving it to Leroy. Did you even say second, Leroy? Right. Voice vote. Larry. Michelle. Hi. Leroy. Hi. Andre. Hi. And I'm an I. Andre, did you, was that your first motion in only your second hearing? Yeah, I almost jumped out of my seat. You're awesome. You're awesome. I think I was like at least 10 minutes in the meeting. You're natural. All right. So that's the end of our hearings. I'm going back. Looks like should we move to ratifying or reviewing and hopefully ratifying some emergency certs? Or what do you want to do? We're here. We still have 11 people in attendance. Yeah. I was just going to suggest we have Pete Wilson here again for Canton Ave. And he has been waiting to have that discussion. So I was thinking maybe we should, as long as he's waiting in the audience, try to have that conversation about Canton. Okay. Do you want to do the quick motion for Zero Tuckerman first? Sure. Just, I'm just looking at. Yeah. Of course. Yeah. That's totally fine. Let me open this up here. Come back to those. So I don't think we should, I mean, unless, is anybody here for Zero Tuckerman? I think it's the first question to discuss this. And if they're not, then this would be my recommended motion. Yeah. So and just to specify there, if we have any representatives from the applicant, the enforcement order for Zero Tuckerman Lane can raise your hand and we can get an update. It looks like no. So we have no activity towards coming into compliance on that enforcement order. So we've consulted with the town council, C-O-U-N-S-E-L, not C-O-U-N-C-I-L. So our attorney and what we're going to do is, yeah, thanks. No, no, you had it right, Erin. I was just making the clarification that it was our town attorney that we spoke with. Yeah. Right. I think it's an important clarification because we have a town council form of government. And so I always try to be careful of how I refer here to that. Exactly. Yeah. And so their advice is that we schedule an executive session to discuss how to, what to do with kind of lack of response to the open enforcement at Zero Tuckerman Lane. So I'm looking and what this is, I guess my understanding, an executive session is one that is during one of our normal meeting times, but closed to the public. Is that correct, Erin? Right. So we would handle all of our regular business and then at the end of the meeting, we would just have an internal discussion with the board without the public present. And minutes are handled separate for executive sessions. They're not released until the situation is closed out, whatever the end result of the whole permit or dispute is. And then at that time, the executive session minutes can be released. So it's handled a little bit differently because it may include litigation. So I need a motion to schedule that executive session during our next meeting. I moved to schedule an executive session for Zero Tuckerman Lane at the April 27 19 or 2022 meeting to discuss the great litigation strategy with town council. All right. Did you have a question? Yeah, I was wondering. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't see you there. All right. If anyone else feels this way, it sounds like that's going to be tacked on to the end of the meeting. Sounds like this is already a very late meeting. If that's how executive meetings have to work, that's fine. But maybe we could call a special meeting if it's not going to be public anyway until later. If that would work for anybody better or worse, I just, you know, this could end up being an 11 o'clock deal. And if it's going to be heavy legal stuff, it might not be the best mindset to be discussed. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry, I missed it. If you had your hand up, I when the screen screen is being shut down, I would have your hand up when the screen screen is being shared. I can't see everyone. So sorry about that. All right. Thanks, Michelle. So the problem with the special meeting is that's a lot of work too. And I don't want to wait a long time. That's the other thing is we. Well, we only have two hearings on the next meeting. Oh, so hopefully, I mean, May is going to be a tough, a tough month. But I think the second meeting, yeah, I thought it, I assumed it was two. Okay. Well, with two hearings, is that okay if we move forward with the April 27th? I'm definitely all right with that. Okay. I'll second that motion. All right. Voice vote. Andre. Aye. Michelle. Aye. LaRoy. Aye. Larry. Aye. And I'm an aye. So just a recap on that. If you're, if you've joined us following the enforcement order that we have active at Zero Tuckerman Lane, there's been no effort to come into compliance on that enforcement order from the builder. So we are trying to figure out how to move forward. And that's why we've planned an executive meeting during our next public meeting on April 27th. So thank you for being here and thank you for following, doing our best to kind of get that site restored and protect the resources there taking it very seriously. So thank you for following. Does that have to be scheduled? What are the reasons I'm saying this? Why didn't we do it tonight? It has to be scheduled. Okay. It has to be posted on an agenda. That's what I was asking, yeah. Yeah.  All right. Thanks, Erin. I just wanted in case everyone here was following for that. I know a few people are. I just wanted to get that out of the way. All right. Katnath, Pete, I'm just pulling up. So we're going to look at the plan revisions and figure out how to move forward. Did you bring, I see Patrice Wilson, should I bring? I'm assuming that that's Pete Peter because I think he was in here on the same name last time. I agree. Okay. And I did do a side by side plan comparison for the discussion. Just so that you guys could kind of see the difference in the designs a little more clearly because on the last meeting, I was, yeah, yeah, this is not actually, I still haven't gotten it totally oriented correctly. I was working to do this at the very last minute when we were getting set up here. So I think that does it now.  Can you hear us now? Yes. Hello. Okay. Good evening. Hello. Thank you for being here. Sorry. This is my brother's wife's laptop. Oh, no problem. No problem at all. Thank you for being here and thank you again for your patience. So I realized that we had wanted to understand a little bit more about the change conditions and adjustments in the plans on site and our job tonight is to discuss a path forward given that the current permit expires on June 2nd. So let's see, what are we? So May, June, so under two months from now. Erin, do you want to kind of? Yeah, sorry, I'm still trying to figure out the orientation. These plans are confusing, but I do see the driveway alignment is the same here. So that is the correct way. Okay. So just to give new commissioners a little bit of background on this, this was a permit that was issued in 2017. My first winter starting in this position, what I understand is that in the winter of 2019, there was some clearing that took place on the lot. I didn't actually find out about it until there was a request for extension on the permit. And I went out in the spring of 2020, discovered that there had been clearing done without a pre-construction meeting, without any controls being installed there. It appeared that there had been excavation in the wetland. And so an enforcement order was issued. The commission determined after several, we followed several steps. Basically, there was some dispute as to whether the wetland had been cleared or altered at all. And so we asked that surveyed flagging be placed on the site to determine where the previous wetland was located. At that point, we determined it was in fact altered. And when we went out on the site, visit discovered that the wetland had expanded on the site as well, which impacted the design of the overall lot. And so what you're seeing here on the right is the original approved lot, which shows, I'll just annotate quickly. This is the driveway location coming in here. And then there's a stormwater basin located here. And then the wetland line, it's difficult to see, but it kind of follows this boundary right here. On the new plan, the wetland, you can see where the wetland has expanded there. So it expanded out and it impacted basically this design. And so that's why the design had to shift. So as part of the enforcement order, the commission required all of those things to happen, the re-survey, the reflagging, the redesign. And so thank you, Pete, for complying with all of our requests and submitting this plan to us. And so now the commission is faced with a permit, which was originally issued in 2017. It's due to expire June 2nd, 2022. So it's set to expire this year, this summer. And the work started in violation. Pete has done what we've asked to come back into compliance. And the question is, how would the commission like to proceed with this? I've already asked Pete to reflag the site because no matter how he proceeds, we're going to have to check the flagging of the wetlands. There's another lot associated with this as well where we don't believe any work has taken place on that lot yet. So the question becomes, would the commission like a new notice of intent filing for these lots? Would the commission like to amend the existing permit to account for these changes? And that's really where the discussion lies, is what is the recommended path forward for Pete in order to move forward with the work he'd like to do on these sites? And if I could, Erin, if I could jump in and just maybe address a couple of things you said to give a little more clarity from our point of view. When we bought these lots, these were theoretically set up to work for the previous owner path of lease resistance. And even when we were negotiating to buy the lot, this particular lot here, that driveway location with a detached garage was really not what we wanted or envisioned for that house build. We always wanted to have an attached garage, which is, you know, most people in New England would want that versus a detached. The previous owner did the detach to get around driveway length and fire department issue. So the reason we've done this irrespective of the wetland increasing or not, we always wanted to redesign this. This was going to be something that we were planning to do anyway. The reason we got into that lot initially was we were told by the previous owner, there was no wetland on that lot up in that area. We were addressing issues, concerns we had for liability. And like I said, Erin, some of the reason why this all kind of got a little sideways in the fall of 19 was because of the Zoom meetings. And there was a meeting I had tried to attend, but could not speak at it because I was muted and no matter what I tried, I couldn't get the system to work. So I wasn't able to share some of this. So the driveway, we always wanted envisioned extended like you see it now. So there was an attached garage to the house. But with the wetland, certainly the pond or the stormwater management rainwater base in there had to be adjusted. So I just wanted to share those couple of points. Hey, can I ask you a quick question? You mentioned the driveway length changing because of approvals from the fire department and whatnot. And so I guess one thing that's always confused me about this site, and maybe you don't know the answer to this. But I never understood why there was even a subdivision filing here, why individual lots weren't applied for, for permit. Because one of the houses associated with this site was already constructed. And that's the house that's to the west, I believe. And so the owner, excuse me, yep, you're right. Opposite side of the street. I think it was expedient. He was trying to demonstrate that you could do a house here and a house there. So I think he worked through all those issues back when he owned it. And when we bought it, unfortunately, we should have done a little more due diligence to check. But in our defense, the small wetland that ran along the edge of the driveway, because we saw the bigger flagging out where it was clearly out in the woods, we saw that flagging. We didn't have any intention of, as I talked to Ward, he says this is all in the buffer, whether that's here or there. But it wasn't our intent, but there were flaggings missing right here by the street. There was like six of them, which is what Aaron addressed. We had to get it figured out. And we ran into a problem with surveyors related to the COVID issue. So anyway, I hope that addresses part of your question, Aaron. Well, I guess the reason I brought it up, Pete, is because there's a subdivision approval. And as part of that subdivision approval, other entities like police and fire had to comment on this. And so just to make sure, as we move forward with whatever changes are approved here, that there may be other entities that you need to also get approval from in-town government, whoever approved the subdivision would have to take another look at this and make sure that the driveway and house configuration is complying with their driveway length requirements and whatnot. So I just, that's a side issue, but I just want to make sure that I noted that, that those permissions would also have to be accounted for. I mean. You're right. The ZBA is the next stop once we're set with you folks. And that was part of the original subdivision that the new owner would have to come back and address any modifications. We had to go back anyway to them, but we would have to address any modifications to the original plan. So, I mean, from a staff standpoint, there's two issues here. It's, he's either going to have to file an amendment and notify a butters and post a legal ad and propose this and get an approval for it, or he would have to file a new permit to permit this from basically starting from square one. And I think that's really the question is whether to amend the permit that was issued in 2017. From a staff perspective, my preference is always to start with a fresh permit because continuing and continuing, continuing on an old permit from an administrative standpoint is tricky. It's also, it starts to become tricky from the wetland to the public. It's become tricky from the wetland delineation, wetland lines change after a period of time. You know, you have wet couple years, the wetland boundary changes. But I would assume that Pete's preference here would be to amend, but I'm not sure what the commission's feeling is. So I think that's why we wanted to bring it before the board and have a discussion. So Pete, what is your preference? I mean, given that it's a pretty heavy lift both to amend and to file, you know, file for a new permit. I mean, do you have a strong preference or is it just that we are as efficient as possible getting through this whatever process it is? Well, well, certainly that too, but and I think you guys are, but we would like to see because we would like to move forward with construction on this smaller parcel. We'd like to see this since there's been so much work. I've talked to Ward over the last since last spring about this.  And, you know, he's one voice saying it could easily be just continued for this one lot. I think my brother and I are in agreement that if the board were to meet us halfway and extend this permit for the small lot, although I don't know if your hands are tied because the original owner did this both parcels under the same, you know, notice. Right. Is there any vehicle to separate out the lots at this point, Erin? So and Pete, just so that I understand what you're saying is at this point, you just want to move forward with this lot. The other lot you don't want to move forward with currently at the present time? Currently, you know, and with constraints of costs of material and so forth, but there is time, but there also is infrastructure that needs to be worked on in this lot. So, you know, we're looking to try to, you know, extricate ourselves from the circumstances previous and continue with moving forward with this lot and hoping that by next year, if we have infrastructure completed on this lot that we could then hopefully see more favorable, you know, building material prices that would say, you know, continue forward with building it. So the other lot was always, one of them was always going to be waiting on the other. And we decided that this was the first one we wanted to go with. So that's why we started there. I mean, I wouldn't see any reason why you couldn't close out the old well. Yeah. How does that work, Erin? Because basically what we're talking about, right, is somehow amending the permit to be only this lot, right? This permit hasn't made any sense to me from the beginning because, and the reason being, because if you have two lots, you don't need a subdivision plan. If you have three, you do, and one of the houses was already built. So it didn't make any sense to me like, why are we having all this stormwater infrastructure here on a single family house lot? The whole thing is just bizarre. Yeah. So Pete, just to clarify, like what we're struggling with is just like literally administratively the fact that both of those lots are on the same permit makes it really, it makes it really hard for us to handle them individually. And I think that's why Erin is like pulling for filing new permits individually for those lots so that they can be handled efficiently individually. So it seems like Erin, the answer is that we can't somehow amend the current permit to apply to only this lot. Like we can't exclude the other lot from a permit amendment. What I would throw out quickly is, you know, I don't have the benefit of Tom Reedy on tonight, but if I could get him to look at this, I know we would be agreeable if the, if this could work. I don't know what he can do to help us in that regard to separate him, but even if we were to work with him to see if there is a way to legally separate him, which helps you guys. Yeah. I mean, that would be my recommendation is that Pete, myself and Tom have a call or a meeting and sit down and talk about what are we going to do about this? And also it might not be a bad idea for us to include planning, considering this is a subdivision plan and that there have been changes that might impact the planning department. That would be my recommendation. And in the meantime, I would suggest that the reflagging gets done. And again, maybe you want to wait, Pete, until we sort out the details, because if you're not interested in moving forward on the larger lot right away, maybe you just want to focus in on this one. And this, the flagging on this lot is already done. So I think we should maybe talk about it offline and strategize. I don't really have a preference one way or the other with the exception of, I feel like continuing a permit from 2017, I just would rather not. I'd rather just start fresh that way. It's like, you've got three years to do what you need to do and the commission approves it in one shot. And it's a much cleaner process as far as I can tell. But yeah, I just want to about, I'm just, of course, I agree that the efficiency of just having an up-to-date, clean permit just makes this easier for everyone. It'll be clear for you, Pete. It'll be clear for us. We won't find ourselves in this quandary situation again. But I also recognize that you've done everything we've asked to kind of get this all sorted out. And I want to make sure that we're handling this in the way that is the most fair and efficient for you. So my instinct is to, Erin, if you're willing to talk with Tom, Reedy, and Pete between now and the next meeting to figure out kind of a pathway or a compromise, or it's not even a compromise, like a fair pathway that meets everyone's needs here, which I'm confident we can. I think that would be great because especially knowing, Pete, that you plan to kind of focus in on this smaller lot, like the idea of like separating the two is really, it's just going to be so much more efficient for everyone involved. That's my gut on this one. Okay, great. And again, I can't thank you enough for the cooperation and being willing to work with us to do this. We know we'll be as efficient as possible. Commissioners, does anyone have any questions or comments about this path forward? I'm seeing no and I'm also seeing it's nine o'clock again. All right, great. So this feels like a plan. And we've got a little time because the permit doesn't expire till June. So I think if we, if we can figure this out before the next meeting, then that gives a little time for us to figure out the path and if it's going to be continued or if it's going to be, you know, how we'll deal with it. So I think that's a good plan. Okay, great. And Michelle. I just have clarification is, is like a new notice of intent still on a table with this path forward that you're yeah. Yeah, I mean, I think we should all just sit down and talk about what is the, what is the the easiest path for everybody because yeah, I think a new notice of intent might be just as easy. Right. I'm not convinced that an amendment is any easier for anyone. Right. Then a new notice of intent, especially since we're so familiar with this site at this point, like I think we could move an NOI through very efficiently and still, you know, do our job and possibly even more efficiently than an amendment because yeah.  I already alerted him last month that there's a potential for that. And he's like, well, I'm pretty well booked for a number of months. So it's either wait him out, wait for him to come available or outsource it somewhere else and try to basically get on a different set of train tracks and with some other organization to do it. So from his standpoint, it's harder for me to do what I need to do if you have us do a new NOI versus administratively deal with it within the committee. Understood. Yeah, we need a lot from Ward with an amendment too, I think that's the trouble. So Ward couldn't be here again tonight either. So at any rate, I'm just throwing out because that's something that's stuck out in our conversations. Absolutely. Yeah, okay. So we'll sort out what the easiest path is, what the best path is offline and then come with a recommendation at the next meeting. And I think we have the information we need in either route, right? Like we understand what's happening aside from the reflagging, we understand what's happening at the site, right? So I think that's a very positive point to make is that, you know, we generally, if we were looking at an NOI with that plan set, it's a good, it's the right amount of information. So yeah. All right. So it sounds like we have a plan for a plan. Pete, thanks for being here and for your patience. We will keep pushing through this. Okay, great. Thank you for your time as well. Yeah. So Erin, do we need, so I'm going to move you back to it in attendance. Pete, have a good night. Okay, you too. Thank you. All right. So Erin, did we, we didn't need to do any moving or motioning about that one? No, no, it's all just a sort of an informal discussion. I just wanted to check that I didn't miss anything. I think that the only thing we have remaining are the emergency certifications. Okay. Under enforcement, you had a general update. Was there anything that you wanted to bring up under that? Oh, well, just to, yeah, just to say that Dave Zomek and I talked offline about this, just to strategize, just because our enforcement environment changed recently. Like we've previously recommended, in a lot of cases where folks are being really cooperative and wanting to resolve an enforcement situation or a non-compliance issue, we've recommended an RDA filing for people to bring sites into compliance similar to what we did with Ben White tonight. And it's always worked really well for us. You know, we recently had a case where it didn't work out so well, right? And so it kind of forced me to reevaluate, should we be handling these situations a little differently? And one of the things that Dave recommended to me, which I thought was a really great idea, is that on smaller enforcement cases, I work with the applicant to come, if they're being cooperative, work with an applicant to come up with a plan similar to like how I did with Ben, make some suggestions, guide them a little bit to help them in the right direction before they even come to the board. Because a lot of times I think when they come to the board really vague and not sure what to do, that the confusion and their lack of background on the situation can almost make the situation worse and aggravate tensions a little bit. And so, anyway, it was just a discussion I had with Dave to try to work cooperatively with people offline behind the scenes kind of, and then update the commission with my recommendations. And I thought that was a really great idea. And I just wanted to share that with you guys, see if it was something you were in support of. We can talk about it more. It was mostly just me trying to reconcile kind of how things worked out in the last couple meetings. Yeah, I appreciate the willingness to kind of be adaptive and how to handle this. But I also think that we have always had a very cooperative stance. And just because this one time that that compromise route of the RDA didn't work doesn't mean it's wrong. You know, sometimes those conclusions can be solved in a 10 minute conversation with the commission. And it kind of educates everyone involved. Everyone already knows what's going on. And so we can move forward very efficiently in those RDA scenarios. So I'm sensitive to the fact that this has been difficult for the enforcement environment changing, but I don't want to necessarily lose confidence in a very open cooperative process from the get-go. So I think I'm just acknowledging that it's thorny. I think before we do any major approach course corrections, before we try to move that whole trajectory of the way we operate, I think we should just let some time pass kind of continue to be cooperative when we run into these enforcement situations. And if people need to come in front of the board to kind of ask questions and we can feel these situations like, you know, that's okay too. We can't just let one bad situation kind of change the whole approach, I guess is my instinct. But I'm interested to let people have to say other people's commissioners thoughts and takes on this. Yeah, Andre? I think that ultimately the idea is to bring to ensure compliance with the regulations. And there are times when it does help to have an expert, Aaron, provide an avenue to avoid conflict and to essentially achieve that compliance. So, you know, we have to understand, I think also that a lot of times the folks who are coming in front of us don't have that kind of understanding and could use a little helping hand, if you would. And ultimately what we're going to end up with, what we can end up with is a much easier process without a lot of conflict. We need to be getting that compliance. Exactly. I think you summed that up really nicely, Andre. And I would just add it also saves you guys time during the meetings. And it's like we could duke it out for, you know, half an hour, 45 minutes talking about it, or I could talk to them offline, come with my recommendations and say this is what I suggested and we've agreed on and is the commission on board. So anyways, it's just, and especially because meetings have been, it seems like getting gaining momentum, getting a little more intense and development pressures a little more intense in terms of permitting. And so I just want to make sure I'm doing what the commission wants in terms of my work. And I don't want to be like doing things behind the scenes without you guys being on board with it. So yeah, I think it's a good discussion and we can continue it. I don't want to hold up the rest of the business of the meeting, but that the discussion can be ongoing. And we, I agree with Jen's comments too. It's like I don't want to change our course. It's been working all along. I also want to be, how can I do this better? I want to think about that. So yeah, I've been thinking about that a lot too, for sure. So I think it's good to have an open discussion and keep it, keep it open between us all. But I'm certainly comfortable with your mode of operating now. Absolutely. All right. So those emergency certs are the only other thing I see on here, Erin? Yes. So the first one, 34 high point, really simple, three dead trees that were in sort of a marginal wetland area that was ponding. And I wouldn't even describe it as a BVW. I just think that the area was a little wet. And so they were sort of operating under a high degree of caution by contacting me, which is good. So that one was simple. I just issued it and said that they could take the dead trees down because they were over their driveway. And Dave gave his blessing on issuing the emergency cert and that they just not block any flowage with the tree debris and that they leave the stumps in place and stabilize any ground disturbance. That's 34 high point. That's great. So we just needed a motion to ratify the emergency cert for 34 high point drive with noted conditions. And then we ran for the emergency certification for is it 34 high point drive? We've been under conditions stumps not to be removed and no tree debris or material be taken outside. And any ground disturbance caused by tree removal shall be immediately stabilized and seen much. Second. All right. Voice vote, Larry. Hi. Hi. Leroy. Hi. Andre. Hi. Michelle. I recused myself on this. It's my house. So cooperative. And I'm an eye. Thank you, commissioners. Wow. I love it when people are so cooperative. Okay. 52 South Pleasant Street, Erin. Okay. So this is a site that we have some history with just to give you guys really, really quick. A year or so ago, this was owned by a different property owner. And we had a lot of problems with them doing tree cutting. I was in touch with them many times about tree cutting and work going on on the site. I'm trying to assess what they were doing, talk to them to try to, you know, prevent work going on near wetlands. They ended up moving. The new gentleman who bought the property is doing a lot just to give you an idea, a lot of work that the old owners buried a lot of trash. I don't know if it was dirty fill that was put in there or what, but he's cleaning out chunks of concrete blocks, tyvek, plastic, potting materials. I went out there and did a site visit. You could see it sticking out of the ground. And he's been cleaning it up, which is great. He does have a couple trees on the site, which are dead or dying, which he requested to remove. And so Dave also gave his blessing for those trees to be removed with the conditions noted. I went out to do the site visit for the stump removal. And it was the other day when it was really rainy on our site visit day. And he said, I'm having an emergency in my basement right now. It's flooded. That basically a spring opened up and started pouring water into his basement. And they discovered that the French drain around the house had failed and needed to be replaced. He did share photos and videos, which I uploaded to the OneDrive. I will avoid opening them right now if you guys don't mind. But the long and the short of it is that the foundation drain needs to be replaced. And I talked to Dave about that. We have no problem with the work going forward. I did tell him erosion controls needed to be installed work. They needed to work to prevent any impacts to the wetland during the work process that the ground needed to be stabilized. And before the erosion controls were removed, that the ground needed to be fully stabilized. So that was modified to include those additional work items when I went out to do the site visit and discovered there was an additional emergency on site. So that one also just needs to be ratified as issued. Sounds good. So I moved ratify the emergency certification for 562 South Pleasant Street for tree removal and amend it to include a French drain around the house erosion and stabilization measures with noted conditions. Seconded. All right. Voice vote, Leroy. Michelle. Hi. Larry. Hi. Andre. Hi. And I'm an I. Great. So there was one other thing that I just wanted to check in on, which is that Paul Backelman basically has requested a conservation commission member serve on the solar by lock development committee. And so I know we have a commissioner who's probably really, really knowledgeable about solar who's not here this evening, but I wanted to bring it before the board to share this invitation and see if anybody wanted to jump in as a volunteer if we wanted to. Yeah. So that commissioner is also our CPA representative. Obviously, I'd like to hear from that commissioner. Thanks, Leroy. That would be awesome. And I would love to see Leroy on that committee because he's been really, really great with the bylaw review committee. And he's also gotten to know our bylaws really well. So, you know, I think that could be a really good fit. That's interesting. So should we give the other commissioner a rate of first refusal and much more knowledgeable. I don't know. It doesn't necessarily take subject area. Sometimes it's the approach that matters. But yeah, it could be would you mind breaching out to that commissioner, Erin, and just making sure that she's okay with her current roles and then confirming with Leroy. Sure. So I'm not sure if this is something that the commission needs to take a vote on, but I can talk with Laura and I can let Paul know that we wanted to just discuss it with Laura who wasn't at the meeting first and that if Laura is not interested that Leroy might be. And then we could handle it officially at the next meeting if needed. Yeah, that's totally fair. I mean, it's a little hard without a full complement of board members to do that. Yeah, point somewhere. It's going to be a really important job. Yeah. That solar bylaw is going to be crucial for the town, but also for us. Is anybody else interested? Is Michelle at all interested? I mean, I'm interested. I don't know if I'm going to fight Leroy. Okay. I'm interested. So I'm not. Larry is out. Okay. We've got a couple people on deck. So is that okay, Dave, if we just double check, check in with Lauren Fletcher? Yeah, that sounds fine. Yeah, I think you bring up a good point, which is Laura is already your CPA C rep, although they don't meet until the fall. But this is, I think this is about a eight to nine month commitment. I think the goal is to have the new bylaw by about March, March of 23, I believe, something like that. So yeah, why don't we check in with Laura and just see?  So let's check in with her and then maybe if she's not interested, then yeah, it sounds like Leroy is and Michelle could be. And yeah. Right. I do think a strong commitment, this group is going to have to work very efficiently and it's going to be a very high profile group. So a lot of, a lot of interest in this, in this subject matter. Yeah, as we've witnessed on our solar related hearings. Okay. So it sounds like a plan. Thank you, Erin. Absolutely. Good job. I was a little worried about tonight, but I mean, we picked up the pace. We did. Yeah. And it was good that the solar project continued because they actually had some BVW boundary issue when I went out to the site visit that needed correction. And just I would rather have everything be reviewed in advance and understood before we discuss. Absolutely. Do you anticipate that being pretty contentious? Was that what most of the people were here for? I'm sorry, could you say that again, Laura? So do you anticipate that being pretty contentious? Is that what most of the people were here for? I don't think it was contentious. I think that the issue is or the reason that there may have been a lot of people is because that development butts up against the co-housing, the pulpit hill co-housing development. And so I think a lot of people got notified. And so that's probably what it was and people were just unsure of what exactly was going on. There are also a lot of people that left after we discussed Zero Tuckerman. So, all right. I think we just need a motion to adjourn. All right. Voice vote, Larry. Hi. Andre. Hi. Michelle. Hi. LaRoy. Hi. And I'm an I. Hi. Great job, guys. Good night, everyone. Thanks, Alex. Enjoy the good weather. Thanks, all. Yep. We'll do that. Bye, guys. Good night, y'all. Good night.