Thanks. All right. Welcome to the Amherst Massachusetts Conservation Commission meeting of September 14, 2022. Top of the meeting comments from the chair. That's me. Usually I use this time to just talk about the meeting we have our agenda is really fall.  We've had a few continuances since the agenda. So it's not there aren't as many hearings, but we have a lot of other business. So we need to keep this like efficient and succinct and really stick to kind of our normal rules. And what we should do is, of course, any reporting from Dave and our land management updates, and then I'll take a minute after that to talk about kind of procedure for the hearings and update, kind of make a general announcement Aaron of what we're thinking about in terms of how to make sure our permits are complete at the beginning of meetings just so folks have a heads up about that. And what I will say before we start into the land management updates is for those attendees here. We're continuing the notice of intent scheduled for 730 which is SWCA for 52 Fearing Street, and the request for determination for seven scheduled for 735 that's Keith Morris and we have New England Central Railroad. So in terms of the hearings, we will have some discussion on. So if you're here for 52 Fearing Street or the New England Central Railroad hearings, we will not discuss anything those hearings are going to be continued into our next meeting which is September Wednesday, September 28 and two weeks. So our first hearing we have to open a public hearing at 740 and probably until then we'll be discussion discussing land management updates. That's what I had, Dave. Sure. And yeah, I can elaborate on things or I can go as quickly as as you'd like Jen you just let me know but yeah. There's a lot happening out there, you know it's it's still fieldwork season as much as we all, you know, certainly want to extend the summer. It's been nice to get some rain I'm sure all of our streams rivers lakes ponds all the critters and all of our aquifers really appreciate what we got we still need more. But we're down to Brad and Tyler at this point our summer staff have gone back to other things college, etc. So it's really just the dynamic duo out there doing as much as they can before the snow flies and, and really we've got a lot on our plates. And you'll see a lot of field management going on right now. We're really trying to focus on some of the fields that haven't been mowed in years. They just completed Atkins flats, which is one of our largest conservation areas and an area that we'd really we've really kind of lost grassland bird habitat there so we're really trying to bring that back and get to use that area again we did have a successful nesting of kestrels there this year which is really exciting kestrels have not been doing well over the last 10 to 15 years and we're going to kind of reach out to kestrel trust I already have they do a lot of focus on work on kestrel boxes and management so hope to work with them this winter and kind of come up with a better plan for where we're encouraging kestrels. The guys will then move on to South Amherst conservation areas they're already up at Mount Pollocks they'll move to Wentworth farm they'll move to West over Meadow. Still some bridge work being done David Mullins if you know David Mullins a prominent member of our community. He's been really helpful he's quite a skilled woodworker and he and Brad and Tyler, and many volunteers have been combining to do some work on trails outside of wetland areas or on bog bridging that was already approved by the Commission and permitted by the Commission last year or earlier this year. So you'll see some new bog bridging going in mostly replacement bog bridging. Let's see staying with the theme of bridges. I'm at this Brooke Bridge. It's a tough one. We are we we are really kind of doing a little bit of a pause I really hope that that bridge would be under construction this year. I think it's unlikely we've we really had the town engineer and the building commissioner take a look at our plan which was approved by the Commission. And they both working with Aaron and myself out in the field really had some pretty significant questions about whether that was the right design structurally to withstand water and ice shearing and last for the next 30 years so we'll be heavily on our building commissioner Rob Mora who has an extensive background in construction and Rob is going to do with with kind of a redo of that design and and likely we would have to bring that back I don't think it would be dramatically different but we will have to bring that back through the Commission to see how it differs from the plan you all approved. So I'm at this Brooke Bridge is is a little bit of on a hold right now. We do have a new quote temporary bridge at the KC trail off of Southeast Street. I'd like to say I'm 100% pleased with it but I have some questions about that bridge to so we're going to take a second look at that bridge. I'm going to be meeting with the adjacent landowner to talk about that bridge is for pedestrians only if you've been on it it's quite robust I would say. It turned out a little more robust than I thought it would be honestly, which translated into a little more cost, but you know, the funding is there so, and we can always if we change the design slightly on that we do need to add things like that and things of that sort so we've been working with the town engineer and the building commissioner on that so stay tuned on that. Keep in mind that that is temporary if you will I say temporary probably last a couple of years, because we, we do want to fully explore that bridge as a vehicular bridge as well because it provides access to the adjacent landowner for their field in the back. That is a major expense for the town and I'm still kind of putting together a funding package for that so I'll be meeting with the adjacent APR landowner and talking that through. In the meantime we'll see what we're going to do with that very robust bridge which is now fully functional but we're looking at that structure a little bit as well. So Casey trail bridge and with this bridge. What else is going on. We're going to talk about vista terrace and the land equity, the gift of land later I think in this meeting. I wanted to bring the to your attention a couple of things happening. Next week I think Aaron may have already sent this to you but on 920 next Tuesday at 4pm we're doing the ribbon cutting for the fearing brook project down at the Fort River farm. I hope some of you will be all of you if you can make it to that we'll also be dedicating the community gardens there. We're working with a very committed group of gardeners who have organized. And certainly the gardens themselves. And so on 920 that's next Tuesday the 20th of September will be dedicating those two projects. On 924, which is the following Saturday the Fort River cleanup happens at gruff park and all up and down the watershed. I'm sure perhaps you've gotten some notice of that through Brian Yellen and other folks at the Fort River watershed group. Let's see on October 8, another Saturday, 930 in the morning, we'll be rededicating the Dickinson trail this is the project that the commission permitted with QR codes and new kiosks. So that'll be on Saturday October 8 at 930 in the morning. And again that that event will be at gruff park so that'll be an exciting, you know, there'll be a new populated kiosk there'll be the QR code posts out in the woods following the Fort River, etc. So that should be good earlier in just a few minutes ago someone asked about conservation commission appointments. And Paul Bachman has with Aaron and with Jen has has done the interviews for those we had three very qualified candidates. Two of those have been selected with input from Jen and Aaron and Paul Bachman will announce those on Monday night the 19th, which is coming up just next week. So we have ribbon cuttings mowing. So the main things we're going to talk about Vista terrorist gift in a few minutes. I know we don't have a lot of time but I know that Laura is on the solar bylaw working group. And you know I just encourage the commission to keep an eye on on the workings of, excuse me, the, yeah, the meetings of that group of that working group I think they're doing great stuff. We are simultaneously also starting the solar siting study. This is by Stephanie Ciccarello. Stephanie by the way I should announce is now our sustainability director, not coordinator. She has been promoted to that position. And that was announced on Monday night. So, so yeah a lot of exciting things happening both in the field and in committee. Lastly, I will say one other ribbon cutting will be doing in October to be announced will be will be doing the ribbon cutting for solar at the landfill at the north landfill. And I'll invite all of you because we'll be celebrating kind of three projects at once the solar and the landfill, the conservation restriction on the south landfill which is primarily for grassland birds. The dog park we already had a grand opening for the dog park so, but that's a wonderful kind of win win win dog park on landfill habitat for grassland birds and solar for the town.  It's kind of a smattering of the things that are on my plate and Aaron's plate and our land management team and conservation team. Happy to take any questions. Thanks David looks like Michelle has a questions. Yeah just real quickly Dave. Our last meeting you mentioned the mowing schedule and, and, you know, maintaining late season pollinator habitat. And this just comes because I was visiting Vermont and at the wildlife openings there and they're just chock full of golden rods and late season masters. And I was wondering if you had considered sort of a prioritized mowing schedule, not just like I know atkins slide has habitat for birds. So that has to be done, you know, in the end of the season but if there were places like atkins slots it could be at the like sort of the end of the line for mowing to support migrating monarchs and, and other pollinators that are relying on late season and I just mentioned atkins slots because it's had such a such a great plant community and I assume it's, it's pretty buzzing. Yeah I just, I'm just throwing that out there is sort of a consideration or whether or not you had considered that. No, it's a great question Michelle and one we grapple with a little bit and happy to kind of dig deeper into it. I think our fundamentally and again we can continue this conversation in more detail but fundamentally. I think time is not really our friend and so we have about 300 250 to 300 acres of early successional habitat, and given weather tractor staffing. There's just no way so we have kind of a rotational schedule for that work. And as an example atkins flats has gotten extremely woody because we've missed it a couple of years it's very wet. And so, actually our tractor got stuck on atkins flats twice, even though this is before the rain we got stuck twice down there and had to be pulled out once. We also pop two tires down there because it had gotten so woody. So the challenge for me practically is how you know, when do we do this mowing, I do get a lot of feedback from from the pollinator community, and my responses are generally of the, of the, you know, 250 or so acres. We normally don't get to, you know, most of it until mid October to November but if it snows early November then we've lost the most of the mowing season. So I'm, I'm, I'm happy to talk more but we're balancing grassland birds pollinators and turtles, all at the same time. So for instance with wood turtles and box turtles we're trying to avoid the areas that we know for the most part that we know is estimated priority habitat for them so I'm, you know, open to, you know, kind of more systematic way of doing that. I think what it would take is actually doing a more in depth habitat and botanical study of each one of the fields, and then kind of doing a matrix of what are we, you know, more specifically what are we trying to manage for. I totally appreciate the logistical complications of that just, and probably the pollinator community can weigh in and maybe volunteer on the habitat assessments. But yeah, you know, ideally if we could I would wait till November 1, November 15, but realistically there is no way we will, we will brush hog, even 50 acres, typically by the time it snows and then we're done. And then we can't come in early because early migrants, particularly birds are here in the second week of April. So it's a conundrum. So, for instance, here I know we're also we're kind of laying off Amethyst Brook because I know there's a lot of, there's a lot of milkweed there and we're getting you know people care deeply about, as you said migrating monarchs for instance. We're simply laying off. We did an early season mode Amethyst Brook, and probably won't even get there until next year we'll just leave it as is. So, but happy to talk more about that with you anytime. And one thing I'm just going to say for like public records I can send it to Erin. There's a new UMass solar siting assessment applicable to Amherst so I can send. It's very new and it's like spatially explicit so I'd like to pass that on to Laura and I guess I'll send it to Erin later, but just want to make people aware of that. Who did that Michelle. I could give you more information because it's my friend Zara.  Okay. Maybe are you already familiar with it or I think she's probably under Dwayne Breger who's one of the who's the chair of the working groups. Okay, so maybe that's for done any information. That's always good. Let me let me just close and I know we got to move on Jen on the field mowing. The other factor in our in our spreadsheet if you will our matrix is is feedback from users so so many people both the butters. Walkers, burders, post supporters of pollinator habitats, orders of turtles. Oftentimes kind of want to advocate and say well what why are you mowing this why aren't you mowing it why aren't you mowing it more frequently. It's too woody for bobble links. How do we how do we navigate that and how do we defend our choices that's it's a conundrum and and and again I would welcome input on perhaps a better way to do that but we do have to think about those human users as well and say, you know, you know, what do they want as a butters to these conservation areas as in addition so. I want to think about David because just because of staff timing obviously is really hard. I know you guys have done mass wildlife habitat grants before. I don't know if you can maybe apply for that for bio monitoring or something to help set up a plan like maybe you could hire somebody out contractually to do something like this to kind of help kind of have a plan. I don't know if they are for you guys unless you got you know I don't know might be might be worth looking at into just because I know staff time so it's so tight. Yeah, so that could be something that could be funding sources out there to actually maybe help what Michelle is referring to and trying to try to help time all those places we're just trying to think about the two people's time out there doing it. So the thing about and think about a six foot wide brush on that's. That's that's a wide your your motor is so yeah but happy to have to explore that more and think about, you know, a, an overall plan for that. Great, thanks. Any more questions for Dave on those things, those items. So Dave, we, you are on also in land management updates for the gift of land, which I think I know what it was but not quite sure do you want to just cover that quickly and then. Sure, I think Aaron may have a slider to context slide to start with. So, so very quickly, we'll just roll into these slides. And just briefly five years ago, we started a conversation with a developer who had purchased a piece of property off of 116. This is adjacent to the Plum Brook pond and the Kestrel office and our land on the Mount Hoyok range in South Amherst off of Bay Road. That developer was very open to the possibility of they were planning to to build six or eight houses. We saw this as a very they were required to set aside some of the land as subdivision open space. And normally, in this day and age I don't encourage the town accepting subdivision open space. And this is the layout you can see the circles represent the new houses and there are a couple of existing houses and this is just beyond Atkins on the left Vista Terrace is the new street. It's a private way it will not be a public way. It's coming down from the notch on your right in any event the land and I think there's the next slide might be a context map to show this parcel in in relation to the to the land. Sorry, I didn't get a chance to put them in any slide form but I have the images here can be made a little smaller. Sorry. So in any event, given the proximity to Plum Brook pond the Mount Hoyok range, we talked to the developer and said, So you can see the parcel in red. It's just over five acres. It's adjacent to our land the town's land conservation land in green. So it provides a great opportunity for a small parking area, as well as a trail connection in the future. So the developer agreed to donate that land directly to the town so at no cost we would pick up about 5.5 acres of the developer also built the parking area already for the most part it's there. They. All we have to do is add split rail and kiosk, and then we would permit a new trail connection up to the east to the green, which is part of the larger sweet Alice conservation area. So that's the long and short of it. This goes way back pre this goes back to town meeting time I remember making this pitch to a variety of committees and boards way back when and and the commission at the time for five years ago was very much in favor of accepting this gift of about 5.5 acres or so. Um, that's, so I am here requesting that the commission vote to accept this gift. And I think Aaron has the, the, the deed was in your packet as well as the, the acceptance of 5.39, I'm sorry, I thought it was 5.5 5.39 acres more or less. But to make a movement now are we going to wait for questions. Do you have any questions. Yeah, we shall go ahead. So this is the entire deed, which I guess I'm just not used to seeing such a short little deed because it doesn't have any, like legal descriptions or anything in it. Um, a an easement is there going to be a separate easement recorded on this, like for this deed. And I see that it's a quick claim. So I assume that there's maybe some review of PTRs or anything previously just. So there's some idea of what I mean the property doesn't a button a road I don't know what the historic land uses but I guess you know if it's a quick claim. I assume there's no other easements on the property already and just thinking through. There are no other. There are no other easements on the property. This would and I haven't looked at this in a little while I'm just quickly. This is fairly typical for such a small piece of property that we would accept as a gift it does come with, as it says grant or grants to grantee and its agents employees representatives, a permanent easement to pass and over Vista Terrace. So vehicles will be allowed to pass to the parking area on either, you know, passenger vehicles, non motorized vehicles or by foot over Vista Terrace to the parking area. In perpetuity so although it won't be a public road it's a private road. I guess my only question with that is at some point they'll have to be maintenance done in that parking lot or building with a split rail and the building of the trail. And it does say just passenger vehicles so this may only comment if this is the full legal document is that it does would allow for service vehicles or larger non passenger vehicles just to do the maintenance required for the property. I mean I can. Before the council, I can talk to our town council about that. It's an interesting catch. The word passenger he has a little specific. That could even be amended. I don't think the, I don't think the, the owner or their attorney would have a big issue with that. If you're thinking in perpetuity I mean could, could the future owners of Vista Terrace which will be a homeowners association could they say well conservation you can't bring a conservation truck in there something like that. Is that where you're going Michelle. Yeah, I mean, might as well just do the, the forethought upfront rather than have to do it fight about it later. If the owners don't like construction, it could come back to the deed and say, it's too noisy, you know, I had to bring car up here or something. So, you know, just to make sure that there's legal access for the town to do what they want to do. Sure. Sure. So, with that change I'm sure I can get that change. Any other questions again we are not. There's quite a ways away from the trail we would knew the trail would require a notice of intent there's at least one stream crossing. There's an old farm crossing with a culvert I have not looked at it in a couple of years so we would put that on the list for the next couple of years of field work and permitting. Okay, so with Michelle suggested kind of small revision. How do we move forward. I'm normally somebody would make a motion. Okay, but can we vote on it without the amendment. Sure. You could, you could vote on it as amended. Okay, as recommended. Okay, by the commission. Okay. So I think we're looking for. Oh, so we probably have to read this whole thing is what you're saying Aaron. So we're looking somebody to for somebody to read this acceptance and add in. Where would you add in as amended. Go ahead and do it. Okay. So, it's a vote for approval right. I think you have to read this and then we vote. Okay acceptance by the conservation commission. This 14th day of September 2022, the town of Amherst acting by conservation commission. We're moving to the authority granted by general law chapter 40 section eight C here by accepts the property located on Mr. Terras Amherst from Applebroke with LLC for open space and passive recreation purposes and provisions. Chapter 40 section. And so I think we're looking for a motion to accept. Motion to accept. Second from Fletcher and we'll do a voice vote. Laura. Hi, Michelle. Hi. Fletcher. Hi. Andre. Hi. And I'm also. All right. Thank you. And that's a good catch. I will. I will work with the two attorneys to make sure. Yeah, that passenger. The passenger vehicles is a little certainly more specific. And we want to just make sure that. At some point, as Michelle said, you know, they.  Or Mo or whatever else they don't like. Right. Okay. Thanks Michelle. Thanks to you. All right. So we have six more minutes until we can open a hearing. And what do you want to prioritize in that six minutes? Um, Well, uh, we have a couple of land use applications to pretty basic ones. But I also know that, um, Laura wanted to talk about. Let me just quickly. I'll do my thing and do it in six minutes and like. Okay. I'll do it. Making myself talk quickly. Um, so if you guys recall a while ago, we gave permission. For. Um, More Amherst resident. Like many, many years ago. Her company to film a movie on Mount Pollux. And.  And they were very explicit. If I recall correctly that, yes, it's public land. They use it, but public still needs to have the ability to access the site. Um, et cetera. So I took my family up there for a picnic. Not even realizing it was that same time. I had a really bad experience. Um, I was. Um, There was no other parking. I told him that I was, you know, My family, he let me park on the side of the road. Um, and he was turning away other cars. Then I walk up there and with more than three times that I could not go to Mount Pollux and have my picnic. Because they're filming a movie. So, um, We had our picnic. Um, way on the side of the mountain. Um, but all this to say that, um, It really made me question. Um, Because I know other members of the public. This is public land or turned away. Um, while they were filming. And I understand why you're filming a movie. You need total silence. No one can be around. You can't, you can't do anything. Um, but I think there are other similar events. Where we're allowing people. And, um, Really for private events. Um, And the public really is limited. Um, just given the nature of certain sites. So I was talking with Aaron about this and. I think there's a number of paths we can take here. Um, One of my suggestions and I haven't no idea if this is even legal. So I want to ask you Dave this before we even get into this discussion. Obviously we could say. As a conservation commission, We're no longer going to permit certain activities on our lands. Okay. That's option one. Um, And I think about wedding and things like that, a wedding on Mount Pollux. No one's going to go up there from the public, you know, And I think that's one of the other. Second option is. Um, essentially. I think I would suggest that in general, whenever we're, Whenever there's a special use permit. Filed for this, any type of event like this, that there's, I suggest there should be a filing. Because it takes time and their discussion and. Um, but for, for events like that, Um, And I couldn't find any precedent in the state of Massachusetts. I looked and maybe Dave, you have more information. But, um, One way to do it would be. Basically a list out our conditions. To have these commercial. Um, Whenever, um, You know, Group. Hey, some sort of deposit. Um, I think that's a good point. Um, I think that's opening up a whole. Whole Pandora's box. Okay. But if they don't adhere to those conditions, we keep the deposit and we use it to fund. The pollinator discussion. We were just talking about Michelle. Or whatever. Um, I come at this from a commercial perspective. You know, I'm in the. You know, The commercial market. So that's how I approach problems. Um, A deposit would be enough of a deterrent for people to not. Say, Make false statements in front of the conservation commission. Um, because. You know, that filming event was. Entirely false.  You know, it was, it was pretty. Discouraging. Um, so. I don't know if now is the time for discussion or. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. If I plant the seed, then we talk about it later. Yeah, I was just going to say. I'm sorry that that happened. I. The conflict aside, I think channeling kind of that experience. And this continued trouble we've had with navigating these. Permits into our land use policy is probably the most constructive way to go. Um, so yeah, so I made comments to that. I don't know. I think before we. Like, and maybe I actually don't know. I don't think this is the right time because we do have a hearing, but like I would be curious to hear from Dave. What is permitted and what is not permitted. Um, and that was, you know, because my comments are. Along the lines of the suggestion I put forth. Um, and I know the intention is to have our land use. Um, sort of policy finalized by the end of October. Um, and I think the next step is just review that language and kind of have a live document going back and forth, but. Yeah, I think if I followed it correctly, I think I'm the. Outstanding and also the last commissioner to look at the land use policy. Everyone else has looked at it. Um, Oh yeah, you, you have not yet Dave, right? Yeah. So maybe that if it's okay with you. Laura, we can certainly come back to this at the end of the discussion. I think we can certainly come back to this at the end of the discussion. I think that makes sense. Um, because I appreciate how tricky this is. And. Oh yeah. I feel like we need to figure, figure out how to navigate this. Um, maybe what we can do is I know you put your comments and I'll pick it up next. I'm really. Take a good look at it. Um, think about it a lot. I could think about this. Um, And then go to Dave. Okay. I think that's great. We can have an agenda item for more discussion. Um, if that's okay. Dave. That sounds great. Yeah. Dave, would you be available on that? The 28th. Okay. Okay. Um, yeah. Let's, let's do that. And if we feel like we need to come back to this at the end of the hearings. Um, we can, but I think we should start the hearings just because. All right. All right. Thanks everybody. Um, Okay. So. I wonder where my. Now realizing it's no idea where my like opening of a hearing language is. I might be able to find it for you. Um, just cause I looked it up recently for, for Fletcher. Um, That's good. Good chance. That's where it should be. I have it. If you need it, I can pull it up. Got it. Found it. Okay. All right. Thanks everyone. Sorry about that. So. Let's get this one going. This is, um, a notice of intent for the town of Amherst department of public work for the replacement of a previously failed pedestrian bridge within the right of way of West street at 371 West street. Um, so this public hearing is now called to order. This hearing is being held as required by the provisions of chapter 131 section 40 of the general laws of the Commonwealth and act village, which is the protection of wetlands as most recently amended. And article 3.31 wellness protection under the town of Amherst general bylaws. Um, And you know, Who was. Yeah. Yeah, it should be Paul death here. And I think I see him. So I'm going to promote him to panelists. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Go ahead. Just a quick question. We did have something on general procedure for fairness to applicants in. For the hearings. Is that something we were going to. Yeah. I'm anticipating. But this one will, well, fair enough. So why don't I get, take a minute and give a brief reminder of our. Agenda agenda. So just for everyone in attendance for all of our hearings tonight. Because we have so much on our agenda and so much to get through. And cannot be here all night long. Our general procedure so that we can be fair. Is that each hearing has about 20 minutes on the agenda. So we're going to have about 30 minutes on the agenda. We're going to have about 30 minutes on the agenda. And then we're going to have an applicant or representative. Five minutes of comments from town staff. Usually that's like pictures from site meetings or review of the plans. Five minutes for public comment total. If there's more than the number. There's more people than five minutes. Then we try to stick to two minutes per person.  And then five minutes for commissioner questions and discussion. And then we'll have a meeting tonight to keep things moving. If you. I'll make an announcement about this, but if you are here as a member of the public for public comment. At the top of your comments or questions. If you could please. Identify yourself and give your address just so that sense, because of the zoom format. I'm actually the only ones who can like see names. So we're going to be doing the final presentation and the next presentation. And then I'll turn to the actual identifying information about people making the comments. So you can do that. That's great. The other announcement I was going to make by have everyone's attention is that one thing we're going to start moving closer to you is a very detailed checklist for. Permit applications as they're submitted. So that if you submit an application, you have to make sure that the application meets all of the items. Achieves all of the goals. We've been having trouble with getting applications that are not fully complete. And then applicants somewhat relying on town review to get to full completion from the standpoint of meeting. Requirements of the wellness protection act and the Amherst bylaw. And what that does is. Kind of railroad our meetings, spending time reviewing things that aren't really ready for review and it takes staff and commissioner time that we otherwise don't really have. We're super busy. So we need to find an efficient way to continue to move through these hearings. So those are the two things I wanted to say at the top of the hearings. I should also note. That we are continuing the notice of intent for 52 Fearing street. And continuing the request for determination of the new one central railroad. So now we're at our seven 40 agenda item, and we're going to move on to the next agenda item. And then we're going to move on to the next agenda item. And then we're going to move on to the next agenda item for the town of Amherst public works. I think I covered it. Was that Andre? Was there anything else? Thank you for their reminder. No, I was just going. Yeah. I was just going off of what was on our PowerPoint. And you've covered it in an awesome way. Okay. Awesome. So who were we going to bring in. I promoted Paul to a panelist. Okay. He's coming in. Hello, this is Paul from the Amherst department of public works. So I actually, I'll try to keep this brief then. I wanted to share my screen if that was possible.  You should be able to share your screen. Okay. Actually, I don't see that anywhere. Like on the bottom center of the screen. Do you see a share screen option? Yep. Okay. How's it? Can you guys see that picture? Yes. Okay. All right. So what, what this project is, is there's, there was an existing pedestrian bridge located over the Plumbrook. And it was on site. It was on site. It was on site. It was on the sidewalk on the western side of, of West street, which is root one 16. And the project is the site is at the actual number is number 371 West street. And that's a property owned by that town. So the existing metal bridge that was on site. Was extremely rusty. The beams underneath it were extremely rusty. And. What we ended up doing. And back in 2020 mass DOT team that this bridge was unsafe. So the DPW removed the bridge from its abutment. And basically put Jersey barriers up and provided a temporary pedestrian route around the, the site. So right now today it looks like this. So we've got our, we barricaded off the sidewalk and allowed people to go around on the east side of the, where the bridge used to be. And the pipe in the center is the water main that runs. Parallel to the roadway. So what we're doing is we're proposing to replace the old bridge with a new 10 foot wide 18 foot long. Precast concrete bridge, which is this. And what we want to do is place this. It's, we measured this designed it and had it built specifically to be set onto the existing bridge abutments. So the procedure would basically be, we would go down, we would trim the vegetation off the side of the abutments that grew over the spring. We would trim any large branches over the site itself. So we can get a crane in there. And ideally what we would do is have the bridge delivered on a site, have the crane on site, lift it off, set it in place. We would mark all the mounting points, then lift the bridge off, place it to the south of the project site on the west side of the road where the sidewalk is. And we would fabricate all the mounts. And once those were done, we would lift it back up and set it in place. So the project itself really doesn't have impacts because we're not using the existing abutments. We're not in the stream. We're not, I guess, other, other than trimming the vegetation on the west side of the abutments, we're not doing any bank work or anything like that. So that's basically the project in a quick summary. Great overview. Thanks, Paul. Aaron, did you have any comments or concerns? Any concerns about this? Natural heritage came back and basically said, because there's no excavation, there's no groundwork other than just pruning. There's no real vegetation removal. There's no anticipated impact to the river as far as like debris falling in or anything like that because they're just setting the structure in place. So from my perspective, I don't really have any comments or concerns. I don't have conditions prepared to. Issue the permit tonight, but I think if the commission. Feels comfortable with what's the work that's being proposed, that my recommendation would be that we close the public hearing this evening and then I can be prepared at the next meeting with conditions so that we can issue the order. I did talk to Paul about that and. He said that it wouldn't interfere too much with his timeline. If we ended up doing that. I also have site visit photos from the visit today, which I can share. If you guys would like to see, they might be a little more. So would you like me to stop sharing? Yeah, that'd be fine. I can share my screen if it allows me to. There we go. So this was from the site visit today. So it looks a little different because some of Paul's photos were. Taken in the winter. Just to give you a better sense of like what the. Vege looks like out there right now. So this is like the pruning that. Paul was referencing some of the. The branches need to be pruned and then some of the. In order for the crane to. Be pruned and then some of the other branches on the tree that is right over the bridge would need to be pruned as well. This area over here is the area that Paul was referencing. On this side of the. Hydrant to set the bridge temporarily while they fabricate the mounts for it. And so one of the things we had talked about on site today was. The bridge that was on the ground. The bridge that was on the ground. And then there was a round disturbance from the setting of the bridge there temporarily that, that would cover that. See. And then that's those, these are photos of the existing above us. And then a photo of the river looking downstream. Great. Thanks, Aaron. I just want to see if we have any questions or comments from. So if you're here as a member of the public and have a question or comment about the pedestrian bridge replacement at 3 71 West Street. Raise your hands. Not seeing anyone. Okay, great. Commissioners, any questions. Okay. So. Paula. I can look closely at the plans here, but you can probably answer it more quickly than I can sort it out. Okay. So I would say that is the invert of the bridge, the pedestrian bridge deck below or above the invert of the road bridge. I'd have to look at the photo. It is. Well. It is probably, I don't know. I can't see a curve in this picture, but I know there is one there. So I would say it's six inches above the. Grade of the. Of West street. Okay. So we're not adding any constriction to stream flow. Yeah. So it's in kind. No. From where it was. Correct. Correct. The new bridge though is probably four inches higher than the existing sidewalk. So. Part of this project would be cutting the sidewalk back. Taking up the, the black top, adding gravel to raise the grade up to the debt, the new deck height. And then. Then repave up to the bridge. And the other thing is the existing sidewalk is six feet wide. So we're not going to have to do that. The bridge is actually 10. So we'll probably pave to eight feet at the bridge. Okay. Okay. Got it. So we're actually gaining more. Kind of stream. Cross-sectional area. So it's good. We'll take it. Okay. That was my only question. So I think with that, we need a motion to close the public hearing. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks for your understanding on that. Paul. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, I'll make a motion to. Oh, sorry. Get in there. Got it. And we have to close the public hearing for three 17 West street. Second. Is that Andre the second? Yes. Voice vote. Andre. Hi. Michelle. Hi. Watcher. Hi. Laura. I'm also I. Hi. Thank you, Paul. Okay. Thank you very much. Erin, do we want to go back quickly and actually vote on the continuation of the two earlier hearings? So we didn't do a motion to continue. Sure. Yeah. If we want to just run through the, the motions for the three hearings really quickly, that would be good. And we'll just that way we don't have to worry about forgetting about it later on. Yep. Awesome. Okay. I'll make a motion to move the public hearing. I'm sorry. I make a motion to move the public hearing of 46. Fearing street to September 28th, 2022 at seven 40 PM. Second. Michelle on the second voice vote. Fletcher. Hi. Michelle. Hi. Andre. Hi. Laura. Also. Hi. All right. New England central railroad. So I'll make a motion to, for New England central railroad request determination to move the public hearing to September 28th, 2022 at seven 45 PM. Second. Second for Michelle voice vote. Fletcher. Hi. Michelle. Hi. Andre. Hi. Laura. Hi. I'm also an eye. All right. New England central railroad. So I'll make a motion to, for New England central railroad request determination to move the public hearing to September 28th, 2022 at seven 45 PM. I'm also an eye. There's anyone. Okay. So. Just really quickly. We had a site visit today out on Canton. And there are still some additional revisions that are being made to that plan set. So. They were going to try to submit the plan set by the end of the meeting. But it didn't happen to us before and it didn't work out well.  The Friday before our upcoming meeting. So they're working on those revisions and. Yeah, unfortunately, we have to kick this one down the road too. All right. I'll make the motion to, I can't have a lot too for those intent to move it to the public hearing to September 28th, 2022 at eight o'clock. Again. Michelle in the second voice vote, Michelle. Hey, Andre. Hi, Laura. Hi. Clutcher. Hi. And I'm also an eye. Okay. So Canton. Was our seven 45. Okay, sweet. So we can go ahead with. East moon brook, right? Or. Do I skip ahead? East moon. Here we go. Here we go. Got it. 395 West street. Okay. Sorry. Make it. Distracted there. Sorry. That's okay. Okay. So we've already, this is a continuation. So this is our seven 50 hearing. Okay. And notice of intent SWC on behalf of Ron Laverda for the construction of a multifamily residential building and associated site work and mitigation in the riverfront and buffers onto BVW at 395 West street. So this Mickey. Yes. And I. I don't know if you've heard of this, but if Mickey has anything closing or if there's any. Public comment and closing. Just to let you guys know, I'm ready. Okay. Okay. Mickey raised his hand. So I brought him in as a panelist. No, the only thing I would add is that. The natural heritage folks. Had a condition for a turtle protection plan. And that plan has been approved by natural heritage. So that. The construction has some. Turtle monitoring. Requirements. Okay. Thanks, Mickey. I'm just looking at your draft. Okay. So Aaron took a lot of time to do some very detailed and really well thought out. Conditions for this project. Aaron. Do you want to run through those? Yes. So this is there, you know, this isn't a draft form, but I tried to sort of get as comprehensive as possible on the special conditions. So we have our standard boilerplate for state and local commercial projects, which I'd like to include here. And then there's very specific conditions for this site. And I'll just run. I'm really sorry. I'm super tired. So I'm going to do my best here. Steaks draw bail shall be used as erosion controls on the entire site where the limit of work is adjacent to resource areas, except as approved or recommended by an HESP. I know sometimes for turtle habitat, they require different. So if natural heritage requires different than that would supersede this condition. Entire lot is with buffer zone and riverfront area. Only native plantings can be used on the site, including landscaping. No snow storage in resource areas or in stormwater structures. If the site is being accessed from West street over the existing driveway after the asphalt is removed, a plan must be submitted showing the tracking pad in that area. Stormwater, O and M log shall be filled out as required for each stormwater structure following the approved stormwater maintenance schedule in the notice intent demonstrating regular required maintenance. This condition shall follow the site in perpetuity. And the complete maintenance log shall be submitted with the request of certificate of compliance. We've recently had some projects submit for certificates of compliance. And then when I ask for the maintenance log, they have nothing. So that's why I included that as a condition. And I'm hoping to sort of incorporate that into our standard boilerplate in the future. Any contractor performing work on the site shall be provided with a copy of the order of conditions and shall sign indicating that they've read the order of conditions. I would get their signature when we have our pre-construction meeting. Any contractor that does not install correct or maintain environmental controls on site shall be subject to enforcement action fines. Grainage and stormwater shall be placed at proper grades and inverts using survey equipment and shall be overseen by registered licensed engineer. Mitigation areas. Permanent boundary markers shall be placed at the limit of work and restoration areas prior to the start of development activities on the site. Options include boulders, split rail fencing, rebar, wetland markers. These markers shall serve as boundaries in perpetuity and will be required to be maintained in perpetuity and the certificate of compliance if they buy or degrade. As built plans shall include riverfront and wetland mitigation areas which shall be conspicuously labeled, signage shall be installed at visible intervals along the limit of work line of the mitigation area. And again, the language of this is negotiable, but wetland area no mowing, dumping, cutting something to that effect or as a language approved by the wetlands administrator or the conservation commission. No additional riverfront alteration is permitted on this property. This is an ongoing condition in perpetuity in the order of conditions after issuance of the certificate of compliance. This is because we're at the 10% and over the 5,000 square feet alteration threshold in the regulations. Mitigation areas are considered compensatory mitigation for the approved riverfront alteration and as such no future alteration of any kind is permitted in the mitigation areas. This is an ongoing condition in perpetuity in the order of conditions after the issuance of the certificate of compliance. Turtle protection plan prior to the start of work in HESP shall approve turtle protection plan. I'm going to glaze over that one because they've already gotten the approval from an HESP. An HESP endangered species biologists with expertise in herbicide application shall review the proposed formulation of herbicide treatment including surfactant being proposed for use by SWCA or licensed applicator and approver modify the herbicide formulation to HESP satisfaction in advance of the herbicide application. Conservation commission shall be copied and notified on the HESP herbicide review and approval process. This condition shall is to prevent adverse impacts to other species of plants on the site as well as aquatic vertebrates and invertebrates in the treatment area. All chemical treatments will be conducted in accordance with 333 CMR 11.04 sensitive area restrictions. A detailed herbicide treatment schedule shall be submitted to the conservation commission for year one and year two prior to the start of development activities on the site. An ongoing treatment schedule shall also be provided for ongoing treatment as an ongoing condition. So I just provided that so that when the permit expires, if they have ongoing treatments that are in their treatment regime that they're not constricted by the order of conditions and they can continue that treatment as part of the certificate of compliance if needed. Where did I leave off? Some of these are a little bit redundant so I'll make sure that the redundancies are gone. Some very restrictions. Work on the approved wetland and riverfront mitigation plan must begin within six months of the pre-construction date. This is just to make sure that the mitigation is going consecutively with the development on the site. Site monitoring. The owner shall be required to hire a competent professional wetland scientist for weekly erosion and sediment control, inspections and monitoring. Inspections shall start immediately following the pre-construction meeting and continue throughout the construction phase until the pre-construction date. I'm adding a date and sign off by me for the pre-construction and the final inspection. This is learning process because we've had some situations where I wasn't reached out to for pre-construction. So I'm trying to tighten that up a little bit. Erosion and sediment control inspections shall be submitted by the inspector to the wetlands administrator conservation commission on a monthly basis.  Contain photos of the entire site, the erosion control boundary and recommendation for maintenance and repair of controls. Reports may be submitted in an informal email format. If the reports are not submitted, the site will be considered out of compliance and subject to enforcement action. Quarterly mitigation area monitoring and progress reports. We talked about this at the last meeting because we didn't have any evidence of construction. Again, this is to keep the mitigation area. Implementation moving at the same scope as the construction and development of the site. Shall be submitted to the conservation commission reports shall outline work completed on the approved mitigation plan throughout the calendar year. The property owner is responsible for hiring a competent professional wetland scientist to prepare the mitigation area progress reports. Reports must be submitted on a quarterly basis until one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, seven, eight. The mitigation area has been completed and to the invasive treatments have been underway for a three-year period. Upon full completion of the approved mitigation plan, a final report shall be submitted to the conservation commission. Certificate of compliance shall not be issued without the submission of monitoring reports and a final report. And then the boilerplate would follow. And those are very standard for the pre, you know, pre-construction meeting, but it's just our general boilerplate. I certainly can't think of anything you didn't cover in there. Extensive air and nice work. Yeah. Mickey, was any of that surprise? Are we good to go? It sounds like, you know, a very well put together set of conditions and, you know, the owner and contractor will just need to make sure they understand all the steps and there's nothing there that's. That's not part of what was in the notice of intent of the plan. So it's good to see it all written down. Okay. Great. Thank you. Commissioners, any further comments or questions about this project? I raise your hand. Oh, sorry. Sorry. I just have a question about how we would. We'll, in the future, evaluate the mitigation. Quarterly reports, like are there benchmarks that we would be looking for? And I guess what I'm thinking about is, you know, sometimes things don't move along. And like, do we have recourse to push them forward if nothing is happening? I mean, we could get reports. Without necessary progress. So I don't have experience on that with this commission, so I was just wondering, are there, is there a timeline or are there benchmarks that we would evaluate the reports upon? So Michelle, I tried to take that exact comment into consideration here with the way that I conditioned this. And if we want to delve into it a little bit. So the, the incentive here is that the quarterly reports. Have to be submitted. Until the construction of the mitigation area has been completed. That's number one. And the invasive treatments have been underway for a three year period. So if they delay on the, they're going to be starting the monitoring. Within six months of the pre-construction meeting. So the idea here is they're going to have to be paying for a monitor to submit quarterly reports. And if they delay in the construction of the mitigation area or the invasive treatments, then it's just going to carry over and make this longer. You know, in terms of. They're going to be paying for a longer period of time for the monitoring. So the idea is here. We want to have the mitigation area constructed while the three years have been up when the development is completed. And that's kind of the incentive. That's a good question. We have like a.  Do we give developers. Like. A timeline for when they need to build. And if they go like, if they don't start. Within that timeline, we have to go right back to the drawing board. Well, so if they don't start construction. Yeah, I mean like for example, like think about this neighborhood where I live right now.  So, a permit is applicable for three years. So there's that generally like with projects like this one like the fight there are other drivers involved in pushing the project forward that are far stronger than any that we would have from my like suitability of mitigation perspective. So that permit three years though let's say I'm just like honestly like I don't want to do this in great detail but like you can extend that you can keep extending that you can keep extending that so at what point did we say hey too many extensions before you have to come back to us again and we have to look at the site, because quite possibly in five to seven years. Things might have changed and the reason why I'm asking is that, you know, obviously we all know that like building costs are going up tremendously and projects very well could be delayed. And that's just sort of a general question that I have. Yeah. Yeah. Aaron, did you have a comment. Yeah, so Laura, I think you the project for the community is a area that you live in is a good example. And I'll just, I'll just talk sort of generally about my procedure with something like that. So it seems, it seems like some commissions just sort of wins when an applicant comes in and says oh my permits about to expire I need an extension will just say okay, three year extension no problem. That's not that's not a procedure that I've ever followed if if an applicant comes in and asks for a three year extension. The first thing that we do is so first of all they have to have the all the wetland flagging has to still be an existence on the site. I take their plan and I go out there and I check every single flag to see that they're still there and I also see has anything changed on the site if anything has changed on the site they don't get an extension. They have to come back and refile. So I think it really comes down to a procedural question. That's your procedure, Aaron, which I think is a great procedure. Is that written down somewhere as our procedure? You know what I mean.  That is what is supposed to happen. Some commissions don't follow it and to. I don't want to derail us. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, I appreciate where you're coming from on that Aaron. I think in this case, I think we have protections against that and the way that the town operates Aaron operates and this commission operates and I also think it's less relevant for this application and these more commercial protections that I do see where you're coming from. Okay. Michelle, do you think are we okay? Are you satisfied with that? Yeah, so it sounds like monitoring is built into the reporting time period. So it's not just that they can print out a report with a different date. It's actually tied to some cost incentive. Right. Okay, got it. Yeah, because they're paying an independent agent to do that. To be there in person, not just to write a report. Got it. Exactly. Yeah. Did you have a question? Okay. All right. Well, in that case, let me see if we have any public questions or comments. If you are here as a member of the public and have any questions or comments about our NOI notice of intent SWCA for 395 West Street, please raise your hand. I don't know who has the crickets chirping, but I hear cricket. There's a cricket like, like in our window I feel like it's been keeping me awake. I keep muting it to see if it's in my house. Sorry. It gets me doing the same thing. It's just really funny because we're like a joke that there's crickets, but there's literally cricket. Sorry, it's my cricket. There's been one in our bathroom that we can't find for the past week. I don't have any public comments. So I think we are in good shape to close this hearing. So Aaron. Okay. Great. You can have this one. Sure. It's not just cricket. Okay. I'll make the motion for 395 West Street and those intent to move to close the public hearing issue the order of conditions for 395 West Street with the noted conditions as Aaron previously mentioned. Second. All right, Michelle in the second voice vote Fletcher. I shall. Hey, Laura. Andre. Hi. I'm also an eye. Thank you, Mickey. Hey, thank you all for all the time you spent working on this. Appreciate it. Good night. Good night. All right. You're muted Aaron. We got to close at least one hearing. Yeah. That was exciting. Don't get used to it. The next two, unless I've lost track, the next two, we're really only going to have a short presentation from applicant or an applicant's representative and take public comment. But because of the multiple factors here, we're not going to have a staff review or comment and we're going to save commissioner questions and comments until we're able to hear from Aaron on her take on the projects. Yes. And one of the projects did submit 47 Olympia Drive, which is the next hearing submitted a revision today. So we weren't ready to do a review of it anyways. Yeah. Okay. All right. So I guess let's open the hearing for 515 Sunderland Road. So, this is a notice of intent would Massachusetts incorporated on behalf of BWC Eastburn Brook LLC and blue wave for proposed 18.87 megawatt AC. Oh my God, Laura, you should read this very specific battery energy storage facility in the buffer zone to bordering but she had wetlands at 515 Sunderland Road. This public hearing is now called to order the hearing is being held as required by the revisions of chapter 131 section 40 of the general laws of the Commonwealth and act relative to the protection of wetlands as most recently amended. And article 3.31 wetland protection under the town of Amherst general by law is Josh is Josh potentially and representative here of the project Aaron to know you're muted. Why do I keep meeting myself.  All right. Josh drew. I know drew is but I wasn't sure about the other. Okay. Can you hear me. Yeah, thank you. I can, can in fact verify. Representative applicant so. Okay, great. So thank you. I appreciate. Great. And Josh, did you hear are just like general hearing procedure and how we're going to go forward with this so we're really looking for a five minute overview and then we'll take any public comments and questions tonight but we will continue to our next meeting for a more substantive discussion once we've had time for staff review. We'll take commissioner comments at that point. Yeah, absolutely. Okay. Great. Yeah, so and that made still sense. So, yeah, I just want to give a brief overview of the project and, you know, explain what we're proposing the work jurisdictional areas and why we're here tonight so I'll just share my screen to pull up the site plan. And I'm going to use to walk through. I also just wanted to note we do have Andrew Vardakis from wood engineering, who's, who's our engineer on the project as well. He's on the call in case any. I know you said no questions but in case anything specific to the stormwater analysis or, or, or wetland flagging comes up. Okay, great. Thank you. So if everyone can see my screen so this is a just a high little view of the site plan. This is very briefly blue wave. We're historically a solar developer in Massachusetts doing projects across the state. We've recently been getting into developing energy storage projects as well. One of which is this project we're proposing at 515 centerland road. This is the context here is the state's clean peak program and this movement toward deploying energy storage products across the state. There's particular targeting specific areas where there's higher concentrations of solar congestion on on circuits where these products provide additional value to the grid. One of which is is this circuit and location and Amherst. So again this is 515 centerland road, which is just at the border of Amherst and centerland to the north. The site currently and I don't have pledges on the satellite view but the site is currently just open field effectively. It's just a called grassy area. The rear of the parcel is, you know, previously tilled agricultural area. There was a previously existing house development in the middle of where our proposed footprint is that since has been demolished. The site is currently undeveloped. Again it's coming off of centerland road. There is a existing semi circular access road that was used for the house that is still in existence. There are three wetland systems that were flagged this wetland system to the north near the property boundary here, which is labeled as that we be there's the well and flags are here. We exactly call this this system but there's a system to the north. There's a system to the southwest, just kind of you can see the flags popping up here, just off at the edge of the layout. And then to the east we have a perennial stream and associated 200 foot riverfront area. The proposed project is an 18.87 megawatt AC energy storage system. It would be a four hour battery system so you know measured in energy duration. It's approximately, you know, 7075 megawatt hours of energy storage. The entire development footprint is slightly less than an acre. Currently, we're proposing this fence line, as you see here is the boundary of the development. Within the development, we would be looking to conduct very minimal grading it's it's again effectively flat if you've ever seen the site and I know there will be a site as it's scheduled so hopefully most of the commission members will be able to to visit the site and see it. So there will be extremely minimal grading required if effectively no gradient and really just a preparation of the surface for the project. The interior the fence line will be a woven would be proposed as a seven foot high woven wire fence. The interior the site would be proposed as crushed stone gravel yard effectively, as well as the access road. We would maintain the existing semi circular access road and extend it as you can see here coming up toward the north and then a hammerhead turnaround with an existing or excuse me propose access for coming into the fence line and into the project for access to this to the equipment itself. The equipment located on site would be six concrete pads where inverters transformers and electrical switch here would be located. And then the battery containers themselves, which are lithium ion stationary energy storage containers. I do want to point out that you can see here that some of these containers are solid zoom in a little bit. Some of these containers are solid line summer dotted or excuse me dashed lines. These lines represent potential units that would in the future be added to the site for augmentation, but on day one or year one when the sites constructed the only units would be placed would be the ones outlined and solid lines here. So again over time with every two to three years there might be a couple of units added to augment system as it degrades over time in terms of its energy capacity. Additionally, there are some proposed vegetative screening along the northern side. Western boundary along the road, some of the road into the south. Currently we propose, you know, simple evergreen plantings are varieties, although we're of course and hopefully the future meeting will discuss with the commission that there's preferences on plantings and the types of vegetation used. We're very open to what the town is seeing another similar projects for screening or the types of vegetation they like to see done and used on projects. In terms of the jurisdictional areas and our work within them. Each of the system to the north and the southwest have their associated 100 foot buffers. And then again the perennial streams the east has a 200 foot buffer. First just doing addressing the stream. So there is the 200 foot riverfront area or buffer extended here where I'm hopefully you can see my cursor. Our work is entirely outside of the 200 foot riverfront area. We basically just kind of come up. Tangent to it along alongside the eastern fence line. In regard to the wetland systems. All of our work is entirely outside of the 50 foot no work zone per the town's revised bylaw. When we originally were working on the project. We actually had designed it and then the bylaw was changed while we're working on the project so we did make sure to shift things around and to the best extent possible and make sure we respected that 50 foot no work zone. On top of that, the majority of the work that's within the 50 to 75 foot zone is primarily fence line and plantings. There's a portion of the access right here you can see that does fall within that 75 foot zone. But for the most but all all proposed equipment and impervious surface would be outside of the 75 foot buffer as well. To the project which we we feel also helps mitigate any potential impact to to any of the resource areas. In regard to stormwater would perform stormwater calculations. So there's actually not that much impervious surface at its site. There are these six concrete pads that be proposed. Each of the battery units is supported but would be supported by a proposed concrete pillar foundation system. So water would still be allowed to infiltrate in between those concrete pillar foundations and flow throughout the site. So in regard to increase in peak flow runoff rates. We're obviously meeting the DP stormwater standards in regard to no increase in those peak flow rates. And again the actual increase in impervious surfaces is very minimal on site. I'll stop there. I think there's probably about five minutes but I know it's a little bit a lot to kind of overview but that's the high level view of the project. The last thing I'll mention is the proposed interconnection of the system is through a series of polls onto the distribution grid along the road. And this is running for those are familiar with the sites area to the substation that's very close to the site just the south. So it is interconnected to that substation. Okay, thanks Josh that was a very thorough and succinct overview which I appreciate. So I'm going to open this for public comment. We're here as a member of the public attending our conservation commission meeting and you have any questions or comments about this notice of intent for a battery battery energy storage facility in BW at 515 Sunderland road please raise your hand. Not seeing anything. All right. We don't have any hands up we have 10 people in attendees and attendance and nobody's raising hands so I think we've sufficiently allowed a period for public comment. And would you be willing to share your screen and we can do our motion to continue the public hearing. Sorry, I know we're not supposed to ask any questions but we just did a public hearing so now we're doing a motion to another public hearing or so there's no more public comment for the next meeting. Oh we are continuing the public hearing there will be public hearing and continue. Yeah. We could look using but I see what I understand the procedural. Yeah so there can be public comment at the next meeting as well. Okay. I'll move to continue the public hearing on 515 Sunderland road to September 20, 2022 at 750 p.m. Oh, I think I got a pleasure with the second there. I was close. Voice vote Andre. Hi. Laura. Pleasure. Hi. Michelle. Hey. Okay. And I'm also and I. Josh drew thanks for being here tonight. Yeah absolutely and just in terms of logistics I see the site visit schedule Aaron. I'll just coordinate that with you and then are there typically is that just with Aaron typically or their members of the commission who would look to attend. So Aaron notifies the commission and if members can be there we will be. We've been our commission right now. We have we have we struggle to get to. To site visits during business hours. So it might just be Aaron. Okay. The other thing I should note too is that we may have two new conservation commission members at the next hearing. So this will make it really easy for them to review the tape so that they could potentially vote on the project and also they could potentially attend the site visit as well. Okay. And with that, are you hoping to have that side visit between now and then next public hearing or sometime after. Yeah. It would be between now and the next hearing. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. Yeah, we can we can schedule that sort of after the after the meeting offline and I'll make sure that the commission members are invited and can attend or, you know, or at least offer the opportunity to attend. Yeah, absolutely. And I know there were site photos included in our NOI but if there's additional photos or videos that we can provide, you know, and take so that if commission members can attend they can see the site or see certain areas that are happy to provide those as well. And in an air we can just coordinate with you in terms of your review and and when when you want to set up a conversation to talk about the project. Sounds good. Great. Thank you, Josh. Thank you all for your time. Appreciate it. We'll see you in a couple weeks. Perfect. Thank you. I think it's Mark. I think it's dead, Nikki. I think. Yeah. Okay. I'm sorry, I was messing with the attendees. Could you move him in Aaron? I did. Yes. All right. So this we're going to follow the same procedure for this NOIs we did for the one we just finished or we just continued. So the next item is the SOA intent is SBE associates on behalf of Archipelago investments LLC and 47 Olympia Drive LLC for the redevelopment of 47 Olympia Drive, including demolition of existing structure and construction of a multi-story apartment style dormitory associated driveway parking drainage and utilities in the buffer zone to BVW and an intermittent stream at 47. So this public hearing is now called to order. This hearing is being held as required by the provisions of chapter 131 section 40 of the general laws of the Commonwealth and act relative to the protection of wetlands as most recently amended and article 3.31 wetlands protection under the town of Amherst general bylaws. Okay. Mark. Hello. Hello. So did you hear our plan like our procedure for tonight? I did. Okay. I'll do a quick overview of the project and then see if there's public comments. Okay. Fantastic. Can everybody see the screen. Yep. We see a plan. So the local property is 47 Olympia Drive and it was formerly the Chai Omega Beta chapter house. The person is approximately 1.06 acres in size and it abuts the Wildwood conservation area, which is owned by the town of Amherst. The wetlands were flagged by Walt Smith of wetland. By Wendell wetland resource in January of 2021 and located by SV associates. The proposed project is to raise the existing. House and remove the existing driveway and garage and back patio and construct a. To building. Dormitory structure with the connection between the two. With a centralized walk out of the front of the building to Mathers Drive. The stone model will be collected within the courtyard area and collected in nylon plash trains and followed to a directed to the municipal system and Mathers Drive. And the roof. So the stone model will be collected into mutated systems that are located on the eastern side of the property, which will have a centralized discharge point outside of the 50 foot resource buffer area. The change that we had from the plans that were originally submitted to these plans for the revised plans is. We have a video walkway out back and we removed that and added a bike rack based on planning board comments. The project will clear about 19,000 square feet of wooded area on the site to make room for the building. And that's an overview of the project. The stone model to Wildwood conservation area should be reduced based on the reduction of stone model flow north to 57 Olympia, which ends up collecting in the drive and then discharging east to the Wildwood conservation area. That's a quick overview of it. Kyle is also on if he has any other comments, but since we're only doing a quick overview and you have to still review the project in more details. Okay. Thank you, Mark Kyle if you want to be furniture panelists raise your hand. Otherwise, thank you, and we'll take public comment so if you're here as a member of the public in attendance to talk about this proposed project at 47 Olympia Drive, please raise your hand crickets. Yep, I don't see any activity amongst our seven attendees here. So with that, Mark, I appreciate your time introducing us to the project. And do you want to pull up the slides that we can make a motion to continue. I'll make a motion to continue the public hearing of 47 Olympia Drive notice of intent to September 28 2022 at 755. Second. On the second voice vote Andre. Hi, flutter. Michelle. Hi, Laura. Hi. Okay, and I'm an eye. All right. Thank you, Mark. You're welcome. Have a good night. You too. A couple weeks. Yep. Hi. All right. Good job keeping it moving. I'm going to do my best to move us through this. There is a lot. So Aaron, do we want to go back to the land use permits that we didn't cover? Quickly. What do you want to do up to you? Yeah, and I think we can barrel through those pretty quickly. So the first. Land use application is from the native plant trust, which is formerly the. Capital conservation area. I'm not even sure what I thought it was a garden in the woods. They want to do a botanical survey at the Catherine coal conservation area. And I didn't see any issues with what they were proposing to do. Starting mid. September through the end of September. They want to do some botanical surveys looking at. They want to do a botanical survey at the Catherine coal conservation area. They, they frequently do these surveys. And I just let them know that one condition that we've required previously for these plant surveys is that we require that the results be provided back to us so that we can post them on our website. Great. I see no problem with this. Missioners. Really interested to hear what they find. If you have a comment. Maybe they could weigh in on the pollinator. Benefits. I don't know. Subjectively. If they, if they were listening to that, maybe they could just. Give a comment. Yeah, right. If the only thing I would add, Jen is typically, so they've done this off and on for years at a couple of different conservation areas. Typically they're looking for rare plant community. So I think it's unlikely that we would want to post this. Anywhere. You know, on our website. Or. Share it at a meeting. Yeah, I think we just need to think through that because they're off. You mean results. Yeah, results. They're often looking for climbing fern. They're looking for rare orchids, et cetera, et cetera. So. Right. It's not appropriate to post. We don't have to post it. We just need to keep it in our archives. Yeah. Yeah, I think anything that might be sought out for in terms of poaching would be a good idea to keep off the public. Keep off the public view. If you would. Great idea. Thanks, Dave. Okay. Let me make a motion to approve the. Land use for a botanical survey. Catherine Cole. Yes.  I want to feel it. Did we hear motion? Second. No. Sorry. Is there a motion? Like rhetorical motion. Just say so moved. Larry the other day. Seconded. Seconded. I was on the second. Okay. Voice vote. Fletcher. Hi, Laura. Hi, Michelle. Hi. Andre. Hi. I'm also an eye. Okay. And then our other one is for our favorite. Mount Pollux. For a wedding up there, which is proposed in early November. If I remember correctly. November 5th. 25 participants between three and five PM. So that's what we're going to do. They want to just put up a temporary sign. That would be stuck in the ground. And yeah. That is what is being proposed. I'll do a screen share. Okay. Parking aware that there's minimal parking. Yeah, I'll definitely make them aware of our sort of standard conditions on Mount Pollux. So that's what we're going to do. So that's what we're going to do. We're going to go into the public. We should have wedding boilerplate. Yes. Is it really only three to five?  Like time use. So they. I don't think are in attendance, but if we have questions that can be answered tonight, I think we can answer them. I think we can answer them. The exact specifics of the application. I think as long as they have, like, you know, our last. Whatever meeting, but we had the meeting. Mount Pollux meeting with the filming and then the wedding was right after the other wedding. I mean, we made it very clear. I think there may be Ray. We should have like a boilerplate for weddings at Mount Pollux. Yeah. Yeah. I think we should have some break down. Because 25 people are going to bring chairs. Yeah. So like our sort of standard, they should have the permit with them. The parking has first come first served. They have to clean up after themselves. If they take put up signage for temporary, they have to take it down. They can't. They don't have exclusive access to the site. The public is still welcome there. Those types of standard conditions is what, what you guys are looking for. If there's anything more specific, I'm happy to add it. I think it's really worth it. I think it's really worth it. I am not in favor of this anymore. Until we have like a more full, full some discussion. I just feel like, I feel like Mount Pollux is so small. In allowing this stuff. Like we're like, basically we're saying for a Saturday or maybe it's two hours. We're not going to allow anyone else up there. So I don't feel, I mean. I don't feel like if we got. We got wedding applications for every Saturday and Sunday. For the fall, that would be a fair use of public land. For our community. And so anyways, you know, while I'm inclined to just, you know, I feel a little bit badly because it's coming on the heels of just sort of what I experienced up there, which is even smaller than 25 people. So, you know, that's just where I am right now. Yeah, I hear you, Laura. I think. It would be difficult to. Reject this application. I agree with you given what we've approved, but I think we should keep this in mind with the land use policy. And if there's something structurally, we want to change about. Events like this amount of politics, we should use that as a venue to flush that out because I agree with you. I mean. It feels inconsistent. It's like our only conservation land that gets this kind of like, like we're running a wedding venue without. No, it's true. Are these guys immerse residents to be asked? They're actually from Amherst. I don't think we can do that. No, we can't do that. Yeah. I think we can. So yeah, I mean, if I could just jump in, I think this has been kind of a conundrum. In fact, when I started here. Some years ago, there were more weddings than there are now on Montpaulex, far more weddings. And back, you know, in the early 2000s. We actually required a fee for Montpaulex, but the fee went to the Kestrel Trust. And then the Kestrel Trust donated that back to the town because it was hard for the town to accept a $200 fee or whatever. So, you know, I share Laura's concern, you know, coming off of the, the movie experience that you had up there. The flip side of that. Now, you know, this is a good conversation for later is that. We now through the process that has evolved through Beth Wilson and now Aaron's work and your work. We now have a better handle on what is happening at Montpaulex at Amethyst Brook at Puffer Spawn, et cetera, et cetera, that we ever had before. So to some degree, knowing what, what people's intentions are, I think is a real plus to be perfectly honest. If somebody wanted to have a 25 person wedding up there and not tell us, there's really not a darn thing that the commission could do about that. As long, you know, and they happen, spontaneous weddings happen at Montpaulex, they happen at, we've had them at Puffer Spawn. So, so they're doing the right thing by contacting us because they're following our process. I think the larger question is, you know, are we prepared to have weddings up there? What are some of the implications for the public? I would add to this one, you know, the number 25 does worry me a little bit. You know, we always encourage carpooling and I would, you know, I would almost make it mandatory that people think they must carpool and there's adequate parking right down the street at the South Amherst Common that is public. And, you know, you could even limit the number of cars they can bring up there so they don't have a lot of the parking and a lot of the access road. But anyway, it's a very narrow access road. It was not intended to be for large events. Historically, I think they had weddings of 100 people up there which chairs and the whole thing. And it got overwhelming for the department because the expectation would be very, very high. Why is the gate not open? Why is the, why is the grass too short or too long? There's ticks, there's poison ivy, et cetera, et cetera. So, so I think a larger, a broader conversation on the matter makes sense. So. I'm glad you brought that up Laura. But I'll prove it tonight because I agree with you. Yeah, I think we need to work on the land use policy before we change course and our status quo. But I do agree that 25 starts feeling kind of like a lot of trampling and people also. I like your idea of having a car limit though, because really, you know, there's sort of an, we're saying you don't have exclusive access. But if you take the parking lot, you essentially are having exclusive access. So totally. I feel sort of, you know, but not great about that condition when we give it. No, but then on the flip side, what Dave's saying is like we could, I could decide to go take exclusive access. So by parking hours up there, right? Like, yeah. Yeah, but you know, they are, they are requesting permission and the permission that we give them can be conditioned on a X, Y and Z. What happened to Laura is completely unfair. And I think it makes sense for us to take that experience and set out some policies or some. Sideboards to what is going to be occurring there in the future to our responses to future requests. For permission that and you know, the ideas that we're hearing here, Michelle's idea of, you know, what to do with the parking.  But I think that the, you know, and on this, I don't want to talk too much, but on this application, it says that, you know, there's going to be a directing guests, where to go and advising others that there's a wedding in progress. I mean, what else, what's the implication of that, that the implication, you know, are they implying that there's a wedding in process? Yes, you know, that's what that means. That's where I was reading it, but you know, it's, which is normal for a wedding.  COVID at the last one just. That was a different scenario. So all right, we should probably, we should probably set this as an agenda for the future or something that we passed around. Yeah, I mean, I think, I think we've got. A lot of other business, like 20 items beyond this. So if, if you guys aren't ready to vote on it, or you want more questions, we can talk about it at the next meeting. But if you guys do want to approve with. I would like to talk about it the next meeting. Yeah, as would I, I think that I'm comfortable. I am comfortable voting on this. Application now. I think we should. Just because we have approved a lot of other similar, very, very similar. Friends up there so far. I'll make a motion to approve the land use meeting. Permit for my politics for 25 person wedding. On whatever what date was it again. November 5th, November 5th. With a boilerplate conditions. And could I friendly. Add to that, which is. The strong recommendation that they carpool from south, south. Common. And that they cannot exclude others from. Walking up to the, to the summit of Mount Pollux. Before, during, or after the, you know, the service, the wedding. Great. I'll second that. Okay. So second from Andre voice vote. Hi. Andre. Hey, Laura. Oh. I'm an eye. You got that. Aaron, that was a name from Laura. The rest of us. Yes. Okay. Okay. So. Certificates of compliance. Yeah, I think, I think some of these, we can bomb through. So I'm going to pull this up. So the two certificates of compliance completely fine. They are fully stable and constructed. Probably in the early 90s. So it's more just. Administrative to issue them a complete certification. So we need two motions. Or you could do, you could do a single motion with both sites. If you, if that's easier. Okay. All right. I'll make a motion to. Complete the search. Certification of compliance for both 76 would lot road. And 182 wildflower lane. No second. Andre seconded. Voice vote Fletcher. Hi. Michelle. Hey. Andre. Hi, Laura. No, Laura. And I'm an eye. Okay. Okay. Okay. Request for emergency starts. So this is, this is a site we had a previous violation on. And the owners reached out to us on this. There was. One dead tree and two disease trees on the site. They had an arborist come out and look at them and identify the issue. And they requested permission from our office. To ratify the emergency certification. We issued them an emergency cert. And I appreciated the fact that they reached out to us. So I, if the commission would be willing to ratify that emergency certification. To 86 West Pomeroy. Move to ratify the emergency certification for 286 West Pomeroy lane. Second. Michelle. Sorry. Sorry. Okay. I have a voice vote. Laura. Andre. Hi. Fletcher. Hi. Michelle. Hey. Also an eye. Okay. So. I wonder, I just want to see if Mickey Marcus is still on the call. Did he leave? I guess he left. Okay. I know there's some folks who are waiting in the wings for. At least one of the items in the request for change to order of conditions. And I just want to be respectful that they're in the waiting room. Of course. And I, I know that several folks are here for the. Modification for 11 trillion way, which it says under order of conditions, but it's a determination. And so if we could handle that one first, I think that's the most tricky one. So let's get it out of the way if we can. Okay. Sure. So just to give you guys some background and Dave's familiar with the situation. The conservation commission received a request for determination. I believe it was last year for the construction of a single family home. The home itself is completely outside of the 100 foot buffer zone, but the property, which is the property of the house. The owner of the house. The owner of the house. The owner of the house is from an intermittent stream and BVW is on the property. And as part of the application, the owner. His name is a mere McChie. Had requested to do some tree removal on the slope within the outer 50 foot buffer. When the commission issued the determination of applicability. They. Basically said that no trees could be cleared. They could be removed. They could be removed. They could be in a restrictive condition of the permit. That they didn't want to see the trees removed on the slope. Amir. When, so. Recently, Amir approached me when I was out doing an inspection at. The South Amherst. They're the Southeast street commons property. And he said, I really want to take those trees down in the buffer. And I'm going to get started soon. And he. Because, you know, he filed the permit for it. He, he thought that it had been approved and I sent the determination along to him to show that the. Commission had basically said he couldn't take this, the trees that were on the slope. So then I know Amir reached out to Dave. And Dave met with Amir. And he said, you know, I'm going to work it with him that he would, he would mark the trees on the site. And then I would go out and look at the trees that he had marked. And then we would bring it back to the commission for consideration again. I will. Bear with me just a moment. I'm going to pull up the photos of the trees. From visiting the site. The. There are approximately 15 trees. There's a total of approximately 30 trees on the entire slope. So it's clearing about half of the trees. Within the buffer zone. The area is again, it's, it's very close to an intermittent stream. The area where the trees would be coming down. They're very large pines. And the best way to describe it is, you know, I'm trying to close some stuff so I can get to the photos. There are approximately 15 trees. There's a total of approximately 30 trees on the entire slope. So it's clearing about half of the trees within the buffer zone. And the best way to describe it is. There's a row of Oaks. There's a row of pines. And then there's another row of Oaks. So these are very large pines that are coming down in between. Two rows of large Oaks.  And that we're going to end up losing a lot more than 50% of the basal area, basal cover area on that specific location. So the trees are dead and one of them is nearly dead. So just for the record.  So that you guys can see the trees that he has marked. So looking down, you can see there. Several very large pines. And I counted them out as approximately 15. So, and you can see there's a couple of dead ones in there. There's like two or one of them is still alive, but just barely, but there's like three dead ones. I have no problem with the dead trees coming down because they're hazardous. I do have a little bit of an issue with an amendment to a determination where the commission has already made a decision because there is really no recourse for a amendment to a determination. And the other issue is there are many concerned butters who, as you guys might recall, those who are present at the meeting, it's not the commission's jurisdiction, but I do remember the consultant saying during the hearing. That there was going to be a privacy buffer of trees preserved on either side of the house lot. And according to the butters, the lot was completely clear cut. So that, you know, that statement was false. And they're just very concerned about if, if the commission approves this, that more trees are going to be taken down than what was identified in the field, et cetera. But I don't want to speak for a butters. I think there's several of them that are in attendance tonight. I know. One gentleman. Nick. Nick. Had asked to do a presentation. Jen. A brief presentation, basically outlining the butters concerns with tree removal. So that's really at your discretion. If you want to allow that or not. Okay. Well, let's discuss this briefly as a commission to kind of get a feel here. I would like to hear everyone's thoughts on this. I mean, we reviewed the RDA and specifically conditioned. I don't have any additional information that would have caused me to revisit that determination. So without any additional. Information that would change that original decision. I don't see a reason to allow it. But I would love to hear what you guys think. Was that last picture? I'm sorry. That last picture was that seven? Yeah. Was that a log down or is that, was that a, a silt fence? It's a silt fence. Okay. Thank you. Yep. I would also, this is reminiscent of, you know, one King men and Tuckerman. You know, we have really worked hard to maintain these buffers around the government and streams as a commission. And it's also part of the law. So. Yeah. I mean, I don't think anything's changed my opinion about that initial vote on that permit. So I see no reason to change it. What was it? Was there a reasoning why those trees wanted. Why, why, why we're looking for an amendment to remove these trees? Yeah. I mean, I think it was the same reason that was originally outlined, which was they wanted to view down to the stream and also. Prevent. To see what the original vote was. I mean, I think if they had actually. Shading on the home, they wanted to have a little more sunshine coming in on the house. And if they take those trees out, they're going to get understory in there. And if they don't cut that down, they're going to have less of you. So. I don't know. I mean, yeah, I'm still. I'm still sticking to my original vote on this. Jim, if I could add, because I did go out and walk around with Mr. McChie and I'm not, I'm not. Evacating one way or the other for this. I do agree with Aaron that the three dead trees. You know, I would support removing the three dead trees. The other thing I heard from Mr. Minci and I think it is a reality, which is, and again, Aaron knows the site better than I do. But the, from a homeowner standpoint, if there are mature white pines toward the top of that hill, where you are going to build a new, a new house. You know, I was sympathetic to any concerns about those white pines topping off in the wind because that's what they do. So if, you know, I don't know if there are any white pines near the top of the slope, Aaron, or were they all down? But that was one of the concerns that, you know, was shared with me out in the field. But I don't know the specifics of, you know, I was, I was there for all of, you know, 10 or 12 minutes walking around a couple of weeks ago. So I think Aaron went out and actually looked at which trees were, were marked with green tape. Those trees that you're talking about on the top of the slope, Dave, are those also in the buffer? The ones at the top of the slope aren't in the buffer. The ones, the ones that are proposed for removal are further down on the slope and you can see it sort of in, let me share this photo. They're further down on the slope, like toward the silt fence. So the silt fence is at the 50 foot buffer. So you can see it. Yeah. So that would be inconsistent with kind of a safety.  It would only be if there's any closer to the top of the hill, the top of the slope. And I, I think in this picture, the house slot is to the right. Is that right, Aaron? Yeah. So it's actually, it's to the right and behind where I was talking, but the, the 100 foot buffer goes probably. I want to say. It doesn't even go to the top of the slope. So there is some, there's like crest at the top of the hill. And I do believe that they cleared all the way up to the 100 foot buffer at this point. They sort of clear cut the lot all the way up to the 100 foot buffer. So anything that would be at the top of that slope, I believe has already been removed. Oh, wait, you say. I wish I had turned around and taken a picture. These trees are within the hundred foot. These trees are within the hundred foot buffer. Yes. So that the sill fence is basically at the 50 foot. And more or less behind where I'm standing is the extent of the 50 foot. So. And the top of the hill is outside of a hundred feet. So the, the issues with the, you know, large mature white pines falling on the house would be. I think. Not in our jurisdiction. It's, well, I think those trees may have already been taken out, but I. Yeah, it's, it's a little tricky because like the, when I look at the cell fence, like I, I didn't take a measuring tape, but I pasted off. And it's supposed to be 50 feet from the stream, but I believe in some places it's closer, like more, like 45 or 40 feet from the stream. So. Like I said, I didn't take a measuring tape because I was alone out there, but you know, it, the line is a little sort of sketchy as to where it falls on the property. But the, the hundred foot doesn't even extend to the top of the hill. There's, it's like the, the, it extends, I would say three quarters of the way up the slope. And then there's like another quarter at the peak of the slope. And then it goes back down towards the road. And Jen, I might suggest, I mean, if, if there's no appetite. For this, then. You know, from the commission, then. It might save time in your agenda. To kind of move on it. You know. Yeah. We're certainly respecting the abutters, but if there's no. If there's no appetite and again, I would. Still ask about whether the, the dead trees can be removed or not. But if there's no movement to amending this, then. Why not move on. Any support for amending it amongst the commissioners. I'm not sure how to handle. You know, public comments here because you have a very full meeting. If we're not going to amend this. RDA. I'm not sure what there is to comment on. What do we do in that situation? Aaron. Say maybe just announced to the abutters that. Change isn't going to be made. And that if they have additional concerns that. They should raise their hand, but otherwise. Just going to be fun. I mean, you could also say if you could. You know, in two minutes. Yeah. Two minutes each or something. Okay. All right. So we have five people in attendance. Two people have their hands raised already and have had this. Them raised this whole time. So. I would like again, so. You are here about. What's the number on Trillian way. 11. 11 Trillian way. A request to amend our RDA. So if you have additional questions or comments. Please raise your hand and we are going to limit that to two minutes. So Victoria. I see you have your hand raised. I just moved Victoria and she should be. Hi, Victoria. You did. Can see. Okay. So. We are not going to permit tree cutting. We are going to not, we are not going to amend the RDA. So if you have additional questions or comments. Please raise your hand and we are going to limit that to two minutes. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So sorry. So first, if you could just identify yourself on your address. So I am Victoria. I am, I live at 1165 river road in Aguam. My company is wicked who'll engineering. I used to work for the town of Windsor, Connecticut, and also fuss and O'Neill. So sorry. I like wash my face and stuff while the crickets were, because it was taking a long time. So I've been working with a mirror on the one 33 Southeast straight site. And he had asked me a number of questions regarding this site and sort of the tree clearing in general. The original permit was. Um, a little bit confusing, you know, it was very clear. Don't clear within the 50 feet. And then it was, you know, don't clear on just like the slope, but it doesn't define. What the slope is, is the slope two to one is a slope four to one. Like it never really defines it. And so he asked me like a lot of times what I thought that meant. And in reality, he just really needed to hear it from Aaron so that he felt comfortable. So he reached out to sort of ask that clarification. Um, When he's, you know, building a home, I think the pieces of the dead trees, obviously the dead trees would then possibly hit other trees that could cause some damage. He would like more sunlight into the property sort of just from, I mean, they're like nice homes in that area. Um, and I think at the original meeting too, he wasn't 100% really understanding maybe what the concerns are. I am empathetic to sort of the causes that you have. I've never seen an agenda like yours before. Honestly. Oh my goodness. You guys review a lot in one meeting. And I'm like, and you have another September meeting. So, um, I just feel as though I do think there is, um, Some validity to revisiting the issue in terms of what the specific trees are specifically within that 50 to 100 feet buffer. Looking at sort of what those critical slopes are, he'd like to cut them, but not remove the stumps so that they're not sort of causing that overall sort of slope destabilization. And I think while they are at the bottom of the slope, they're not at slopes, maybe greater than two to one. So they're not in that detrimental area. And it's hard when you have a lot of, um, neighbors that are really opposed to it, but I feel like some of that tree buffer stuff is really more under the jurisdiction of like planning and zoning. So if they're within the setbacks and stuff like that, and if it's truly not deemed a slope stabilization issue, then could it be reconsidered? So I just think there is some validity to actually maybe looking a little bit more into it. I understand you have a busy agenda and I understand it was weighed in on, but there was someone, you know, not. Yeah, Victoria, I appreciate your input. Thank you. That's, that's more than two minutes. Um, so thank you for being here tonight. Um, and for your contribution. Um, all right. I'm sorry. It looks like there's one more hand raised. Um, Kunji. How do I pronounce that? I think it's. Nick. Okay. Apologies. I'll get that clarified. Yes. Thank you. I really appreciate what you, what you, what you all did. So I don't really have anything much to add except to say that you know, you know, it's very clear what the slope is. You go down there. You see it. It's very steep. Uh, as Aaron mentioned, the 50 foot line is pretty much down and no, there's absolutely no tree is going to fall on the house. The plot is pretty flat. It's big enough for him to build. There's absolutely no reason for any of the trees to be cut. And, um, you know, our houses are built right there. Our neighbors houses are there too. It's pretty much, you know, it's very, very steep. I don't know. I think what you guys did was right thing. Okay. Thank you. Thanks for being here. All right. There's one more hand raised. I would like to say that we are not making any amendments to this RDA. So we are not approving tree cutting. If you still have a question or comment. Jurisdiction also this situation. Please raise your hand. Okay. I think we're good. Thanks for being here, everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for the difficult situation. But it sounds like the commission is agreed to stick by our original. Determination on this one. And I did let Amir know he could cut the dead trees, the dead ones, but only the dead ones. Yep. Sounds good. Safety issue. Okay. Okay. So do you want to keep rolling? Yeah. Okay. I don't want to make any comments. So I don't know. I think some of the motions are needed for any of these, but I do want to make you aware of them. And if anybody has concerns. Let me know. So. 29 mil lane, they had a, this is a, there was a prop, it was a permit for a tennis court. We discovered that there had been a violation we required them to restore a swale on the site and also we required them to put in a bridge that met the stream crossing standards for their vehicle access over the stream, which previously just had a piece of a board basically going over it. So, we approved a bridge there they made some modifications to the bridge they made it a little more narrow, and they made it a little bit lower. I did review the plan and I did talk about it with GZA and it does still meet the openness ratio and the bank full requirements so I don't have any issues with them changing making the minor change to the plan set. 51 Spalding Street. I wanted to sub out one tree for another both of the trees were native, I didn't think that was a big issue I just wanted to highlight it for you but I do also want to let you know that they, their plan is going to be changing substantially and pulling away from the wetland because GZA permitted them to make the parking area smaller. I think that that'll probably be coming down the line in the next month or two as a minor administrative change as well but I just wanted to kind of keep it in your radar. I'm just going to jump to Hickory next because I think it's a little bit another easier one before we get hung up on the ever source. So, we've approved I think three or four minor modifications to the Hickory Ridge order of conditions for the solar project that's being developed by amp. Recently, we have town staff has been coordinating with amp pretty substantially to make sure because they're gearing up to get started on their work and one of the things that they did was to assess reassess the bridges because they've been in the past since 2017 when the original order of conditions was issued and there's been a lot of flooding and changes to the landscape since that time, and so they reassess the bridges to make sure they were still stable. In doing so they did discover that the decking on one of the bridges is not really adequate for heavy machinery to go over so they would like to lay a timber, timber bridge over the top of it. And they still need to make some other sort of structural repairs to the bridge before that happens. I included it in the folder for you the correspondence folder. My assessment of that bridge work is that it's not substantially differing from what was already approved by the commission in the original order of conditions. Jen and I did talk offline about this and I think, you know, it's kind of like on the fence in terms like okay change after change after change when do we draw the line. I don't think drawing the line is here. Hopefully this will be the last change but I just wanted to make you guys aware of it I don't think it's a substantive change to the original order of conditions but if anybody feels different, based on the content of the email that was sent. And I can pull it up if folks want me to but I don't think that there's a significant change in terms of impact to the river excavation that had already been approved etc. So. Yeah, for my part I agree with everything Aaron said again we had talked about this offline it did, you know, those bridges were a big part of the discussion for the original permit because I specifically was concerned about the structural integrity of those bridges and if they have to be replaced it is a major project. So, you know, this, it's getting there, but I think it's still under the line and can be considered a minor amendment. I just emphasized to Aaron that we need to be loud and clear that we've had amendment after amendment after amendment to this order of conditions and you know we're getting to a point that we might have to revisit the permit if anything more substantial comes across our collective desk. I just want you guys to know that we're watching that. Thank you yes. And then the other update is so the conservation commission had approved ever source to do some glossy buckthorn applications in various species habitat along their right of way in a couple locations one off College Street one off of Strong Street, the Commission had asked an HESP to approve their formulation of the herbicide that was used, and they did get that approval and then after getting that approval they found out about this buckthorn blaster, which is a it looks kind of like an envelope moistener and they put herbicide in it and they use it as a targeted treatment for buckthorn, and they would like to use that method as part of this application and sought to get the commission's approval on it. I don't think it's a big change from what they had already approved to do if anything I think it's more of a direct spot treatment again that it's in the correspondence folder I think it's a more precise method of applying the as opposed to using a paintbrush they use almost like a sponge to dab the top of the stems and he did provide some photos of what that looks like. Any problem with what they're proposing as far as the change I just wanted to highlight it for the board that that that requested come through. I've used that thing before totally fine. They've been used that bunch of working groups and upper Midwest get started with it. It's just kind of gone from there. I just googled it. It's like available on Amazon but it looks like it. It's a different chemical. Thank you. No thank you it's. There was a slightly different formulation, which they passed by NHSP and NHSP did approve. But yes, a slightly different formulation for the use in that for that specific application as well. If anybody, sorry if anybody thinks that any of these warrants a motion to approve, then that's completely fine I. I'll leave it to you guys to render that decision but I think they're all sort of relatively low minor changes so. Yeah, I'd like to know what a glorified bingo marker is. Very similar to an envelope moistener. I was like wondering what is he talking about. Yeah. Keep in track of this stuff Aaron, I don't see that. Yeah, these are minor but I appreciate you keeping track of and letting us know. Yeah, I agree with Fletcher. Yeah so commissioners looking for a motion to approve the minor administrative changes at list all these properties. Yeah, that's a good way to handle it. Not all of them right. Not. Yeah. Thanks. All right. Make a motion to approve. The changes at 29 mill lane. 51 spaulding street. The ever source determination that we've made previously hickory ridge dash slash amp order of conditions, but not 11 trillion way as minor administrative changes. I second. Second from Laura voice vote, Andre. Hi, Laura. Hi, Michelle. Hey, Fletcher. Hi. And I'm also an eye. Um, you mass, I'm going to just give you guys a quick update on this. Um, for those of you who are not aware. Um, on or around September 1st, I, I became aware that UMass was doing some trenching on on cold storage road in Hadley to connect into the village park apartments off of North Pleasant street. When I found out about it, I sent a stop work immediately to the facilities department at UMass because I had previously been in contact with facilities and knew that they needed a notice of intent to complete that trenching work. I sent them the stop work order. And I had been in contact with UMass on several occasions to discuss the situation and had been in the process of scheduling a site visit with them. And the gentleman who's the manager at the facilities was unable to schedule a state visit with me and so I ended up scheduling the site visit with another person from UMass who took me out there.  There was work actively going on to replace a culvert which had not been permitted. It was a complete mess. It was two days after the big rainstorm, following the long drought that we've had and it was very muddy, very messy, and the replacement itself was poorly designed. The contractor onsite did not install the environmental controls that were necessary to do the work. And there were three laborers out doing the work there was no engineer overseeing to make sure that the culverts were placed at appropriate inverts. There was no measurement taken for the riprap that was placed at the inlets and outlets. There was a bypass pump which was drawing water from a silty pool and dumping it into another culvert, which was approximately 30 feet away, causing scour around that culvert. I issued an enforcement order that day. I talked with Jen prior to issuing the enforcement order. I've also been in touch with the Hadley Conservation Commission and I've been in touch as well with the EP about the situation. The commission is willing to ratify the enforcement order tonight. That is what I would ask of you. However, Dave and I have also talked at length about this and I'm going to be providing guidance to the applicants representative which is SWCA they were out on site with the violation. And what I would like to see what Dave would like to see is for the two, I think they're 16 inch culverts to be replaced with a crossing that meets the stream crossing standards, and for the entire area to be restored completely basically. And then also, if possible, there's a 60 inch culvert that's immediately beside this which received a brunt of impact because of the bypass pumping and also it's in terrible shape and really needs to be replaced. I'd love to see that culvert replaced as mitigation for the overall violation. So that will be my ask of the applicants and I think talking with Dave Z, he's in agreement with that. I'd like to see the enforcement order ratified and for me to provide that guidance to SWCA and then to have SWCA come back at the meeting on the 28th to discuss sort of their findings, their recommendations as they begin to prepare and after the fact notice of intent and hopefully that notice of intent will be restoring and bringing this situation into compliance and improving the resource area damage that was done. Aaron, so this is, this is, you're talking about from cold storage. So it basically falls a mill river out to where they're building the new presidential whatever apartments. So that's like all their construction debris is and stuff and yeah all back there. Okay, there's a 60 inch culvert back there. That culvert doesn't serve the mill millers mill river there now. There's a unnamed perennial trip that flows into the mill river though, and it's, it's really sad because it looks like when they installed that road, it basically created like a giant dam, essentially going between that perennial dream and the mill river I called it intermittent I apologize. It's perennial, the stream there. They, they have basically completely blocked the right now the perennial stream is blocked and I would say 40 to 50 foot section is not flowing right now because of all of the bill, these perched culverts and they also dropped in like five chunks of granite garbage that they were like the contractor was probably just looking to dispose of and he just dumped it they just dumped it in the river bank. There was a silted in section of the channel. It's, it's a really bad situation. And now all of the water is being forced through this almost failed 60 inch culvert which is causing a lot of erosion downstream. I'm sorry, go ahead. I was just happy to make a motion to ratify. Yeah, of course, out of curiosity just quickly and what was DP's response to this. They said if the, if UMass is uncooperative in any capacity to let them know because they are basically ready to stand behind us and I think probably jump in with fines, if necessary. So, I would know man's land back there they just yeah. It's like, I mean, is this, is this something that UMass doesn't typically do this do they aren't they pretty good. It's, it's unusual because we went through this all this effort probably just before you joined the Commission Laura to do this kind of umbrella and I process with them. Yeah, and so we have these, we have this very clear understanding with UMass when things that when we have to be notified, when we need to be involved and when they need to like submit a permit application and this would 100% qualify that they would submit an NOI permit application for no questions. So it's just, it's literally mind boggling. What, how this got to this point. No man's land back there. Yeah. Yeah, I would Aaron's done a great job of just that. Yeah, I think it's, it's, it's very unusual in the time that I've worked for the town and worked with UMass to have something like this happen. Yeah, I think it's a complete breakdown of communication, both between and among UMass, but then between those departments and, and the conservation department and the commission and staff so they have pledged full cooperation, I think is that accurate error they've pledged full cooperation on rectifying the situation, submitting a, you know, a new NOI, an NOI not a new NOI because there was no NOI, a notice of intent from the get go to replace, you know, this culvert or the two culverts that they put in. So, I think this is the first step in, in rectifying the situation. So, All right, I'll make a motion to ratify enforcement for UMass cold storage roads and 950 North Pleasant Street. Thank you for your question. Laura on the second voice vote fletcher. Hi, Laura. Hi, Andre. Hi, Michelle. Hi, I'm also an eye. One last comment and that is, I'm sure he was aware of this and all of us, but I'm is, is not UMass is friend on this, on this project right so, you know, I don't know what they're going to do how quickly they can get an NOI together get it together before you. There's a lot of engineering to do here so we'll just have to see but I don't know Aaron is your expectation that this could be. This could be cleaned up if you will and a better solution by the time winter sets in or is this a spring project. It might be a spring project I tried to get them to button it up as tightly as I could the contractor on the site they were not happy and not super responsive and yeah, but, you know, I think I will also add if I could that, you know, I speak regularly with with some of the leadership team at UMass and they are, you know, well above people in facilities and in the contractor so the leadership team at UMass is well aware that this problem happened they were deeply apologetic and and somewhat embarrassed that this happened so. So I think people are aware of this issue at that many levels, and at a very high level at UMass so hopefully we can get some traction and if Aaron doesn't get traction from the contractor or or the team at UMass then she'll let me know right away. Thanks, David Aaron for handling this I know it's not easy and I got 100% agree with the approach moving forward. Awesome. So I think the CPA appointment is our final article of business tonight. Hopefully I didn't miss anything. I can find anything you missed. Okay. Thank you for checking me. I don't know I don't know if I'm the best checker but. Yeah CPA, who's interested. I'll do it, as long as maybe Fletcher you can tell me that the meetings don't go on till like 10pm. No comment. Can't. I was on a different I was on a different meeting. Somebody else was on the need. And I was on those. And then when Anna took on it was a whole different situation. CPA. No, but she was she was on the CPA when she was on the concom with us. Yeah, has moved off. That's right. She's on town council now. Gotcha. Sam McLeod is the current chair. Oh, he was on when I was on. Yeah, so Sam. He got new. That's good. His family actually donated some conservation land to the town off of a station road in Southeast streets.  You get to make votes on almost a million dollars in spending every year in the various categories, historic preservation, affordable housing, conservation, open space and recreation. And it's, I mean, it should be kind of fun reading the proposals, asking questions and then learning about the different areas that CPA funds. So it's just a handful of meetings at first. And then Peter's out once you're voting stunts. So it's not like consistent like ours. The work is really from October to February. And you're really kind of done. Yeah. Well, let's vote for I changed my mind. Do we vote? Is it a motion or a vote? Motion. I think we probably just need a motion to nominate Michelle. To the CPA. I'll make a motion to nominate Michelle to the CPA. As a conservation liaison. I will second that motion. All right. Second from Laura waste boat Laura. Hi. Hi. Andre. Hi. And I'm also an I is Michelle boat. Michelle. Thanks, Michelle. Thanks, Michelle. She just said you're welcome. I mean, I assume I'll be contacted. Etc. I'll just wait to hear. Okay. Aaron will let, let the folks know. The CPA is, the liaison is Sonya Aldridge, our comptroller and Sean, our finance director. So. Aaron can let them know. And then. Also, if you want to chat, you know, offline, Michelle, I could fill you in on kind of how the process goes and, but I will say proposals are due by the end of this month. So there's, there's no rest for the weary. So they'll probably have another meeting coming up in about four to five weeks. Maybe six weeks where the proposals would be reviewed. There's typically anywhere from a dozen to as many as 20 proposals in the various categories. And looking at their web, looking at their website is very instructive. Stop Dave. Dave stop. The nomination already happened. A million dollars, a million dollars to spend on worthy project. What other committee do you get to do that? You should have been a used car sales. They never go past nine 55. Right. Yeah, right. Here on the conservation commission, we have the satisfaction of protecting our wetlands. Just wanted to defend that. Right. All right. It is good. You'll, you'll appreciate it. Thanks Michelle. Sure. So I think that's a wrap on the agenda. Thank you Aaron and Dave. Sorry, you guys have to be doing the mess until nine 42 at night. So we need a motion to adjourn. I'll make a motion to adjourn at nine 42. I second that motion. We had a simultaneous second, which means Andrea. Everyone. Okay. Voice vote Laura. Hi. Bless your. Hi. Andre. Hi. Michelle. Hi. And I'm also. Hi. You guys are awesome. Thank you so much. Thanks all. This is great.