Okay. Hello and welcome to the October 11, 2023 meeting of the MRS Conservation Commission. The time is 7 0 8. All members are present. Except Laura and we have Bruce coming in. Let's get Bruce in. I got him. Okay.  All right. All members present except Laura. Dave is not present. So I don't have any comments to start out with. We'll just skip over Dave until possibly he gets here. So let's move to approval of minutes and make sure Bruce is successfully joining us. She's named there. Hi, Bruce. There's this pretty face. Okay. So we have three. Meetings of minutes for approval. Any comments on them? If not looking for a motion. I move to approve the minutes from 8 23 23 9 13 23 and 9 27 23 as drafted. I will second that. Andre on the motion. Jason on the second Andre. Hi. Alex. Hi. Jason. Bruce. Hi. All right. Do we want to wait for Dave to open this one? Yeah. We have to wait till 7 30 to open any of the hearings. Okay. All right. Let's get on to other business then. Holiday schedule meeting. Yeah. So we have. A meeting the day before Thanksgiving. This happens to us every year. And. Some years we cancel it in some years we don't. It really depends on availability of commissioners and families and travel and stuff. I know that the elementary school is closed on Wednesday. Wednesday through Friday of Thanksgiving week. So that makes it a challenge for several folks. We typically don't meet the Wednesday before Thanksgiving. And I, for one, won't be here or available. I mean, I think we should just go with convention and cancel that one. Unless anybody has a strong opinion to discuss, but. That's my position or anything else. No, I'm comfortable with that. Okay. Since there are five Wednesdays in November, could we move it to the 29th and that would still be two weeks until the first December meeting. Interesting idea. What would that do to. I mean, that's there's, there's nothing saying we have to do it on the second and fourth Wednesdays. Or is there, I think that the challenge would be, then we'd have back to back meeting weeks. No, sorry. The 20 29th is two weeks from the first December meeting. Yeah. And plus we've got to have a subcommittee meeting in there. Oh yeah, I guess I've got my, I've got my dates wrong in here. Sorry. Yeah. So you go 29th to the 13th, right? Right. Um, that does push the second. Oh yeah, never mind. Sorry. I had my, my meetings on the wrong week in December and my calendar, but that does mean that our second meeting in December is two days after Christmas, which might be difficult for people. Two. Yeah, because we'll be meeting on the 13th and the 27th. So. Well, does that give more backing then to trying to meet on that 27th or 29th? In November, it's the 29th. And personally, I'm, I'm, I'm game for that. I'm game for moving it from the day before Thanksgiving to the next week on the 29th of November. Yeah. Yeah. I think that would allow that would like Bruce was saying it allows two weeks until the 13th. Yeah. And it frees us up to perhaps cancel the one between Christmas and New Year's. And I would certainly be missing that one. Or most likely would be missing it. Okay. So is there, is there any reason that we can't do that break from our second and fourths? I mean, in fact, I think that's a really good plan because my only concern is I'm expecting to get like five NOIs. Imminently. I've had. I know they're in the mail. So we're going to get, we're going to get an influx. I'm hearing Bruce. Alex Andre. And I'm in favor of that. Jason. How's that for you? I'm good with that. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for that suggestion, Bruce. So I'm looking at the camera. Before we. Have a motion just to be clear. That means we'll be meeting on the eighth. And the 29th. 13th. 13th. 13th. You're talking November, right? November. 13th. November is a Monday. No, no. I got confused, Alex. You're talking about November, right? Right. And after that, it's the 13th of December. December. Sorry. Yeah. So to be clear. Before we have a motion on November. We would be meeting on the eighth and the 29th. Yes. Okay. We need a motion for this. Let's, I think it's just going to go on the website. Okay. So then our subcommittee meetings would remain the same. Yes. Okay. Good. Okay. I'm fine with that. And then. Can I can then deal with December. Yeah. So what were we going to suggest for December? Aaron. Anything. Well, just, we'll just have the one meeting in December on the 13th. And then. Potentially have to cancel the second. I mean, the, the week of Christmas, I know is not going to work for a lot of people. Cause that, that week. School is closed through the first of the year. Okay. Why don't we remove the word potential and just cancel it? Okay. That works for me. Everyone go with that one. Okay. Yeah. Right. Got our holiday scheduling. Dave's still not here, but I guess we can do some land management updates, which is essentially just that we can continuing to work on the land use policy. And we have a meeting next week. Okay. So Alex, did you want to add anything to that? Alex as chair of the subcommittee. Well, the only person here on Andrew for Andre and Jason. Dave has been very helpful in that we asked him to. Let us know if he has any. Priorities on the topics. That are in the existing policy, but we asked him to identify specific issues. All the way through the previous board for comment. So we asked him for some guidance on what to work on first. In case there's timing issues that something might come up where he really needed something. Decided. So we've got that. And then underneath each topic that he named as a priority. So we're going to look at, and he has done that. We haven't. We haven't chewed on that too much. Because we just got it. But it's Dave's been very helpful in providing that guidance. And we're charging along. Our, our meeting. And we can get. We could actually use an hour and a half. Because sometimes to talk about what Dave thinks is important, it takes about really adds on to the meeting and we fall behind a little bit on the things we're working on. So. We're making progress. But I thought we would get through it, you know, in this calendar year, and that's probably not going to happen. Dave. So we're just going to look at what other towns are doing. On certain topics. And. And so we're sort of adding on to our charge. Which will just take longer. Eventually we will have things coming to the board for its review and approval. And we're not. There yet. But everything we work on will eventually be coming before the rest of the commissioner. Yeah, everything. We're going to come with recommendations. And everything will have to come to the board. For. It's review. And approval or not. That may happen. In one document, it may come. In segments. Okay. Thanks. Right. Is that good? Okay. Thank you. Erin, I don't know if you want to go down the list, or if you had some thoughts about what we could cover in 12 minutes for our first hearing. You're on mute. I was checking attendees to see who we had, if we had anybody from. Any of the projects. So I'm going to hold on the request for certificate of compliance for POTIC substation. Cause I think somebody, there's going to be a representative forever source here for that. So I'm going to go back to the agenda for a change to an order of conditions at 285 Sunderland road. Just a quick. Sort of update on that that happened today. So. Several weeks ago, I got a request to change the permit at the request to change an equipment pad at the. Request of the. Electrical inspector, but this was through the applicants representative that was submitted to me saying we have to make a request to change an equipment pad at the request. So I went out to view the site. And I identified that there are several. Compliance issues with the erosion controls. And there's quite a bit of sediment. On the site that's moving and flowing into the. The wetlands. So I was in touch with the applicants representative today and going to be meeting with them immediately to. Get them to mitigate the impacts and. Refresh the erosion controls and come up with some stabilization measures on the site. So. That's a battery storage project. It is not the battery storage project. It is a. A previously permitted and approved. Solar facility. That's a 285 Sunderland road. And I'm going to go ahead and. However, there was a. A permit. Fairly recently for some sort of equipment upgrades, which, which may have included battery storage. Within the. The actual. Solar. Array. Enclosure. But there was also a connection. It was like an interconnect. That was a. That was a. That was also a connection. It was like an interconnect. That was done to out to Sunderland road. And that's really where the issues are is between the array and the. And the road. There's 2 large ponds there. Coming across the duck pond. Yeah. Yeah. That's where the issues are.  I would love for the commission to entertain a motion to require the applicant to come into compliance prior to our meeting on 10. 25. So that. It sends a message that they need to act quickly to resolve the compliance issues on the site. That's the, the, yes. So that. The issue with the change they withdrew apparently that was resolved with the electrical inspector and there was some kind of a design issue that was resolved with electrical inspectors. So they withdrew the request for the change to the plan, but they still need to come into compliance. So I just crossed off the section that's not applicable anymore. Okay. So we just are making a motion for them to come into compliance with. I move to require the applicant. Address staff concerns raised on 10, 11, 23. Prior to. The 10, 25, 23 meeting. I'll second that. Alex on the motion. Jason on the second Andre. Hi. Alex. Hi. Jason. Hi. Bruce. Hi. And I'm an eye. Um, the next issue is the. So this one seems like it just keeps coming back to us. The, the Holy Oak range trail project. Um, I got another email from Chris Valente. Uh, at Kestrel land trust and, um, it's kind of kind of funny because we had talked about this initially at the initial project review, but you folks may recall, and this is in your one drive folder. You can see the photos and everything. Um, you may recall that there was a footbridge that was put across a small intermittent stream as part of the Holy Oak range trail project. And we had talked with them prior to the work being done because there was concerns expressed about. Um, uh, emergency response and how, you know, they use a gator to get up the mountain basically to rescue people. And now we're putting a bridge across there. So they can get a gator up the hill and we were told that there was an alternate route and it wasn't something that we needed to be concerned with. And so we passed it. They installed the bridge. And now they have a problem because they can't get through there with the gator and they apparently don't have alternative access. So they need to. Shift the bridge six inches and change the angle of the bridge orientation so that they can get a gator through for, um, emergency response purposes. Yeah. I don't, I don't remember them, uh, saying there's an alternate route because I would have said something.  Um, I don't know why, why they assumed that we definitely brought it up. Um, I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. You definitely did. And they definitely, you know, said it was fine. So I don't know what we could have done differently to have avoided being at this point. Um, yeah. It's unfortunate. It's six inches. Um, Does anyone have any comments on this? I mean, it's, it's for safety and rescue. So. Yeah. I won't be able to, I'm not going to vote on it, but I can certainly say that, uh, I think the only option of, uh, Rangers on, uh, In that whole area is, uh, is rescue. And, um, It's, it's, uh, It's completely necessary to be able to, uh, move through those trails, uh, regardless of. Uh, anything else really. So my only recommendation here is, you know, They should be stable, fully stabilizing the areas of disturbance when they relocate the bridge. Um, And there was some stabilization measures that I had already discussed with them, but we should make sure that that's part of this approval. Okay. Do we have conditions to specify that or. Oh, I can add in some language to the motion. I have a question. Why not just make it a, uh, Make it a bridge that's wide enough to, to hold the quad. Yeah, right. I mean, if not, because I mean, that's what we'll, uh, stop the, uh, You know, uh, that'll make it so that, uh, So that the quad doesn't have to go into the, um, The, the stream and, uh, Create that kind of erosion. The quad could just go right over the, uh, The bridge. Yeah. Yeah. And isn't this also the spot where they were concerned about people going around the bridge? Yeah. So yeah, I think it would be, wouldn't it be beneficial to just widen the bridge so that it can't go around and then it can also. Fit the quad. Yeah. Can we make that part of the motion? That makes total sense. So I am in agreement with you. The only comment I would add to that is that if, if they're now going from having a footbridge, which is designed to hold pedestrians to a, um, Large bridge that's designed to hold a small vehicle, it might require some sort of engineering, um, and or like design considerations. So, um, I can certainly, um, You know, we can make the suggestion and say that would be our preference. I just don't know what kind of can of worms that might open for them in terms of, you know, now they have to change the design to. Okay. So what? I agree. It seems to solve a lot of problems and concerns. We all, they also came back with a budgetary constraint to us. Prior to this, which there's, this is probably going to put them over anyway. Is it worth asking Aaron about this? Yeah. No, I, I think it's absolutely worth asking. Um, I just wanted to make sure that. You know, I know that this was grant funded. So it's not like they have thousands of dollars to go back and hire an engineer to redesign it, but I think it's, it's a great suggestion. And I think from a resource standpoint, it makes a lot of sense. So, um, I can certainly ask, I guess my only concern is that, you know, it's two weeks until our next meeting and, um, maybe in the meantime, they just take it out until they figure out a long term solution. Um, I'm not really sure what else to do in the interim. Yeah. I, and, you know, I've seen a lot of, a lot of bridges all around, uh, that people ride, uh, ride on or take their, uh, their snowmobiles over and so on. And for that distance, uh, you know, I think at that point, the, uh, stream might be four feet wide. Um, you know, their bridge might have to be, you know, six feet long. Um, I think maybe, maybe add another two or three feet to that, but, uh, um, I think the impact on them is going to be minimal. But again, I'll just, that's just my, and, and. If I remember the crossing, um, it seemed to me that a four by six, uh, to support that span would, would hold a quad. And, and it's, I don't think it's a difficult engineering issue. And it makes total sense for the quad to just cross the bridge. And, um, I think rather than, I mean, it's nice to ask them, but they'll find the money somewhere. And I think we should err on the side of safety and being able, allowing the quad to get to the person that needs to get rescued expeditiously by going across the bridge. And I don't know where, I don't know who said that there was an alternate route, but there obviously wasn't. And so that's a mistake in planning. And I think now's our chance to make it right and just require the quad, the bridge to allow the quad to cross it. And if they need more time to raise money, so be it. Okay. It could also provide, uh, be so big that, uh, people aren't going to try to go around it on a bicycle.  People will go right over it over the bridge. Yeah. So in the language then in the motion that we're going to make, do we have to specify that the bridge be. As wide as the trail. Are we going to make a motion to require this? Are we going to continue this? Yeah. It is open. I can tell you right now it's opening a can of worms because there's mass stream crossing standards. So there's openness ratios and. Bank with bank spans that are required, but I think this is what I recommend. Let me speak with Chris Valente and ask her to come to the next meeting. Explain kind of the. Um, uh, recommendation of the conservation commission and, and push in that direction and see where it goes. And then we'll come back at the next meeting to review and approve whatever change they come up with. Can you also, uh, ask her to Chris? Uh, yeah, ask. Ask if they can, um, talk to the Rangers there. To. Kind of figure something out together instead of, uh. Yeah, I think that's a good idea because this is kind of hinging on. Uh, a last minute after the back change that maybe they have materials and possibly some labor to pitch into the fix. But I think, um. Yeah, not making this motion and we'll just come back to it. Um, so you'll get. I'm a little confused. Is Erin going to talk with her about what we would like to see. So that comes to the next meeting. Telling us how they're. What their retrofit will be. Or are we going to hash over this whole conversation with them present. Which I think is a waste of time. Well, there's different permitting. Um, that will be involved. So it's probably not going to be a minor administrative trade of change. If we require this entire new bridge and we'll probably have to have a new permit for it. Is that right, Erin? Or can we stretch this into a. It really depends what they come up with and what's required. Uh, if it changes heights, um, if it changes the. Openest ratio of the bridge. If we're widening it, then it might have to be higher in which it's going to be higher. Um, if it's going to be higher in which it's going to be higher in which it's going to be higher in which it's going to be higher in which it's kind of like the domino effect as soon as we start changing the design. So I need to let her know what my plan is, is to speak to Chris Valente, tell her that the conservation commission is asking to design a bridge that can accommodate a gator and see if that's something they're willing to do or able to do. And also I can ask them to speak to the rangers to try to. I can ask them to speak to the gator to come to the next meeting with a potential solution or to discuss it further depending on what her thoughts are. Cause I, it's not really the conservations commissions authority to say to someone redesign this. And this is how we want to redesign. Typically the conservation commission comes with a plan and. Or the applicant comes with a plan and the commission reviews it. And says yay or nay. So I need to, this is something that's really up to the applicant to do. It's a specific way. So I'll speak to them and have them come back and then. Just for clarity, I don't think we're telling them how to do it a specific way. I think what we're doing is giving them criteria. That a gator needs to, the bridge needs to accommodate the gator. Yeah, but that's going to require a rehash in the plans. Oh, hi, Dave. Right. So. And that's going to involve them coming to us with a new plan. And then we're going to have to talk to them. Okay. I see your hand up, Dave. Do you want to weigh in on this one? Yeah, I'm sorry. Sorry. I'm coming from another meeting. Yeah, I guess I wanted to really reiterate Aaron's point here. And again, I have not been part of this conversation. But I guess I'm, I'm trying to figure out what is. What is the commission's. Authority to have the applicant change the design of the bridge. Where is that coming from? Is that coming from the commission? Or is that coming from an external source? Because I understand the safety issue. But if we're telling, I just. If there's not a resource area. It's crossing an intermittent stream. Oh, I know that. I get that. What I'm saying is. The commission is actually. I don't know. Is the commission. We've already approved the product, right? Right. Right. So. So it seems like. It seems like 1159 is, is it really is this going to send this project into kind of a tailspin? I'm just not sure what is the commission's authority to change the design of the bridge. So, so. As I'm seeing Dave. They're asking to change the bridge to move it over so that a quad can go through where they put the bridge is what I'm thinking. Is that right? Yeah, they're, they've requested to. They requested to shift the bridge over 6 inches because they're having trouble with emergency access. To up the mountain to the area where they need to access. The drive through this train. Right. And I. I don't remember from our conversations, what I thought we were approving was a bridge that they can that, that a quad could go over. That's. Okay. But. So there, you know, what. As far as the authority that we have, we're just, you know, we're. We're kind of ruling on, on their moving the bridge off to the side. And yeah, we can. What we're, what we're trying to do is, is ask them to. To make a full bridge there so that. While they're at it, they're going to cover the, the ATVs and the, and the gators, the emergency. Vehicles getting through there. As far as forcing them to do it, I don't know that we can do that, but. I just think we need, I think you need to just be clear whether this is a requirement or this is a request. They may say thank you, but no thank you. We don't think we can redesign because of the cost time or permitting. Necessary to do that. Yeah. I think we're moving. A request, which Aaron was going to relay. To see if this is possible because the DEP chain or DWR. DCR. DCR. Change, change their requirements for emergency access. And so the whole decision, the whole permit was based on the fact that they didn't need it. Alex, I see your hand up. Yeah, I see this a little differently, Dave. When this was permitted. It was believed. That there was an alternative route for the quad to get to somebody to rescue them. What we've heard from Andre is that rescuing people is the primary. Primary time that the Rangers spend. Up there that they're. In the business of rescuing people all the time. So had we known at the time that we approved this. That there was not an alternative route for the quad. I don't think we would have approved a narrow walk bridge. Now we're told there is no alternative route. For the quad. And the pro the, the intermittent stream is a resource. And we're left with having the quad drive through the rest of the resource. And if we had known there was no alternative route. I think what we would have asked for at the time. Was a bridge that kept the quad out of the resource and over. Rather than driving through the resource. Have the bridge carry it over the resource. So that's where we're at now. And we're trying to protect the resource. So there's our authority. I agree with Alex's characterization. Yeah, I. Yeah, I'm, I'm not going to. I'm fine with the direction you're moving. I think it's a bigger question about. Ridges and walkways on the Mount Hoyok range. You know, is our, are we going to insist that everyone is quad. Friendly. I mean, I think that's a much bigger conversation, not for tonight, but the other thing is, you know, one might argue that the number of times that a quad has to go through that stream. I mean, how many times a year is that so. It's not a regular, it's not a regular occurrence. And it probably doesn't impact public safety per se to go through that stream, but I understand where you're going. I'm just trying to. I'm going to put my hand back up. The, the excuse me, but the. When I stood on that thing, there was a steep slope down from the trail to the bottom of the intermittent stream. Then there's a steep climb out. The quad will erode every time it goes through there. It will loosen up the material. It'll be subject to a rate to erosion every time the quad goes through and every time a bike goes through every time anything with wheels goes through the same thing will happen. And I have roads on my property up in New Hampshire where I see this kind of erosion taking place all the time. And the bridges, the wheels are set up that they just loosen the material every time they pass over it constantly. And the bridge stops that from happening. So there's a protection for the resource. And if it's wide enough, the bikes and other wheeled vehicles will not go into the resource. So I, I'm comfortable backing up and saying, but for somebody saying there's an alternative route, we approved a footbridge. Now backing up, somebody says, oh, we made a mistake. There's no alternative route to rescue somebody. We would have required a bridge to accommodate the quad. That's what Andre was asking for. It's passage of the quad. Yeah. Erin. I was going to request that we table this until Kestrel can be present for the conversation. Okay. That sounds like a good idea. I'd like to hear from Kestrel and maybe you could just relay the concerns that we've discussed here tonight to them so they can think about that. I'd still request that they, that we not rehash this whole conversation. That Erin tell them what this conversation was all about. And see if they can come to us at a time when they actually have a redesign rather than, it just saves us time, saves them time. And I think it's more efficient. Andre. Yeah, just real briefly to fill your curiosity. I would say that you have two, two ATVs going through there at least, at least every other week, sometimes twice a week. Thanks. Good information. Okay. So there's a lot of people on the trail. Yeah, it's also, it's also getting out there to access areas or to patrol it. Okay. Not just on emergencies. Okay. So it, it, it all depends on how much staff they have and how much the staff wants to be getting out on, on an ATV. Okay. So significant use. Possibly. Could be done on foot, but rescue also. Okay. So do we need a motion to table this or do we just, we just table it? Okay. All right. Let's move on. Let's see. Let's go to our seven 30. So this is, all right, let's do our general procedure. So each hearing has 20 dedicated minutes on the agenda, five minutes from staff, five minutes from the applicant, five minutes for public comment, five minutes from commissioners or two minutes each. Please raise your hands during this. All plan revisions are required by the Wednesday prior to the meeting at noon. For all presenters, please clearly state your name, address, and who you're representing. Okay. So this is. The notice of intent for Amherst for the construction of a three paved pickleball court, the existing rest recreation fields to include removal of two trees associated grading and fencing proposed work is within the buffer zone to bordering vegetated wetland at Stanley street, Kiwanis Park map 18 a lot 16. 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 the wetlands as most recently amended in article 3.31 wetlands protection under the town of Amherst general bylaws. Okay.  Thanks, Michelle. Yeah. So I'm here tonight. I'm going to present this for the town. We particularly with town projects, we really try to have Aaron. I'm going to go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and advise the town like she does any applicant, but not be in the position of presenting the projects. If I stumble or. Or have a hiccup on something she may jump in, but I'll try to keep this fairly brief. And Aaron, maybe you could share a site plan. Of Kiwanis Park. So very quickly in and succinctly. In 2021 community members got together. And I'm sure you're all quite familiar with the popularity of pickleball and that popularity is certainly echoed in the town of Amherst. And that community group applied for CPA funds, community preservation act funds to create some pickleball courts. Their preferred location for those pickleball courts were Mill River recreation area up in North Amherst. Fast forward, we got a staff group together working with the recreation commission. And we, we, we looked at Mill River and determined that Mill River was not the best place nor a feasible place to put three pickleball courts. And so we began to do kind of a, an alternatives analysis looking around at our recreation areas. Across town. And we landed on this unused part of Kiwanis Park, which is off of Stanley street in Southeast Amherst. It's close to the village center. It is a part of a small recreation area, about 7.6 acres that the town has owned for many, many years. And it is a modestly, I would call it a modestly used recreation area. The uses include softball. Some high school teams will practice there from time to time. We have soccer leagues play there and there's two diamonds, one softball diamond and one, a small baseball diamond. The reason it was selected was it, it is an existing recreation land. It has frontage and parking already existing. It has a crushed stone parking lot that you can see in the center of this photo. It's generally flat and dry. It's underutilized. As I said, it has accessible water and sewer for a possible restroom in the future. And we have general agreement from recreation, DPW planning and conservation. And the original applicants for pickleball that this would be a good location. It's out of the flood plain. It's not in riverfront. And there's no estimated in priority habitat. And as Michelle said in the introduction, it is a buffer zone project. As you can see, the proposal is for three pickleball courts oriented north, roughly north south adjacent to existing crushed stone parking. The wetland resource area is over to the east or the left. As you're looking at this bird's eye view of the three courts. It's a relatively simple project. There is the removal of two trees that have been approved by our tree warden. One of them is dying or in a state of. Of decay. The other one is covered head to toe with poison ivy and kind of a. Problem, if you will, for parents using that spot anyway, and we wouldn't likely plant some additional trees, new trees near and around the pickleball courts in the future. And it's three courts. It's a fairly easy. Excavation of, of some of the, the base there, the native base of, of soil. I actually don't think it's probably native. I think we've, we've graded this site through the years. And then coming in with a paving contractor and paving this area. And then, you know, the other amenities are fairly simple. There's fencing around it. There's nets for the game itself. And then we'd create an ADA walkway from the parking lot to the pickleball courts themselves. I think you can see the dimensions there. Again, it is a grass. Area right now with minimal slope, slightly sloping toward the West or the left-hand side of this, this image. I was out there with Jason and. Bruce on Friday afternoon for a site visit, perhaps other commission members got out there. But it's a fairly straightforward project. And we think the site makes sense. So I think I'll stop there. Can you leave the drawing up please? Thanks, Dave. Aaron, do you want to give some comments on this? Yeah. So the, the original plan that came to me was the pickleball courts up against, within the 50 foot up against the sort of Western. Edge kind of where that yellow line is. So I think that's, I don't think it's, I don't think it's, I don't think it's, I don't think it's, I don't think it's, I don't think it's really on the map, but I kind of like, I like on the center of the site. Um, sort of Western. Edge, kind of where that yellow line cuts through the site. Um, and I advocated to, to shift it out of the 50 foot. Um, and you know, move it as far away from the wetland as possible. There was obviously some existing issues there. Um, just for historical context, this feel. this location so it's a very historically altered location. I ran calculations and it came out to approximately 2% of the buffer zone on the entire site for the footprint of the pickleball courts. There was an issue with the delineation which was that the neighboring property couldn't be reached for permission to delineate the wetlands so I actually estimated the wetland line with a GPS unit and that was something that was advised to me by DEP in order for us to get an approximate wetland line in order to be able to have a buffer there. So just that's my backstory as far as input that I've had on the project. Michelle, could I also add I neglected to add that this was not designed by Erin or myself but the town engineer Jason Skeels worked with our DPW director as well as Ray Harp our recreation director to come up with this plan. So that's how we arrived with Erin's advice on shifting the project to the east and further out of the buffer and then obviously staying out of the existing ball field to the east which is a softball field. I'll stop there if there are questions happy to take them. Yeah any public comment please raise your hand we'll keep an eye on you. Okay no one's no one's raising their hand I see yours up Alex do you want to take two? How'd you come up with the number three as opposed to four or two or why three? That's a good question Alex I'm jogging my memory as you were asking the question. Well I will tell you this the pickleball enthusiast pickleball people who play it say the more the better a pickleball not unlike tennis is it's a social sport people like to come together and play and have tournaments and mix and match players and teams and whatnot. So we basically tried to maximize what we thought was realistic to fit on this site if we could fit four I think we would have gone for four we also had to realize that we had a limited budget so the original budget for this project was a hundred and twenty thousand dollars that may not have been ground truth as far as it could have been and honestly that was during or just before COVID and we saw escalation of cost across the board construction across across the board so we are actually going back to the CPA committee to ask for a supplemental authorization to help complete the funding package for this project so right now we have a hundred and twenty thousand dollars and we know that will not pay for these courts we we want to try to get them permitted they would go before the conservation commission the plan they would need to go before the planning board for site plan review and the design review board or their input on design signage anything like that so there's no magic there's no magic the more courts the better we think the town in the future will probably likely build more courts the other thing I should mention is we did we did line we added lines to one of the tennis courts at mill river park recreation area so that that could do double as a tennis court and a pickleball court I will say that tennis enthusiasts and pickleball enthusiasts um they want their own courts I guess that's a simple way to put it yeah I played I have played pickleball at hampshire college those courts are indoors and um and I don't know if there's a shortage of pickleball in amherst or not in terms of number of courts but I was just curious why three do you um hampshire college pickleball courts are available all year round yes these would be free that's the big difference alex so these would be free and open to the public you know dawn to dusk you know in season and you have to pay for the courts at hampshire college yeah it's not a it's not a high fee but I I don't know I don't know that to be true but these would be free and open to the public I think that's the difference yeah um would you envision putting a bubble on them sometime I do not envision I do not envision that myself given budgets for recreation and parks here and down I think we're just trying to get courts that are free and open to the public as soon as possible it's it's a good start there would be no lights um again dawn to dusk um important that um Aaron and I were talking that um they would not be treated there would be no chemical applications to melt snow or ice they may be shoveled in some parts of new england pickleball enthusiasts will shovel their own courts um and the town certainly will not be doing that but volunteers might but there would be no sand salt or other chemical applications on the courts themselves yeah so um I noticed that the town has built a number of things inside the 50 and inside the hundred foot buffer and and and at a principle it would be nice to see that stop as we move to um slightly we get we get uh as as as a climate change thing um try and avoid impermeable surfaces in the hundred foot buffer and it would seem to me that Amherst should set the standard and show the way for other projects that come before rather than continue to set precedent for building inside the hundred foot buffer and I don't I'm not going to swallow my sword on here but at a principle I think it's time for Amherst to stay out of the hundred foot buffer and whether or not that affects this pickleball court um or not um um probably doesn't make much difference but I I would like to see Amherst staying out of the hundred foot buffer out of principle as a climate change adaptation or an adjustment to cope with climate change and stop building impermeable surfaces inside the hundred foot buffer and when at all possible thanks Alex any other commissioner comments for the pickleball courts okay I don't see any and I still don't see any public comment um and you want to pull up the screen Dave I assume the butters have been notified I understand it's outside of our jurisdiction but the pickleball court noise has been an issue in other places so just wanted to make sure that was um all the neighbors understand the new activities yes the butters have been notified and I believe um I believe our recreation director also sent out a letter himself to the closest to butters on Stanley street and is if he hasn't already willing to sit down with them and discuss the project um there's a you know there's a long way to go before this project actually would see any kind of movement because we have to go through the CPA process that'll take a couple of months the planning board is yet to be scheduled and we have not gone through design review so um there are a number of months and a number of steps that would this project would need to go through um I I know you did call for public comment but um if there are any I do see our recreation director is on the call and uh there may be one or two pickleball uh supporters so perhaps you could ask if anyone I know you already did Michelle but perhaps someone else would like to chime in now that you're at that point okay right so we're at the point of closing the public hearings if anybody wanted to chime in now is the time and I'll just take this moment to uh second adding maybe new shade trees in lieu of the ones being taken down um just because that's a very open site and just you know to facilitate people hanging out waiting for their turn to pickleball and you know just family is it be nice to to revegetate it to extent possible okay I'm still not seeing any hands so commissioners I'm looking for a motion to close public hearing I move to close the public hearing for DEP number 089-0722 I second that motion Andre on the motion Jason on second Andre hi Jason hi Alex nay simply because it's an amorous project inside part of its inside the hundred foot buffer just voting against it out of principle at it Bruce hi number nine it's okay um just move on to our hickory ridge which is going to be continued um so this is notice of intent for a town of Amherst for the construction of handicapped accessible trail system and bridges resource area mitigation and restoration activities work is proposed in the bordering land subject to flooding bordering vegetated wetlands bank riverfront and buffer zone at 191 west primary lane map 19 d 20 a lots 10 and 59 so we're look this is being continued because we haven't received uh comments from nh esp is that correct Erin so Dave didn't really get a chance to present the project yet Michelle um we can't approve it but it might be nice and I can't recall it seemed like Dave just did a really quick snapshot at the last meeting it might be nice to give it a little bit of bandwidth tonight um that way if we do get comments back and are able to resolve anything with nh esp that we're in a better position at the next meeting sounds good i'll take the floor Dave sure thank you and I will say back on just i'm pickleball we will look into those trees that's a I assume that is a condition um we'll just have the trees far enough away from the pickleball courts so they don't shade the pickleball courts or have things fall on the pickleball courts but we can easily do that so um again i'll try to be concise here this is um you know there's a very complex project I think you all read the notice of intent which I believe was pushing 300 pages with with addenda and and supporting documents and maps um it is um part of the overall plan the comprehensive plan to restore as much of the former golf course as possible just some quick numbers for the commission and the public listening hickory ridge the acquisition um which was made in 2022 was 150 acres um if we work from that number um the majority of the site is um is is flood plain is resource area we have vernal pools we have flood plain we have riverfront we have wetlands we have buffer we have uh extensive areas that include estimated and priority habitat for a number of species both aquatic species that that make their home in the fort river as well as um terrestrial species so this this property you know in short is a is an ecological gem and so what we're trying to do um is is uh develop it and I use the word develop if you will in quotes develop it in a way that is sensitive to those resources my charge um and I took the lead in acquiring um hickory ridge for the town you know my my charge from the town from the town council is to uh achieve some of the goals that we stated in that acquisition plan and those goals um first and foremost had to do with ecological restoration and preservation and habitat enhancement on the property but also um second secondly were to provide access to people who live north of the um the acquisition and south of hickory um and provide access to and from the village center that exists uh off of 116 and and uh west street excuse me 116 west street and pommeroi lane at the new roundabout so that people could move freely from north to south and and then also that we would provide access and parking and and trail uh enhancement and interpretation from the main parking lot off of uh west pommeroi lane um the town overall has not decided what to do with the buildable frontage which is encompasses the area at the clubhouse and the parking lot associated with the clubhouse there's roughly five acres 5.5 acres there that could be used for another purpose that is not the focus of this NOI but I just put it out to there to the commission that in all likelihood in the years ahead that the town would come back for other purposes for that land in the meantime we are trying to restore habitat we're trying to create a trail system and restore access to and from so from the 150 acres we subtract about 26 acres of solar that that project was already permitted and part of the acquisition that we made so pure sky is going to develop uh 26 acres of solar as part of their project they're required to mitigate about 17 acres of riverfront habitat and they will pay for that they will it's already been permitted through you and natural heritage and DEP and they will pay for and make that 17 acres of restoration happen we then began to look at trail access and working with the planning staff working with Erin uh and working with the existing topography the ecological resources we have out there and the former um cart paths that were part of the golf course and they were quite extensive this is this was a a golf course with with uh with paths and bridges designed by a world-renowned designer of golf courses we want to utilize as many of those uh former cart paths as possible and so the trail system that is part of this NOI um utilizes as many of those existing and already impacted area areas as possible the main focus of this NOI is the um ADA trail loop trail as we're calling it which is in the lower left hand corner of near near the word sheet eight it is the brown trail um and then the purple loop if you will purple and brown loop um and then the north south trail which comes from up on east Adley road thank you Erin with your cursor and follows that path all the way down and is able to get people to the village center via a DPW water sewer department existing right-of-way and then we are proposing other trails that connect to the proposed parking area which is in the existing uh parking area now so we're not creating any new bituminous or impacts there eventually the clubhouse will come down that is a tear down and then throughout Erin you know can can her cursor can follow uh connecting paths a minimum number of connecting paths throughout the property that gets people to and from those main trails some of those trails will be crushed stone and um many of them will simply be single track um unimproved mode annually trails that do not have any construction or um any kind of crushed stone or by two minutes they will simply be hardback that is already existing because many of them have already been used as a cart pass um we're working with a number of different funding sources to put this all together as the NOI indicated we've got park grant funding mini entitlement grant funding we're working with the us fish and wildlife service as well as mass wildlife to bring other additional resources to bear on the project particularly those resources would help us mitigate a number of historic impacts that have already taken place on the site for instance um if we're successful in getting some of the national money we would remove the old pumping station which Erin can probably point out here that has made significant impacts on the riverfront of the ford river um we're also talking about removing um um many square feet linear and linear feet of existing trails including removing by two minutes in many locations on the property um let me see i will not go into great detail but but you can see under the proposal um the entire project is is being proposed as a limited project under that provision there is extensive mitigation work extensive restoration work um and i think i may stop there um if we want to go into more specificity on some of the restoration and some of the impacts um we can so maybe that's kind of the broad brush overview we're talking about a trail system we're talking about removing um culverts uh in many of the uh intermittent streams so all of this would be part of the initial work we do for the trails um in the ADA trail alone just to go back to that i believe there are uh we're removing is it four culverts Erin uh alone on that ADA loop trail one um or is it three there are two culverts on the the ADA trail and there is a section of wetland that's being restored but in that general area around the ADA loop trail there's an additional four culverts that are being removed through funding with uh through the us fish and wildlife service there's also an additional three culverts that are located in in this location um they're all undersized they're all failed um so you know Dave is talking a lot about the the trail development but i have advocated very strongly for restoration throughout this project and incorporated a significant amount of restoration almost every single resource area on this site has significant restoration associated with this project the only exception is riverfront and in the case of riverfront we're actually moving the impacts away from the river um there's a very small increase in um riverfront alteration in the outer riparian that's proposed and in the case of riverfront um there's actually a limited project exemption in the wetland protection act and in our local bylaw specifically for bike paths and multi-use paths so um there is there is comprehensive mitigation that's built into this um in in terms of removal of impervious surface in terms of removal of fill from the floodplain in terms of wetland restoration um habitat restoration for turtles that use the site yeah so that's a wonderful list so just kind of recapping seven the removal of seven uh failed culverts um we also are proposing to remove one of the major bridges over the fort river there's five bridges over the fort river one of them as part of this assessment and analysis we've determined is not necessary um it's it's uh the bridge maybe erin can show you that right in the center that one there it's a very significant bridge i'm going to say it's 30 to 40 feet long um and that would be a huge improvement to get that structure out of there that structure has probably been there for 50 to 60 years um so that whole package we feel is a very strong package for mitigation and restoration of the site thanks Dave thanks erin erin sent out some flooding pictures recently and i was just wondering if any of these trails are going to be underwater and if i don't know were you surprised to see the locations and does that give you any sort of insight about how the trail construction if that's going to be sustainable um yes and no we were well we certainly weren't surprised um the flooding actually i i think the biggest rise i have in 2023 is that we haven't seen more flooding on hickory ridge because i've seen you know five five fold five times more flooding in the past on this site than 2023 i don't know why that is the spacing of the storms i really don't know um but part of our thinking there michelle is that a we've we've we're removing some of the existing trails that we think we're in some of the particularly on the eastern side of the property in some of the most sensitive areas for um a rare and endangered species for rare and endangered species nesting we're moving trails away from um um the the fort river and some of the tributaries in some ways we're also basing this in part um recognizing that these trails are going to have to work within the natural systems of of of the land once we remove those seven culverts we think some of that uh flow will actually change we believe that some of the the flooding will in some parts of the property not be the same and not be as great because water will be able to move more freely right now it's being backed up by these you know tremendously failed culverts the other thing is that the cart paths you know our proposed treatment is a for the most part a six foot wide crushed stone uh compacted crushed stone construction and really that's what the cart paths have been for the last 50 to 60 years and they're still there through all of this flooding they're still there so we feel as though some of them may flood during some parts of the season and users are just going to have to get used to that and I think we've all been to national parks and state parks and when a river does its thing or or streams do its thing and and these things happen in a flood plain then some of these trails may be impassable for a week or two until water recedes but we we know that the cart paths have been overtopped hundreds of times and they're still there um so that's kind of our thinking we're not proposing extensive boardwalks there's really only one which actually is a wetland restoration project down near sheet eight there and that is going to be constructed in such a way that water can flow under it around it over it okay thanks to um Bruce thanks for being patient well let's see I have several questions um on page uh like the second or third page of the narrative um it there's a whole long list of things that are going to be built and I guess my question for nine through 13 is there enough money to build all those things and then that's related to my other question was well what happens if the Fish and Wildlife Service money doesn't happen or you get they decide to give you half of what you ask for I might as well add my other one while I'm at it um is it fair to assume that the pump station removal is a separate thing and would come before us later once you get to that point so that I'll maybe take that in in that order so yes there would be a separate um filing for the pump station removal um so that's that's definitive that would be a very significant project I don't have the dimensions of the pump station off the top of my head but perhaps some of you have been there um but it has had a major negative impact on the bank of the Fort River there when we showed it to the folks from the federal and state government they were honestly kind of gaga over that restoration they jumped in I didn't have to ask twice they said yes we will fold that in I think what happens if we don't get all of the funding or or any of the funding um I guess my my best answer to that Bruce is our potential partners on this at US Fish we've had um the Connecticut River Conservancy we've had um Mass Wildlife um we've had uh the folks from ecological restoration out there to a person they are interested committed and excited about this site um you know there's over a mile of frontage um on the Fort River which just doesn't happen uh and so they I have no doubt that if we don't get all of the funding they will help us to reapply the other thing that I think is is outlined in the narrative is that US Fish and Wildlife is willing to do some of this funding with their own personnel and equipment so it's not going to require uh removing some of those seven culverts they're willing to do at their own cost even though they don't own the land they have no no fee interest or any legal interest in the land they're just interested in restoring habitat on this site of course they own the Conti Refuge land downstream on the Fort but they're so excited about this project that they've already they've you know they've already volunteered their staff and their expertise and their design to remove these culverts so I think we're basing some of that on their enthusiasm and their commitment to making some of these things happen I don't have I don't have a page nine through 13 right in front of me so I can't that's okay it just it was a general question I wouldn't worry about it andry has a question yeah so everything got addressed all right on yeah I'm uh wondering what what's going to happen with the sand traps that I've seen out there what's what's that going to be restored as or yeah so we have many many many sand traps um so again we're working with the folks particularly at mass wildlife some UMass researchers who are experts on rare and endangered species we are going to without going into a great deal about species specific locations and such on the site I mentioned aquatic restoration as well and and that would be in the future but they're interested in aquatic restoration in the future and then the sand traps would be managed for certain species that have used them in the past so the former golf course owners had a very good working relationship with the university and folks at the state level and allowed researchers to study monitor etc species that use the property for the last you know well for for for eons here but uh so UMass has extensive records of those species on the property so the goal uh with some of the sand traps is to simply keep them open and available for some of those species to use uh the right now they're growing in they're growing over with weeds um some native species some invasive species and the treatment would be to kind of be two-fold one is to remove those weeds and keep that sand uh loose uh and also to put up split rail fence you you saw in some of the in the notice of intent that we would be putting up split rail fence and appropriate signage to say you know ecological restoration and in process please stay out of this area please keep your dogs out of these areas and do not allow them to dig etc um so things like that you know in stream and bank restoration would come in the future but there's a lot of bank hardening out there you see a lot of riprap uh the stream has been kept in its banks the Fort River for the last 50 60 years and in some case some places through this restoration it would be allowed to uh more naturally flow out onto its flood plain and then flow back into the main stem great thanks uh I hadn't thought of the uh the fact that the sand could be uh useful Alex yeah um first of all I had to chuckle when Dave said the former owner had a great relationship he had been talking about the critters that used the sand traps and I thought what he was going to say is the former owners had great relationships with the turtles but um I my mic was off and you didn't hear me um what a wonderful project and I when I was listening to you uh one of my thoughts was what a wonderful outdoor laboratory and part of our mission is education um I can see the Hitchcock Center you know going out there um teaching kids um I'm I wonder if there isn't room somewhere to have a visitor center I know there might be kiosks explaining things but it would be cool if the town of Amherst was able to have some sort of a call it a visitor center for lack of another term on the five and a half acres uh to talk about what's going on ecologically out there and um just videos and things that that aren't deadening and and we'll get the attention of of people and to explain to them what's going on in the Hickory Ridge uh area and I just plant that I'm sure other people have already thought about it the great idea okay um any other comments we should probably move on Michelle if I could just say thank you Alex and others for comments we are exploring partnerships with uh on the education side with the Hitchcock Center US Fish may want to want to work with us on that um Kestrel has expressed interest in in working with us on programming uh there um certain town departments the recreation department would like to run some programs there on black bear and and other critters um and then we of course I mentioned in the past that the property itself is not under the care custody and control of the conservation commission it is under town control but part of it will be dedicated to conservation and have a conservation restriction held by the Kestrel trust on that part of the property we have not determined which part of that property is the exact acreage but we will survey that out obviously 17 acres will have a cr on it for mitigation for the solar project and then riverfront and so we're working with the natural heritage program Erin and my and and I are um on that next phase which would be what parts of the property will be permanently protected I will say um and it's important to say that you know the town certainly is looking at the frontage um with less of an eye toward conservation so we did have an we do have an engage amherst page up on our website which um is still live I guess you would say it is available to you I would encourage you to go there there are hundreds of ideas about what to do with the property but also with the frontage people have talked about community gardens having you know obviously trails uh environmental education opportunities trail connectivity to the village center uh we have uh it could it be a site for a south amherst fire station could it be a community center could it be a senior center could it be affordable housing and the list goes on and on so part of my job is to work with both with Erin with you but also other departments to say what other things might happen on that five five and a half acres on the frontage all of that would need to be compatible with um trails and conservation and of course solar so I just wanted to put that out there so there's a lot of moving parts here but very exciting for the community okay so comments on that live website if you guys have them all right so I think we're looking at motion to continue this move to continue the public hearing for 191 west prom roy lane to october 25 2023 at 7 35 p.m thank you dave looking for a second i'm taking it andre on the motion bruce on the second andre hi bruce uh alex hi jason hi sorry nominate okay um um okay uh 7 40 notice of intent swca on behalf of university massachusetts for the construction of a gravel parking lot and associated stormwater structure in the 100 foot buffer zone to bordering vegetated wetland at lot 13 olympia drive map ad lots 15 16 and three so the applicant has requested a continuation um i think we can just look for a motion here for the continuance okay is it i will continue the public hearing for a lot 13 olympia drive notice of intent to 10 25 23 at 7 40 p.m second okay we have jason on the motion alex on the second andre hi bruce hi jason hi alex hi nominate okay what do we still need to cover how about i see christin is here for the umass proposed maintenance to tan brook inlet on mass ad of dep number 0890647 if we want to bring christin in erin you're still there erin i'm sharing my screen so i can't see uh they attend to you so you're able to pull her in that'd be great i can do it hi christin hi can you hear me yep hi thanks for thanks for hearing us tonight um my name is christin mcdonough i am with swca environmental consultants and i'm here representing university of massachusetts um we submitted a letter to the commission providing written notification for work associated with an existing order of conditions for routine operation and maintenance and this is associated with mass dp wetland final number 0890647 and this this work falls under categories one and two which includes for category one work which does not require prior written notice to the commission and category two which does require prior written notice to the commission and then just as a reminder to the commissioners work falling under category three may require additional review and permitting so all this work is just under categories one and two so either it doesn't require notice or it does require written prior notification but not additional permitting um the work that is scheduled is just routine operation and maintenance and it includes um the tan brook infall rate which is located at the southern end of lat 34 which is the visitor center to emas it's north of fearing street in amherst right in front of that culvert there's a trash grate and the trash gate is really intended to block large debris that comes from downtown amherst from flowing into the culvert and then getting potentially clogged in the culvert um and creating a blockage and potential flood situation the something must have bumped into that trash grate over the winter and it's been bent so they want to just replace the trash grate uh in addition the university wants to replace a security fence um which is kind of like a top of the sort of parking lot area and then do some minor tree clearing um to be specific hang on really quick um there are two specific activities that fall under category two which is the requirement for prior notification one is the removal of two dead eastern block trees one is a storm damaged eastern white pine located directly east of the infall and another is the replacement of the trash gate great so both of those fall under the existing order of conditions and require prior notice to the commission so this was just kind of a courtesy notification to the commission and i'm here to answer any questions if anybody has any questions i think these photos kind of show if kind of scroll down erin um photo four shows that damaged trash grate it's just basically a giant iron screen that keeps large material from entering the culvert um that culvert is it it's it's not a daylighted culvert it goes underneath that parking lot all the way until the campus pond so you know they want to make sure that large material stays out of that culvert and doesn't create a blockage and then photo three shows the damaged um security fence and that's just an accessory uh fence so that kind of just falls under i think that's a category one third placement of that it's just accessory and then photo two shows the overgrown vegetation it's primarily uh asiatic bittersweet and japanese knotweed um so they wanted to trim that and that photo also shows the two dead snags that they wanted to remove for a safety hazard and then photo one is just a site locus thanks christin and you want to give any comments on this sorry i was just like coughing um yeah i don't i don't have any issues with the um the proposed maintenance um obviously that's i i do think that that falls under the the permit based on um the information christin provided michelle and i reviewed everything earlier today prior to the meeting and i think the one question was uh what was the necessity to remove the the live white pine um i'm assuming that that's the white pine that's shown in the photos behind the hemlock and just maybe some additional information regarding like what the damage was to the tree in a written description detailing why it's a hazard mostly because it does provide shade to the to the tanbrook and there's development on the other side so it's just to try to preserve what vegetation we can if it's if it's possible to to save it and keep that shade tree there from what i've been told that was a storm damaged uh eastern white pine and so they're they they wanted to remove it just so that it doesn't drop limbs and create additional blockage at that trash grate but there is they're they're not proposing to remove any of the existing live vegetation they i think the university recognizes that mitigating thermal loading is a priority um especially under the interest of the act so i don't think that they're interested in just half hazardly removing trees this is this is something that they were you know while they're in there with machines getting rid of that storm damaged tree bruce does the town tree warden have jurisdiction over this tree and if not does umass have its own tree warden i don't know that answer and i mean usually the tree warden gets involved if it's if it's on a public way um or in a public right of way uh in this case i'm assuming it's on umass private property i'm i don't think that area next to the brook is a town public way but dav if you if i'm off base please let me know no i i totally agree here and that's your spot on so umass has jurisdiction over the trees the tree removal and we do not is that the implication okay yeah our tree warden does not get involved with a non if it's not in the public way then it's not in the jurisdiction of the tree warden jason roto 2 shows what appears to be some silphence is that what is that for and then if it's not for anything can we make sure that that gets removed that's um associated with the link and av apartment complex which has been under construction um and i do have to make a site walk out there uh to check on the progress of the project just to see where things stand but there is a active construction site there on the i guess it'd be the west side of the tanbrook so that's why you're seeing erosion controls there okay so then just want to make the statement then to make sure that that doesn't get damaged and if it doesn't get replaced properly okay um my you know follow up comment with that tree is that the white pine looks pretty good and it's also taking it's this native species and it's existing in a space surrounded by not weed and when you take it out it's all going to be not weed and there's not going to be any more native species i was just wondering is it absolutely necessary because i mean just it's hard to tell based on that picture but can the umass tree warden just weigh in on whether or not when the crew goes in they can remove the dead limbs and try and keep some native species space in there in addition to the to the aspects that erin mentioned about stream shading yeah i'll absolutely pass that along to you mass you know especially if if worst case scenario they can you know limit and cut it to say like 15 feet leave a snack for wild life habitat value or something along those lines um i honestly don't know what goes into the onem but that was what i was told that that was what their priorities were so um it does fall under the existing orders of conditions so i figured we'll just start with that yep just an ask okay any other questions same concern here thanks okay if there's nothing else and um not to get any hands i think we're looking for um what are we looking for on this one erin it would be i think we should we should try to get in the habit of doing motions for these just so that we have it on the record um but this was what michelle and i kind of worked on earlier crafting for motion um that's what's that's what's there right now and we had something from jason about um oh an integrity of the yes silk fence well i'll move that the commission confirms that the great safety fence work and vegetation maintenance is covered and approved under category two the commission is in favor of removal of the two dead hemlocks commission would like additional information on the necessity to remove the live white pine the commission requests a photo of the damage to the tree and a written description detailing why it is posing a hazard and damage to erosion controls must be repaired immediately second jason on the motion andre on the second bruce hi andre hi jason hi alex um i'll say i but i have a question okay um do you want to just say before we move on this yeah did we get enough explanation from um christin to about the hemlocks or about the the pine tree um could we be saying something about do do we still want the additional information i guess that's my question where did we get what we were looking for from christin i would like additional information personally i like and i'm done great i think we're waiting and and that's within the motion there i know i'm i'm done yeah i said i okay and i'm an i okay um um we're still podic and we have main street oh christin i think you're still there but thanks for joining us thank you bye bye right do you see melissa kaplan and the attendees michelle sorry i was on mute yes i'm bringing listen hey how's it going okay so is this for a podic yes um so we submitted the uh request for different certificate of compliance um however the actual work that we submitted the no i4 never actually happened and there is no there are no plans to to do the work so the the work was to build a small gravel road outside the substation i guess they just determined they didn't need that road and they did the work and without it however we still did the mitigation and the mitigation area and the podic coal sanctuary was constructed um and now erin has been out there and she's um talked with um ever source about it a few times um so it um we're just requesting the close out the uh the order of conditions thanks erin do you want to give us any comments on this well i just uh just to clarify with melissa i was drafted this as being a um a complete certificate of compliance but would you rather that it be um invalid because the work was never done or how would you prefer to close it out i mean we did the whole mitigation i would say invalid i think pleads probably fine okay um yeah okay and then the only other thing um there were no ongoing conditions in the order it was relatively simple um but i was just curious because there had been um a diesel spill i believe on the site and i was just curious when i was out there today i saw the groundwater monitoring wells and i was curious if there was any update as to sort of um the results from the clean up that had been done there at the substation yes i'd have to get back to you on that that i know it's unrelated yeah it's not part of that project so i'd have to go back and ask okay that's fine i'll get back to you though okay okay commissioners any comments i don't see any members of the public hold raising their hand nope okay well the medication looks good thank you um all right well i'm looking for a motion issue complete certificate of compliance for DEP number 089 0678 approved second that alex on the motion jason on the second alex hi andre hi jason hi ruse hi num and i great all right thank you melissa thank you have a good night um so the only remaining two items uh the first was the 815 main street demolition um there was a existing sort of abandoned house um at 815 main street which was a pretty significant safety issue there was people getting into it um the roof was caving in and so uh the applicants applied to uh demo the property and um the town issued an emergency certification to take it down to remove the safety the immediate safety issue there um there was an erosion control inspection associated with it and they were ordered to stabilize the site upon completion so we would just need a motion to ratify the emergency cert for 815 main street i moved to ratify the emergency certification for 815 main street second andre on the motion jason on the second bruce hi andre hi jason hi alex alex austin can i ask a question though about it sure who was the contractor it's i i don't have it on the tip of my tongue but i can open up never mind let's go it's it's fine i i think it was it was a wrecking company um i can't i just can't remember the name it's really fine it's already happened to yes um the other update i wanted to give was um i don't think we finished that motion are you at this oh i'm sorry on this okay yeah we did jade i'm an i i think alex dropped off but um okay we're finished okay i'll just make a note that alex dropped off um so the other update which i was a little disappointed was um 200 levered road this is where the commission issued an enforcement order basically allowing the applicant to complete the stabilization measures that were associated with the expired order of conditions and i was out there and saw that they finished the grading operations um but i went out again today just to follow up and see if they had done the hydra seeding to stabilize the site and that hadn't been done yet so i contacted the contractor and the contractor expressed that every time they were about to do the hydra seeding that there was a huge rainstorm proposed and that they didn't want to do the hydra seed and have it all wash out so they were holding off until they had a few dry days um to do it i urged him uh that they do it immediately um as soon as they possibly can because we're moving into the um the the growing season ending and that i felt like it was important that they get some germination he said that they're working to do it as soon as possible but they're you know the weather has not been cooperating so my recommendation was that the commission set a deadline and tell them that they have to do this or that they're going to be in violation of the enforcement order and one thing that we did discuss was threatening fines which you know it's not i don't really want to go there but i really just want them to finish um and not have this hanging open because it's been now this is the third meeting um so since it was issued so it just at your consideration as to how you want to deal with that thanks sarin i think we've given chances and handled this um you know gently thus far and i think that time is really running out so i'm in favor of of doing this with um you know expressing what the implications are if they don't do it as soon as possible jason i agree with you i think the weather's actually been pretty good and this whole week it is it's been great this whole week so far and there's no i just looked right now there's no rain in the forecast for the next 10 days so in my opinion it should have already been done so i would just second what you said there michelle thanks andrei uh one more for the bandwagon okay um yeah so if you could somehow express to them and are you in contact with the contractor erin i don't know if you could i would i would prefer this just got handled and we don't have to take next steps so maybe maybe like getting them to weigh in on what day it is so you can be out there as soon as possible when it happens but um whatever we can do to just make sure this gets seated down before it's frosting okay um i think we need unless there's any more comments motion for this one no you're muted erin sorry i keep coughing and i don't want to cough in your ear um if anyone wants to make a motion you're more than welcome to and i can convey the content of you know the commission's request to the contractor i think i think uh from my point of view the next step is to essentially let them know that they need to they need to do it it's time i don't know if that requires a motion or not but okay um yeah and today being the 11th and the 25th being two weeks away i would ask that we have i would ask that we if we're going to send a deadline for them that it be the 18th okay all right erin's laid out a motion for the commission that the commission is requiring the work at 200 levered road be completed by october 18 2023 or the project is in violation of the enforcement order and then begin commission will begin issuing daily fines so move second all right jason on the motion andre on the second bruce hi andre hi jason hi num and i okay um all right public comment if there's anybody that wants to raise their hand i'll keep an eye on that um erin were there monitoring reports oh i see your hand up roots do you want to jump in i don't know if there's a public comment but i do have a question and erin probably as a member of this group she could advise us so the massachusetts society of municipal conservation professionals which i so erin as a member um sent a letter to the governor saying really you need to uh authorize dvp to put out the wetlands waterways uh right new regulation package for public comment and i guess my question here is let's let's assume that they act on this letter you sent them are we ready to comment do we have a role in commenting uh if so who's going to do the commenting and what's our plan um so i mean it's it's entirely up to the conservation commission if they wish to comment on regulations submit public comments to um dp regarding revised regulations um a lot of times individuals will do so but certainly um the commission as a whole could i mean the other thing that occurred to me is you know similar to the municipal conservation commission group um municipal conservation professionals group that issued the letter that conservation commission's commissions can also um urge the passage of such regulations and those regulations are extremely important because you know with climate change we have increased rainfall and increased stream flows and um that is what is contained in those regulations is um updated regulations that take those climate change um issues into effect when granting permits which i think does impact us pretty significantly um in terms of the permits we issue we you know when we look at like the hydro CAD calculations that um are provided to us for stormwater regulations for stormwater reports for various developments um if the calculations that are being plugged in to those um calculations are based on outdated numbers outdated rainfall analyses then the information that is coming out the other side isn't always going to be accurate so i think it's great i'm i'm really happy that um that group was able to submit a letter of support but that's another another idea but um yeah i mean i i think it's really how aggressive the conservation commission wants to be and how much time we have um in the comment period in order to go through it um you know it's kind of a an issue that requires going through line by line on a um regulatory revision and commenting whether it's appropriate or needs revision so um it's it's kind of a matter of time and investment by commission members and how invested we want to be in commenting on that and you know might require special meetings and so forth in order to go through it but i agree it's a worthy cause what's the timeline on the comment period uh no it's not out yet the purpose of the letter was to ask the governor to get the thing going and get it out so we can comment all right thanks for staying on top of that bruce i have to um well i have one this related so i went to and i'll be very quick we can discuss it later but i went to the macc green infrastructure lunch today and there's a lot of very interesting things in there about how green infrastructure could be is not forced by the commission at least strongly recommended in terms of design and all sorts of things and she did say the presenter did say that a number of the things she was talking about are perfectly applicable to the projects we already have alone whether they're you know the new wave of green infrastructure so i i found it really interesting and recommend i'll send the once they send me the link to the to the slideshow and to her talk i'll bend it around in case you want to look at it be great i would i would also just add that i think that the two comments that bruce made are sort of intrinsically linked because um some of the green infrastructure is not really built into the dpbmp handbook and as far as the regulatory requirements when we're reviewing a project the the the bmp's are best management practices for stormwater that are built into proposed projects the design requirements have to meet the stormwater bmp dpbmp handbook and so if um some creative uh you know green infrastructure project were to come our way where you know they wanted to incorporate sort of new cutting edge stormwater management practices which by the way are there are some really cool ones out there that mimic streams mimic wetlands unless they have a spec in the dp stormwater handbook under state law where our hands are tied to approve those um because they're not approved bmp's under state law so i think there's a lot of modernization that the state hopefully will be coming forward with with all of the you know um resiliency climate change um green infrastructure you know i think they're all tied together in a really important way well then let me comment from the letter that your group wrote 2021 epa us epa mandated that cities and towns in massachusetts subject to ms4 strengthen their stormwater bylaw regulation language has that been done so in in amherst we do have a stormwater bylaw which is administered by the department of public works um when i review projects i reference that bylaw um whether it's my jurisdiction or not i do because i am familiar with the regulations um and what the ms4 and epa requirements require so just to give you a little side by side under state law we're required to have 80 percent tss removal so again we use the bmp handbook and typically there's a pretreatment bmp that removes like 25 to 40 percent of tss and then there's a secondary treatment in the treatment train that removes the remaining 80 percent um but under federal law the epa under ms4 requires 90 tss removal so an increase in 10 percent and they require i think and i'm going off memory here but i believe it's 60 phosphorus removal in addition to that so technically any project that's passed in the town of amherst is supposed to be meeting the epa 90 tss and 60 phosphorus requirements so i do always call that out when i'm doing my stormwater reviews on projects and i think that's an extremely important point uh that bruce has brought up and i'm really happy that he did whether or not we specifically enforce that bylaw we know that it's a standard that the town requires so when we're reviewing projects if it's not meeting that standard then it's a demonstration that the project wouldn't be passing in the town of amherst anyway so it's good for us to hold in my opinion hold applicants to that standard well it's great to have such excellent staff knowledge jason just out of curiosity you said that the um ms4 permit is managed by dpw is there a specific reason why that's why dpw is um is the agency or the group in charge of the ms4 permit and ms4 permit compliance as opposed to another group in town or another uh i should say another a uh department yeah i mean that's kind of a question for for dave um so i i can't really i know from my standpoint like it's a it's a wetland directly tied to our regulations so and it's also sort of my um a lot of my stormwater my background is in stormwater training so i certainly i when i i i get excited talking about it and i'm interested in it but i don't know you know what i don't know the rationale for why it was allocated where it was another thing that came up in the green stormwater thing was the need to reach out to the other departments and have good communications with them about these emerging ideas i assume dave does that regularly but maybe there's the time in the future when the commission itself needs to go have a meeting with the planning board a public meeting but you know to talk about these things if i could michelle real quickly i know you want to end the meeting but um i think all of these are great ideas i i do think there's always room to jason's point and debruce's last point there's always room for more communication and collaboration we you know most downs are not perfect on these things i will say that in my experience at least in the valley here most of the ms4 usually sits with dpw's sometimes so but collaboration should be in you know expected and and as part of that i would think you'd have planning conservation and dpw all working on that so much of the ms4 is about our infrastructure and dpw oversees that infrastructure our our our storm drains are all of these pipes that flow to wetlands ponds and rivers and streams so a lot of it is engineering and how are we going to you know address that moving forward with climate change but also you know to improve water quality and and and you know all of that so i i think all of that is good and i think we certainly could advocate for more communication and collaboration i will say that there is there was virtually no money to implement ms4 in emers at this point there has been promises from the federal government but most of it is done at least in my limited very limited experience and we can we can have gilford or amy rusecki come talk to you it's done with erin somebody help me out a fee a stormwater fee is assessed to all property owners business owners and that fee then helps to helps to fund both the design and the implementation of those designs for improving stormwater throughout the community north it's called a stormwater enterprise fund north hampton has already begun theirs we have we have considered it but we have not gone there yet there also are grants out there to help with ms4 implementation i think i think mvp um municipal vulnerability program in must use it can be used to help fund um you know these these initiatives so we got a lot of work to do no question so but these are all good ideas great thanks everyone bruce i don't know if you're going to keep tabs on this letter or the movement of it um into the public sphere but if you want to i'll try okay i'm assuming that the uh the erin's professionals group will keep on it so macdc will almost certainly keep us informed but i'll keep an eye out for it yeah we could ask beth wilson at some point erin to come you know speak with the commission because it's really her job to oversee ms4 if you will at her level within dpw so that might be a well well spent 20 minutes with beth okay um yeah i guess i don't i don't know what the timing is but maybe we could just keep an eye on this and leave a little time for the next meeting to see if there's any updates on it um that works bruce i assume that the um i assume that the presentation that you're going to send out is free to us i know that some of the macc cost money um this seemed to be something they were just going to send out to all the people who there were like 50 people on this call so it was yeah it was a free lunch thing okay great all right well thanks for attending doing the homework okay uh that we're good and i'm just looking for a motion to adjourn motion to adjourn let's go again undre undre and jason on the second bruce hi andre hi jason hi num night thanks everyone right hi erin can i ask you one question before you leave