Welcome everybody. This is the October 28th, 2025 Greenfield Conservation Commission meeting which is being held via Zoom/Hybrid through the John Zon Community Center at
35 Pleasant Street in Greenfield. Should any technical interruption to the meeting occur and the meeting is suddenly ended, it will not be resumed and all items will automatically be continued to the next scheduled meeting
date. Uh please contact the conservation agent for more information. Just so everybody is aware, this meeting is being recorded by the Greenfield Conservation Commission. And if any other persons are also recording this
meeting, you are required to notify the chairperson at this time. Are there any members of the public currently recording this meeting? Okay, hearing nobody, I will assume this
is the only recording. I will proceed to call this meeting to order. I'll take a roll call of all members present. Um I guess we'll start with virtual members. Erica,
>> hi. >> Um I can't see who's in John's on, but I'm assuming that we have uh Emily. No, Emily and Elizabeth aren't here tonight. >> Okay, so just Travis >> present.
>> Okay. Uh, and Kristen is also present. Um, uh, Jessica, did I miss anybody? Just us three. >> Yeah, that's it. And then me. >> Okay. Um, all right. So, the first order
of business on our agenda is um approval of meeting minutes from October 14th, 2025. Uh >> I move to approve the minutes as written. >> We'll second.
>> All right, we have a motion and a second. Um, Travis, can you remind me? Do we need to do a roll call first and then discuss comments or do we discuss comments first? >> I think it's motion, second, discuss,
and then vote with a real quick call. >> Okay, thank you. I think I screwed that up the last time. Okay, so does anybody have any comments on the meeting minutes from the last time we met? >> No. Travis, do you have any comments? >> No, I was just looking through it again,
but I don't I don't see anything. >> I didn't see anything either. Do you want another second, Travis? >> No, I'm good. >> Okay. Um, so we have a motion and a second. No further comments. Um, I'll take a roll call and then issue
a statement. Um, we'll start with the virtual members. Erica, >> hi. >> Uh maybe I should go next because I'm also virtual. Uh I'm also an I. Travis. >> Hi. >> Um and then just as a statement, um
approved meeting minutes will become available to the public on our website on the next business day following this meeting if anybody would like to look at those meeting minutes. Um, we don't have any public hearings
scheduled for tonight, but we do have other business and enforcement updates as well as project monitoring, correspondence, and site visit scheduling. So, let's start with new business. Um, the first item on the agenda under new business is a request
for certificate of compliance for 105 Newton Street. This is mass D file number 1680350 which expires on November 22nd of 2025 and this is associated with the construction of three storage buildings.
Do we want to start with an agent introduction or a applicant introduction? Jessica, >> I don't mind just doing a a brief intro. Um, this is the project at 105 Newton
Street. It was building the storage facility, storage units there. And, um, yeah, I'm really excited. We got we got them in right before the expiration date. They've been super cooperative. Uh, I did go and visit the site and took
some photos that I can show uh, later, but um, it does look great over there. And Doug Suril, am I saying that right, Doug? >> Uh, it's pretty close. I say surreal. um >> Daryl is here tonight and he can um discuss it in more depth.
>> Go ahead, Doug. >> All right. Thanks. Um hi, my name is Doug Surl. I am a landscape architect with Birkshshire Design Group, and I'm here tonight on behalf of uh Jim Bole with Kitchen Concepts, Inc. uh for uh request of a certificate of compliance
for uh D file number 1680350. Um so the project um uh just to do a brief uh review if may I actually share my screen? >> Yes, go ahead. >> Great. Thank you. >> All right. Of course.
Uh, it should be, pardon me for technical difficulties here. Sorry, just one sec. Do it. Okay. Is everybody able to see this plan
currently on the screen? >> Yes. Thank you. >> Okay. Wonderful. Thank you. Um this is an asbuilt plan that was completed uh last September, September 13, 2024.
uh showing uh the site uh that includes um uh a series of storage buildings on a site access off of uh uh Newton Street that kind of deadends into what is labeled Rug Place. Um and with a uh an
office here and uh some initial parking for office visitors and then otherwise um uh the overall facility uh that allows you to with asphalt surfacing that allows you to drive through. Um there's a large retaining wall uh here
and then the site abuts uh wetlands along the northwest perimeter here and uh the north and then um uh a little bit here just straight to the west. And so
uh largely uh the um uh applicant had completed uh the project following the plans. um with uh several minor exceptions. Uh one of which uh is uh
that uh originally the plans had called out a conservation seed mix to go in around this uh western and northwest uh perimeter and uh what was installed was a nommo mix instead. Um and what we
observed um uh in in uh in retrospect um after that was uh installed and that grass was being mowed, there's a tremendous uh Japanese knotweed population that runs the perimeter of the uh of the site uh that's very dense
and uh had we installed a conservation seed mix in this area followed by limited mowing regimes to um promote its establishment. Uh it largely would have been taken over by Japanese notweed and then the site
would have had a massive Japanese knotwheat infestation all throughout the uh uh area that is otherwise, you know, that kind of the maintained uh landscape around the storage facilities. And so we find that the no mo mix with regular
um mowing uh is greatly beneficial to help um kind of hold that um line of defense uh line in the sand so to speak against uh the um spread of Japanese knweed. commonly see chutes coming in
all through the the west and northwest here um where it is uh seeding over the perimeter fence of the site and so we find that that is actually a that planning the nommo mix is actually a very good move uh for the site. Uh
second thing that I wanted to point out that there were 66 shrubs that were uh proposed uh and uh 66 shrubs and uh trees uh were proposed on site and only two have uh to date have not survived. Um
and uh that is that is otherwise a 97 uh% uh survivorship rate. So we find that to be well above kind of a standard 70% or 80% uh survivorship rate. Um and so we don't
have any issue with that unless um the commission does um uh you know we wouldn't ask the client to plant two additional plants um unless you felt that it was necessary. Uh and lastly uh
wanted to point out um our engineers had observed that the rain garden which is uh on the north side of the wall here it's I'm circling my mouse over a series of contours in this area which is where the rain garden was proposed. It is
slightly smaller than what was originally designed. Um, and given that, uh, the engineer that, uh, designed it went back through and reviewed, uh, the original, uh, design calculations for it
and, uh, discerned that, um, what was originally proposed um, uh, you know, would store 774 cubic feet of water below the overflow elevation. And as it's built, it is only storing 660 cubic
feet uh below the overflow elevation now. And while that's less than the design volume, this storage volume exceeds the 0.5 in water quality volume associated with the uh imperous area discharging through the rain garden uh
as required by the storm water handbook. And so the u in addition the the rain garden was uh included for uh only for water quality but was not accounted for in the overall runoff calculations for the site. So, um, uh, Chris Chamberlain,
who is, uh, uh, authored, uh, who's the, uh, principal and, uh, civil engineer for this project, um, who's the one who reviewed, uh, the rain garden design and its, uh, current capacity, um, uh, had, uh, you know, uh, relayed
that, uh, in his opinion that the, uh, asbuilt condition meets the design intent, uh, what was approved by the order of conditions. So, those are the main things that I wanted to point out and wanted to uh bring it back to you
guys to see if you have any questions. I would just like to add that in the order of conditions, one of the special conditions was that there be at least a 75% survival rate for all the plantings.
So um it according to the calculations of it being I think you you said 97 that that condition has been met. >> How how long is that? Is that supposed to be a threeyear monitor? >> That was just two years. So it's been
years. Yeah. >> And um I can I can also show the photos now. This might be a good time to just show the photos real quick. While you're pulling those up, Jessica, I also wanted to point out that special condition 77 stated that only native plant species
should be included. And I don't know what the seed mix alteration was, but um did the agent or was there any administrative approval or commission approval of the change of seed?
I this definitely occurred during Mitch's time and I am not aware of correspondence. Do you know Doug >> the uh the ultimately it is a good uh
question and I uh can't speak to whether that was uh uh if there was any administrative approval on that. I can say that the um uh Nommo seed mix was uh part of the plan for portions of the
site um but not uh the uh entirety of the site. And so um it was installed in the in the proportions that it was originally intended for and it was also spread into the uh areas on the on the west and and northwest uh sides. So it
was beyond that, but there was a NOMO mix that was part of the original plan set that was approved in the order and amended order of conditions. Okay. I also have um a photo here. So I I took photos, but this photo was from
Mitch's um Oh, there we go. site visit last year that just shows this is before they put up the fence. They have a fence there now. Um but it shows
the aggressive notweed sprouts coming up through the grass area that they that they maintain as a mode grass. So that's that. Um but I'll go to my photos now. See
Oh gosh. Sorry. Bear with me for a moment. Okay. There we go. Okay. So, right now I'm um to the north of the office right there. That's the office.
Um the you know southern buildings are just beyond the office and the property extends to the left and the right. But this was a photo of the plants um that are there and they wrap around to the
left which is east. And where you see the stop sign, that's the far edge of the um storage unit property. And then that's to the right. So the hill the road slopes down and you can
see the retaining wall and the rainwater garden is at the base of that retaining wall. And this is the depression of the rainwater garden. And you can see little black outlets at the base of the retaining wall kind of all the way around. There was a little bit of water
in there. There's an outlet and then there's one further down to here's the plants. A lot of them have lost their leaves um but not all. They looked alive. And um
there's I think that's the last outlet. And so that's kind of looking towards the woods. There's still a straw bottle there. And that's looking uh I guess south. The
wetland is um to the right of the photo. And that's down in the wetland. And so I walked all the way I walked the whole perimeter. So the these photos will take you kind of along the edge. Those are more plantings.
Did we receive um a survivorship report on the plantings? >> The >> I'm sorry. I'm having a hard time finding the orders of conditions. Like there's a special conditions PDF and there's like multiple orders. I am not sure what's what with the
>> the in the folder um for today's meeting. If you Oh yeah, sorry. Totally. Okay. So, you just need to um go in today's meeting and go to the to the 105 Newton and then
click the most recent permit. I think it was 2022 and then click order conditions and then click COC >> and I I put everything in there. So, there's shortcuts to the amended order
of conditions. Do you see that? Yeah. So, there's a folder called order of conditions. >> Yeah. And then go in that and then there should be a folder called COC. >> Oh, all right. I was looking at the original orders. >> Yeah, I know. Cuz they amended they amended the plan. The original plan was
a different building. >> Okay. >> Uh shape and um there was some unforeseen uh I think underground stuff that they had to redesign the building. So, um, but the I think these pictures clearly show kind of the limit of the
disturbance that was on the plans. And as you can see now, there's the chain link fence that wasn't there in um Mitch's photos, which also kind of honors that limited
disturb disturbance in, you know, a more permanent way. So, their mowing doesn't go beyond the fence. Wait, can you go back when? I'm sorry. Yep. Yep. Yeah, I was just That was just me. I was like, what's that fence over there? There's like a fence in the
woods. I don't know what that is. I think it has probably has to do with the highway being right there. So, this is um kind of on the back side of the property looking south. So, >> that's the 25 foot buffer.
Yes. Well, down there. So, the 25 foot's like up here >> or But there there does the projects also in the 200t riverfront under the local ordinance. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, yeah, that's like this is where
Mitch's photo was before that I just showed you guys with all the notweed sprouts. Um that's this area. >> Yeah, you can see it behind the fence. >> Yeah. So, you know, my understanding is it
probably pops up like all summer long and as they keep mowing it. So the I'm sorry in the in the folder we have the special conditions but where are the boiler plate here? I'll go look for you
>> cuz usually there's a boiler plate are part of the special conditions. So if you open the special conditions um and you scroll down like a page >> oh >> it will say special conditions and there's only two and then there's general conditions and those are the
boiler plate. >> Okay, gotcha. Because usually there's something that states like any deviation from the plans as approved will be, you know, described and certified by the
engineer or something like that. Um, so that's kind of what I'm driving at. And it sounds like there were some changes. For example, the storm water basin is not designed as permitted or not constructed as designed. Um,
we do control there is there is a um under number 71 upon completion of construction and final soil stabilization. The applicant shall submit the following to request a certificate of compliance. And number and letter B is a letter from a
registered professional engineer certifying compliance compliance of the property with this order of conditions and detailing any deviations that exist >> their potential effect on the project. The statement that the work is in substantial compliance with no detailing
of the deviations shall not be accepted. >> Right. That's Thank you, Travis. That's exactly what I was looking for. So um I'm assuming that with this request for a COC there is a certified statement from the project engineers Bure Design
certifying that the storm water management asset hasn't been constructed as originally designed but that you're in your professional opinion it will function as intended given climate
change and all of all of that. That is correct. >> And we have that in the folder, Jessica. >> Yes. >> Yes, that um is actually there and it's called Yeah, it's the top one, the request 105
Newton Street, request for COC. And that's the letter with the form filled out form WPA form 8A. mind if I share my screen really quick just so that >> yes it doesn't look like there's anybody here from the public but um
just for the record uh sorry my screen's slow to share boopity boop okay so can you guys see my screen >> yep >> okay so Berkshire Design Group this is dated October 14th so just for the record this is signed by Christopher
Chamberlain principal engineer or what is PE E stand for >> a professional engineer. >> Professional engineer. Thank you. Sorry. Principal of Berkshire Design. Um just stating that essentially uh the conserv conservation
seed mix was um subbed for or the no mo seed mix was subbed for the conservation seed mix and that two of the 66 shrubs did not survive. However, that still meets the survivorship threshold
and based on the topography, uh, the rain garden was constructed slightly smaller than was designed. Uh, as designed, the rain garden would store 774 cubic feet of water below the overflow
elevation. As built, the rain garden stores approximately 650 cubic feet of water below the overflow elevation. While less than the designed volume, the storage volume exceeds the 0.5 in water quality
volume associate with the impervious area discharging through the rain garden as required by the storm water handbook. I'm wondering, Doug, if you can just talk to that point a little bit more because I don't see personally as an ecologist
how that really jives and if you can just talk about the stormwater handbook and how you know um 100 cubic feet volume difference meets the thresholds that you're that
you're going for. like why was it designed for more and constructed for less? >> It's a good question. Um, and I'm not the engineer on the project, but I will do my best to explain it. Do you mind if I share?
>> Not at all. >> Um, my screen. >> Uh, oh gosh, where is my Sorry, you're seeing stuff that you shouldn't be seeing on my screen. Where am I? Where's my stop sharing? Oh, it's over here. Sorry. Too many. Too many screens.
>> Nice picture. >> Three screens. Too many. >> Wonderful. Hold uh on here. Let's see which one here. So um it is my understanding that um uh
so this this I'm moving my mouse to show the portion of the site that drains down into this rain garden. So it's it's it's uh it's it's somewhat a limited uh
portion of the site that drains into this rain garden. >> There's more than one storm water asset. That's correct. Yeah. Um so uh there's an infiltration uh a um uh subsurface
infiltration chambers um uh that uh uh the central part and the eastern part of the site uh drains to. Um, and when the rain garden was uh constructed, it when
the rain garden was originally designed, it uh took into account the impervious area of these uh three buildings as well as this um horseshoe shaped uh asphalt uh drive lane and the retaining wall to
drain down through um these three uh uh catch basins or drain manholes. to drain down uh through the wall and then um overflow into this uh outlet into this uh rain garden uh and then ultimately to
um uh overflow uh just uh past the rain garden um uh at the uh overflow elevation there. So the um what uh
these two buildings on the side however are actually sheet flowing off and not draining. They are sheet flowing away from the asphalt. So they are uh just sheet flowing and uh uh landing onto a
drip strip and then infiltrating uh into the site. they are not actually uh square footage wise uh contributing to the runoff that would land uh in this location. So although the rain garden is
smaller, it still works for the actual area that uh that actually drains to it. So >> was that originally intended in the design or was that something you didn't notice until after it was implemented? It was uh designed to be oversized just
for safekeeping. Like it can't harm it to be bigger than it needs to be if there's room for that to happen. Um but um uh but to achieve the uh you know
stormwater standards uh it's my understanding that uh that the uh smaller rain garden uh still works. that slightly smaller uh size uh 650 cubic feet uh of volume space versus 774
um uh still works for the actual area that is draining uh into that rain garden. I think I think uh as I recall there may have been uh iterations of uh uh building design and how the roofs would
be pitched and so they were uh ultimately uh pitched uh and it was designed for them to drain into these uh drip strips shown on on both sides of these buildings. Um but the uh original calculations were just it was a larger
volume of impervious area that was that was calculated to uh put in the original rain garden which just sort of extended out a little bit further than what is um than what was actually built. So what was actually built uh does meet um the
area that actually drains to it. Does that make any sense? So it's oversized in the original design. Um and uh as it is built, it still meets the uh actual area that uh
that runs off the central building and this horseshoe shaped area um is what drains into these uh catch basins and then into this rain garden area. So it still meets the uh you know required
uh uh volume uh capacity for this area. >> Was this part of the amend amendment? I don't know if Jessica if you can remind me which building got changed. Was it I I can't It's so small I can't see. Was it the big building in the bank or was
it is it the building in the horseshoe there? one was supposed to be it was supposed to be a two-story building >> and then >> my understanding is that yes this this section is part of um the change I I think that I could bring up the old
plans but um I I think that the layout was >> so when they changed >> what did you say >> so when they brought us the amendment was the rain garden changed then or was
it just during actual construction that it got changed? >> Oh, the um you mean the difference in the depth? >> Yeah. Well, well, I guess. Yeah. I'm just wondering. I'm just wondering. Yeah, >> I think the difference in the depth was
changed in construction. >> Okay. Yeah, because this ASB bill is based on the the approved plans and those were approved when the amend amended requests went in.
>> Um, sorry, sorry I lost you guys for a minute. I don't know why my computer decided to do a mandatory update. So, I'm logging in on my phone, but I guess uh and it's still, you know, it'll take like 15 minutes, you know, but um I guess kind of like snowballing on what
um what what the other commissioners were saying. I guess my question is was that a field change that was approved by Mass D and the conservation commission or was that ever even brought to the administrating issuing authorities?
It's our understanding that uh that this was uh done during construction. This wasn't something that we approved or that had sought permission for. Um and so we reviewed what was built to see if
it needed to be, you know, you know, if we would recommend, hey, this doesn't meet the stormwater handbook and this is not going to fly for the conservation commission. um you need to go out and enlarge that and build it per plan or will it work in its current size? And so
our engineer uh Chris Chamberlain had uh reviewed it in its current size. Does it still uh meet uh the u volume requirements for the area that drains to it? Um and he found that it still does.
I don't have those calculations. in front of me. So, I I would have a harder time explaining. >> I guess I'm just curious why you wouldn't have proposed that in the first place if it were smaller and you would have less impacts to buffer zone and
riverfront area under the ordinance. I mean, why wasn't that your first preferred alternative if that was possible? >> That's a good question. I do not know. That was why I was asking about which which building was the one because one of them was supposed to be a two-story
building and I didn't know if that had different impacts on how much water would be coming off the buildings how fast. >> Yeah. I I mean if you want I could bring up the original >> I don't know if it matter I don't know if it matters or not. I mean >> Okay. Yeah. It was a it was like a
different layout. Um >> I didn't study the original plans too much cuz they were amended. Um, but I did see like the general sketch and it there weren't >> I think there was less buildings that
were bigger, you know, bigger surface area. >> Yeah, I I can't actually speak to what was originally planned prior to the amended order of conditions request. Um, uh, I vaguely am familiar that the
original building that was on site was a multi- two or three story building that they had torn down in order to install. They were intending originally to install a two-story storage unit, but they found that it would have been uh that that the subsurface conditions
would um were not amendable to building uh a two-story building. And so the uh they went back to the drawing board uh and revised those plans and then submitted an amended order of conditions for the current uh layout that uh we're
looking at here in the asbuilt plan. >> Also, um Kristen, just a uh you were asking about uh why it might be sized bigger when it would have more impact on the buffer zone. Um, just a reminder
that this was the rain garden was built where part of the previous building was. >> So, um, it was a disturbed area to begin with, I guess. So, >> it was a redevelopment. >> Yeah. Yeah. They tore down a building
and the building was part of the building was where the rain garden is now. >> I'm just curious too though, why it was sized originally if that wasn't what they needed. Mhm. >> Usually when you're looking at
resource area impacts, you try to reduce them as much as possible. So why was it oversized? And then I don't know. I would I guess personally I would like to see a more thorough explanation on why the storm water management asset is designed larger than was actually
implemented. Maybe an explanation, maybe some calculations showing what uh like how much it would have treated if it was built as planned and comparing
how how much it treats as built as is. >> Yeah. I just I don't really understand what, you know, 0.5 in per the stormwater handbook really really means. It's not like in context for me. So, I guess what I'm looking for is, you know,
it was designed and permitted a certain way. It was implemented smaller. Why are we supposed to understand that that's okay? I I just I you know, saying like, well, per the stormwater handbook, 0.5 in that doesn't mean anything to me. I
need to have an explanation that means something to me. >> Okay. Yeah, I'd be happy to go back and and um uh discuss this with our engineer and get a a more thorough explanation. I'd certainly be happy to do that.
Um and Kristen, just from a procedure perspective, um I'm pretty sure the certificate of compliance uh is one of those things that we have to respond within a certain number of days >> and I don't think we can
>> um like continue it. So >> yeah, >> I think I think we just have to vote to not issue it at this time and request more information. And then >> is that true though? I I feel like >> I don't know. I feel like we've done that in the past. That's what I remember. >> I per like professionally totally
outside this commission. I I filed for a COC request like on behalf of the company that I work for in August and I don't think that they've done anything about it yet. They're still opining. So that's a good question, Travis. I am not sure about the administrative stuff on
that. So I defer to you because you're the expert on the administrative stuff. >> You always know about that stuff. >> So yeah. So like is there an expiration on on a request for a COC? That's really Jessica, do you know?
>> No, I don't. Travis, do you mean like once the hearing or whatever this is called, once it starts, we need to respond within a certain amount of time like we can't continue? >> Well, I thought it was one of those like once they submit it sort of like, you
know, within that too or whatever where you have to respond within a certain number of days, right, or continue it. I'm I'm >> But is it one of those things that if that if they they ask for a continuence, we could do it or kind of >> Oh, maybe that's it. Yeah.
>> Or or is that not I mean, I know that's with the other one, but >> it's ultimately Yeah, it's a good question. I wish I could answer the um like administrative rules regarding the uh like how much time is required. I
think it's 21 days for a response for the original, you know, submission of a notice of intent or an RDA. >> Yeah. >> And I don't know for this I I mean I can say that that uh you know Chris is a licensed engineer. Um uh he uh reviewed
the uh Asbo plans, re reviewed the uh uh you know uh storm design calculations and then added that um to this uh narrative for the certificate impliance to describe um it's uh you know the uh
it's a change uh certainly from what was uh originally approved from the designs, but it still uh works and meets the uh requirements. ments per the handbook. So from an engineering, you know, uh perspective, he's putting his his kind
of his license on the line to be able to verify that this still works. So um uh it's like I I I and I but I'm I'm also happy if it is if uh you know if you guys would like uh a more thorough
explanation of this um uh I am happy to come back with that. Well, I I aired my opinion. My opinion does not mean the whole commission's opinion. So, I'm happy to listen to other people's opinions. And I'm sorry, my computer is all messed up. I don't
know what's going on here. So, I'm just going to stick to my phone if that's okay. Is this Is this Jessica? Will this work if I'm on my phone? I don't know if you can see me. I have like a weird >> We can Yeah, we can see you and hear you well. Okay. >> Um Kristen, I I can add I just looked on
the um the handbook, the MAC handbook, and it says after the site inspection and within 21 days of receiving a request for certificate of compliance, the commission must determine whether the work has been completed in accordance with the order and act uh
mass form 8B is used to issue a complete, partial, or invalid certificate of compliance. >> So continue into lab. Yeah, and the next meeting's canceled. So, this we wouldn't be hearing them again until the end of November.
>> Gosh, that means I should talk to Gil about that one, >> which is which is probably after their see their their condition expires, right? So, >> yeah, I think we are close to that um
date. If we if we >> so >> if we skip our next meeting >> I have a question. >> Please go ahead. >> If the certificate of compliance is determining whether they complied with the order of conditions and condition 71
talks about the asbuilt letter having the engineer um sorry I don't have it in front of me. Um, >> yeah, >> but everything that is in the letter that we received, wouldn't that mean that they're like, isn't that complying
with the order conditions? You know, so >> that's what I was wondering that that Yeah. that they did did do what they would what water conditions had said they had to do if this if this arose. >> Yeah. because it's like what the engineer is calling, you know, not a
substantial deviation and it still complies with the storm water handbook. I'm just wondering if that's like I don't know if there if if that means they are still complying with ordering of conditions. >> Yeah, I guess that was you nailed it.
That was my question. I guess I'm confused by the applicant's response on that. Personally, I I just I don't really know what what their answer means. So, >> so it's my understanding that like the
um uh the storm water guidelines uh that has a certain amount for uh water quality volume. So for an amount of water that's getting filtered through uh in this case uh like through you know through vegetation so like bofiltration
um that uh the storage volume um needs to uh uh uh meet or exceed uh a half inch of uh uh water quality volume within an area associated with the area that's being discharged. So the area
that's being discharged would amount to um uh like it's still uh that amount of water still uh fits within the 650 cubic feet of storage uh within the existing Raiden garden that is there. So,
originally it was designed at 774 feet, but at 660 ft, 650 cubic feet of of storage, uh that it still meets that uh requirement of this area uh draining a half inch of water uh would still be
able to um uh be uh captured in this location. >> I'm sorry. a half inch of water in like 24 hours or a half inch of water in like what half inch of like what is the parameter on that? I just don't understand what a half inch means.
>> It's a good question and I can't um I can't describe it in further detail. I'm sorry to say. >> So I guess yeah that's that's just basically my question. And I just I would like a little bit more clarity on, you know, you know, is this is this
storm water asset designed to to handle, you know, uh a 50-year rainfall event, 100-y year rainfall event, a two-year rainfall event. I I don't really know what half inch means. So, I guess that that's just my only question, but I'm just one
commissioner, so that's just my question. That's a fair question and I I'm sorry to say I can't elaborate further on the engineering behind it. >> I don't mean to put you on the spot, Doug. >> That's all right. >> I'm not an engineer, so I'm asking, you
know, probably pretty basic questions. Um, I guess uh sorry I'm like really dealing with these computer issues, but do other commissioners have questions at this time or do we feel comfortable voting right now or do we want more information? What do what do you guys
all think? >> What was there an actual planting list? Um, and I know a lot of times we that that's not ready yet when they come and we approve it with the stipulation that that will be that will be sent to the
agent for approval before anything's done. I just wondered if that was if we had a list and if it was approved and and if does anybody know what's in this no moix and why is it called noomo mix when they're mowing it? >> Yeah. Do we have a seed?
I don't know. Stupid question, but saying it was no mo mix, but then they became like talking about talking about mowing it. I'm like, >> I was thinking the same thing or Yeah. And yeah, do we have a seed list, Doug? Um like what the species are, the scientific names?
>> There is um and uh I don't uh have it on the computer that I am uh currently using for this uh uh for uh this meeting. Um it is it was on a planting plan that was submitted as part
of the order of conditions and then the um amended order of conditions. Uh so there is herbaceous plant list and a shrub list, tree list and as well as the uh seeding list that was there. A nommo mix is uh essentially five different um
uh types of fescue um and like like red fescue for example, fistaar rubra which is native to the um uh to the county and um but it is a it's a broader mix and so
it is a low growing um sod forming uh fescue mix that can be left unmowed for a much like greater infrequency than a typical lawn. Um, but you can mow it and
then it still functions. It still works like a typical northeastern uh sod and lawn mixes have a mix of uh fescue in there. It's a cool season bunch grass essentially um like a sod forming bunch
grass and it uh and so that the mix is comprised mostly of that. It works best in the northern parts of the country in the northeast and the in the mid north uh you know uh northeast or north like northern midwest um and probably would
work great out in the um northwest as well. Um it is uh but it is yes it was uh on the uh planting plan uh for the project. >> So the commission already approved it is what you're saying >> which yes the commission had reviewed
that and approved it. >> Okay. Thank you. That was yeah that was helpful. My computer is back on. I will log off my phone and get back on my computer. I'm so sorry about this complication, especially while Liz isn't here. Um, so
while I log back on, do the other commissioners have any other questions while I get off my phone and get on my computer? Yeah, I guess that's me. Uh, and the other commissioners. Um, yeah. No, I don't think so.
Wait till Kristen's back on her computer before doing anything. Really sorry about that. I don't know why my computer decided to reboot in the middle of a Con meeting. Um, company updates, I guess. Sorry about
that. Um, so I don't know. Are are commissioners ready to make a motion or do we want more information? Uh, personally, I would I would personally like more information, but um uh you know, that's just my opinion. So, what what do the rest of the
commissioners think? Um, I guess I personally feel like, um, I don't know with the letter from the engineer, um, uh, it seems
like I I personally wish there was more information, but I also feel like maybe there isn't enough information missing for me to not vote to issue the the certificate of compliance. Um,
>> and just to confirm, there's only three of us here. It's you, me, and Erica. Okay. So, that we need a quorum. So, Erica, how do you feel? Because I could be swayed. I I honestly I don't want to create waves and I don't want to extend business. Um, so I could be swayed, but like that you know my you know my
position. So, what do you think, Erica? >> Well, I I guess I kind of agree with I mean agree with both of you. I mean, I I I I would like a little more information, but that's probably partly because I just don't always understand it. Um, but I also feel like they've met
the the the conditions by providing the letter from the licensed engineer. So, >> right. >> And in the in the handbook, it basically says we have to confirm that it was built. Um, I don't have the language
right in front of me right now, but you know, with the certificate of compliance, we're saying that it was they they've met all the requirements and it was um, you know, largely
built as uh, land or or whatever. like substantial conformance to the plans something. >> Yeah, something like that. Yeah, that's why I was trying to find the order plate is usually where that states it's not in the special conditions, it's usually in
the general conditions. Um, >> and Kristen, I think um I think when we vote on this, our uh the city's ordinance says that we need three votes to issue
um to issue an order of conditions. I think so. I believe any other vote we only need a majority. >> Oh, you mean the certificate of compliance or
No, I think I think in our in the city's ordinance uh for the conservation commission, I think it says we need three votes to issue an order of conditions >> um specifically. Uh but I think any
other vote only requires a majority. So I >> So I could nigh it. Not that I've made anything ever, but I could pass what you're saying. Okay. All right. >> No, I'm I'm honestly on the fence. I I know. I'm always like I'm such a you know needler. I'm always
>> Well, I I have a question. What if you get the other information? What what does it does it change anything or um I mean I feel like it would instill confidence personally in me personally that this
storm water management asset is being functional. And um so one of the comments that D Western Region always writes as of maybe five years ago is that you know uh whenever they review an
NOI application that you know storm water management basins or storm water management assets should have a maintenance log and that that maintenance log can be uh viewable by any issuing authority or regulatory agency upon request at any time in the
future. and it should be maintained in perpetuity because the reason they started seeing that is because they're like often neglected. They get sedimented, they don't function, and then there's just mismanaged storm water everywhere. And this is unders sized.
So, I just would like to have some confidence that it is sized appropriately. And that statement from the engineer, while it does go a long way, I trust engineers and I trust that their stamp is their reputation. But I don't understand I
don't understand the explanation. I I don't know what 0.5 in means. Um so just me personally, I would just like to have more information on what that means. So as a commissioner signing off saying, "Yay,
I know that this is going to function in perpetuity." Are there are there certain conditions that are in perpetuity for this for this? We have someone in our boiler plate. They're just just in our boil boiler plate. >> Yeah, I'll bring that up. I mean, do we
have any recourse as far as as far as, >> you know, even if if we if we if we issued it and then found there was a problem, we have any recourse to go back um as far as like if if it's not functioning, if they're not cleaning it or >> That's a good question.
I think there's always something about storm water. um system maintenance. >> Yeah. And as as it I mean as it currently stands uh the site and the
rain garden and uh uh the site is uh you know totally stabilized. Um, and there's not a buildup of sediment uh that is uh in this uh uh rain garden area or within
these uh uh stone uh drip strips uh along the side of the building or within the infiltration uh the um uh underground uh infiltration chambers. And so it's currently the site is uh you know working as designed although the
caveat of uh this was slightly smaller than what was originally uh you know what was originally approved by the commission uh to be constructed in the in the original plans. Um but uh but it still works. It still it still functions
to grab the amount of water that is running off. Um, and I think the the half inch is related to just the first flush, which is typically what would, you know, include the all the sediment that would be within the initial runoff. And so, not for a 50-year or 100red-year
storm. >> What about like, you know, TSS removal or like any other of the standards that we would normally look at for a storm water management asset? I I I
don't know uh how it is meeting those so I can't speak to those specifically. >> Um >> we do have a SWIP on file Kristen. >> I don't think a SWIP would really like
that's for just construction. >> Oh, okay. And then we also have their um there was sorry I'm looking right now. What? Um there's there's the rain garden then and then you were saying was there
is there a burm there or something where it's elevated so that water doesn't go past that or >> Well, the rain garden itself is depressed. >> It's depressed and then Okay. And then there's like a a very large stretch of lawn before
>> um the woods >> cuz I I remember there was a lot of discussion about because the stream does go down like behind that. So I remember there was a lot of discussion about making sure that runoff didn't you know get into the stream without >> Yes. You're in river
>> right? >> Yeah. >> Uh this area I believe is within uh riverfront. Yes. >> And so the the overflow for this area is the uh 90.5 ft uh elevation line that's here. So the
uh base of this is uh at 1895 uh and then um uh it extends out around this 195 190.5 is the um is the uh overflow for uh this
uh for this uh rain garden. >> I don't know. Personally, I don't know why it's so hard to just get a written explanation as to why this was designed larger than was constructed.
There has to be a reason. >> I think >> Sorry, I was just going to say I think I think we can do that. I think we would just have to um not issue a certificate of compliance at this time with a written explanation for
what we need to see in order to do it. And then I think they have to apply. So we had we went through this with someone else and they had to like reapply but they just submitted the same form again that they had already filled out um with
the additional documentation I think. And I don't think I I mean with with their um uh order of conditions expiring >> on the 22nd.
>> I I mean I Isn't it fine? Can't we still do a certificate of compliance after that expires? We just we just can't do >> Wait a second for an extension. We couldn't do an extension after it expires. >> But there were two COVID talling
extensions. So, this was originally issued in 2022. >> Yes. >> Then it's still valid, right? Uh 23, 24, 25, 26. It should be valid for >> it was I think it was issued after the last COVID one because it hadn't been up
all the other dates had been updated except for this one. >> Oh, okay. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. My bad. Because there was the second tolling extension which was another two years. But either way, we've definitely done COC's for expired ones.
>> Yeah, that's true. That's true. That's true. We're just saying it was done within that time frame like it that was completely >> well um I don't know if any commissioners are ready to motion or continue or request the applicant's
continuence if if I'm not the only one who wants to see more information um you I I feel like we've spent an hour on this and that's probably way longer than we had anticipated. So, um I feel like
we should move along to the next item on the agenda. Uh >> the only the only thing I would add is that I think when we did this before we said that it wasn't something that we
could continue and so we are required to respond within 21 days either issuing the certificate of compliance or or denying the certificate of compliance within those 21 days. We don't have um a
bylaw fee for a request for a COC, do we? >> There's no fee. >> Okay. Um gosh, I just I don't know. I just feel like that's never happened to me in a professional capacity. Um
and maybe that was the mistake of all those other commissioners. So, I guess Travis, I'm going to look to you about the administrative procedure for this because I guess >> I guess um I guess I would say I'll I'll I'll make
a motion to um deny the certificate of compliance at this time and request more information on the storm water
uh as it applies to the um rain garden. Yeah, I think I'm ending my sentence there. >> We have a motion. >> I I'll second that. Yeah. >> All right. Um so, we have a motion and a second. Do we have any discussion before
I take a roll call? Um, the only thing I'd add is I in in the handbook it does say we have to give them a written um a written explanation for why. So we'll just have to send them a letter I. I guess okay with what we're
with what we're requesting, I guess. >> Would email be sufficient or does it have to be like >> I can I don't mind. I'll do both. I'll email the attachment and then mail it for the record. I feel like personally the issues that were that were brought up by the applicant was the planting
which I think as as Erica kind of ironed out like that was already in the um order of conditions and was approved by the commission that native plants would be used. Um two of the plant installed woody plantings failed but that's still
meeting the threshold. It's really, in my opinion, it's the storm water, which is kind of a big deal. Um, that was altered from the design. And I just would like to have, personally, I would like to have a more um
descriptive explanation on how why that was implemented smaller than designed because usually like it's, you know, the other way around. So, um, that's my summary. All right. So, we have a motion and a
second. Um, that was our discussion. Any other discussion? I don't mean to cut anybody off. >> No. >> All right. So, we'll do roll call starting with you, Erica. >> Hi. >> Travis, >> I. >> I am also an I. Um, sorry. Sorry, Doug.
Uh, I know you were looking forward to closing this out and we took a whole hour, but we'll get this done next time, I'm sure. >> That's all right. That's all right. I'll I'll certainly get more information. I have a much more thorough explanation of uh the storm water design and how it is
currently, you know, meeting uh meeting the requirements in its current size. >> We appreciate it. Thank you. >> Thank you, Doug. >> Thanks. >> Of course. All right. Thanks, everybody. Thanks for your time. >> Have a good night. >> You, too. >> Um, all right. Sorry, I lost my agenda. I'm all mixed up because my stupid
computer. All right. Uh, let's see. >> Uh, can I can I just before you continue on um I know we have a couple people here in person and I don't know if we have anyone else online, too. So, I don't if there are things on the agenda
that um are relevant to people who are attending our meeting either in person or online, maybe we can move that to the top or maybe that's next anyway. I'm not sure. The next item is Miller's Meadow and Athena is here online tonight.
>> Yeah, I'm I'm okay waiting if it's not going to take too long. Um if you want to go ahead. >> The the other item is 30 Adams Road and we have two guests in person tonight and
I think this should be quick. >> No worries. Go ahead. Hi. Um, so yeah, Kristen, do you want to introduce the topic or? >> So, yeah. So, under old business, so we'll come back to new business, Athena,
um, which is the Miller's Meadow, and we'll start with old, we'll go next to old business, and we'll start with 30 Adams Road. Jeremiah Stowe is in attendance to update the commission on the progress of moving stored materials from the buffer zone of bordering
vegetated wetlands and bank. Um, >> okay. I'll just do a quick intro. Um, because I went out there on um the 21st and this is just I think our second or
third update since we first started looking at the property and um I took photos and things are moving along swimmingly. Um there are definitely um like we had talked about the the compost
piles in the woods just leaving those and letting those naturalize. And um the logs are out out have been totally moved outside of the um riverfront area to the farther side of the property. Um, and
the wood chip pile that was um, kind of within the work zone has been totally reduced and basically like flattened. Um, but Jeremiah's here and and also I'm sorry, could you remind me of your name?
>> Clever. >> Cleber, right? Brian Cleberg is here. He um is the new owner of the property and he's here to introduce himself and kind of just get on the same page with
everybody. Um but he was also there when I went out on the 21st. Um and we talked about a few other things. So anyway, that's my introduction and I can bring up the photos too. Um, and unless there's >> if you guys could tap the button on
there so it turns green so the people online can hear you too. There you go. >> Okay. So, let me just uh let's see. Okay. So, this photo was where the logs
were. Logs are gone. Um there's the spot. Um the these portaotties we had talked about in the past and um they're for
sale and so they plan to have those permanently gone when they're sold. Um there is some trash debris that we talked about. Well, the commission, we didn't talk about it, but we talked about it on um on the 21st when I was
out there. Uh the possibility of a garbage company coming to pick a dumpster >> to um I'm sorry, could you repeat that? Uh we discussed getting a dumpster
brought in and just removing that pile that you see in the picture >> and um this was where the other wood chip pile was. So it's it's basically flattened. Um, so one of the things we did talk
about as a commission when we last um spoke about it was when it did get to this point kind of what the next steps would be for stabilization. Um, and we left that as a like we'll discuss that later. Um,
and so we can broach that topic tonight. But um otherwise, yeah, it's just everything. I mean, it's it's looking way better. And see there, that's in the distance. And that's going to that's what we talked about naturalizing um because of the
disturbance it would cause if if we were to move it. So that's that's the update. Does any do any of the commission members have questions? When do you plan on hire uh renting a dumpster?
>> Um there's no like date set, but we could do it um like reasonably soon. I think before the winter would be possible. Um, would we as a commission be willing to like
implement um I don't know there's an enforcement order on this, right? >> No, this was just like a the state saw it. >> Oh, that's right. Mark. >> Yeah, we this they've just been super
cooperative and it was >> Yeah. So, there's no official enforcement. So maybe we could just like throw out a date and not make it official, but be like, "Hey, bye. You know, Thanksgiving, you'll have this addressed or something like that." >> Um, >> is that doable?
>> Yeah, I think so. I know. Um, one of we actually slow down a little bit with my business in the winter, but one of my guys is going out with neck surgery next week, so time might be an issue, but I I don't know. What do you think? >> I mean, I'm I'm in the same business.
I'm in the same position. We slow down as well in the winter. So, our time does open up after Thanksgiving. I know Kristen, you're asking around then for the finish date. >> I think it'd be better to get that stuff out before the ground freezes.
>> Um, and I think that a lot of the dumpsters, they're they're just like a flat fee. It doesn't matter how long you have it. It's like $500. You could have it for one day or five months. It's the same price. So,
just throwing that out there. >> Yeah, we can certainly um try to get that. What? Thanksgiving's four weeks away roughly. So, um I'm gone until the 7th. So, I'm actually leaving tomorrow. So, that gives me about 3
weeks. So, I can try to line something up when I get back and um start working on getting that stuff out of there. Great. >> Great. Thank you guys. >> Yeah, we appreciate your
>> Is there any other >> Sorry, Jessica. >> Well, thanks for hanging in there. >> No problem. >> Appreciate uh how much work you've been doing out there. It looks really good. >> Thanks. Yeah, it does look it looks a lot a lot better on it. >> Yeah,
that's it. >> Yeah. All right. >> Thanks for staying with us. Sorry. We We should We should consider maybe like moving inerson business to the front of the agendas in the future or something. I
don't know. We We appreciate you coming in. Thank you. >> I agree. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, all right. So, now we'll jump back up to new business. Is that is that cool, Jessica? For Miller's Meadow
Invasive Species Removal, or are we ready for you, Athena? >> I'm ready. My date starts in 10 minutes. So, >> all right, let me introduce you. So, Miller's Meadow Invasive Species Removal is next on our agenda under new business. This is the Miller's Meadow
Restoration Project and they would like to apply for the quote mass wildlife habitat management grant unquote from the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife for invasive species removal. Athena Bradley is in attendance to discuss this effort and request authorization from
the Conservation Commission to move ahead with this effort. So, the floor is yours, Athena. Okay. Well, I'm assuming you all uh remember my approach for the CPC application that actually uh rumor has
it that we can apply for the CPC under a recreation. >> Correct. >> Yeah, I was going to ask if you if you heard the update on that yet. >> Um I kind of heard it through the rumors, but I won't say who I've heard it from, but I did let Jessica know and
she should be the one that'll find out. And I don't know if she's heard yet. >> I have not heard yet. >> Okay. Well, I can give you a brief I could give you a brief update on that if you'd like. >> Okay. >> Since I'm also on the CPC. Um, basically, we had a very long discussion about it and >> I'm sorry.
>> No, it's okay. And the um the the uh community preservation coalition um that provides technical assistance. They said essentially habitat restoration on open space land that was not acquired with CPA funds is
not eligible. So he said specifically like planting a meadow is not eligible. But some CPCs in other towns have made the argument that if there's conservation land without recreation on
the parcel and you're doing something to add recreation to the parcel, that can count as >> okaying recreation. And the example that they used was if you have like a like the new conservation land that we just
got. If you have this conservation land, there's no public access, no trails, and you're creating trails and you're creating recreation where there was only open space before, then that could qualify as creating recreation. So
essentially we the I forget the wording of the motion in the meeting but essentially it was uh habitat restoration anything you want to do that's habitat restoration is not eligible but if it's specifically
creating recreation where there is none that could be eligible. >> Okay. >> Well um I'll lead Yeah, thank you. Um, I'll lead into what we're proposing for the mass wildlife because, um, we're actually proposing a fishing area. So,
that would be good for CPC as well because we could increase that if that goes okay. Um, okay. So, thank you all for having uh us back and um why. So, this again, it follows up on
the CPC grant and we had we fleshed it out. We now have a 14page application which is going to be ready to go by Friday, hopefully by Thursday because that's when it's due. So our proposal is for the upland on the hillside adjacent
to Cole Rain Street. Uh we want to remove a lot of all the crown vetch that we can get to. So if I don't know if you've been up there, but it is like it was overgrowing our trees and it was overgrowing the whole um hillside. And then uh Peter Wacken and the youth um
conservation folks um hand um tore it out and mowed it and rewacked it and so it was down so that the trees could um prosper and that was and that's all going well. um but it will definitely be coming back. And so what we want to do
is through this grant is to again um hand uh remove it and also the land stewardship would treat the crown veg with the folure herbicide spray and so unfortunately the grant has to be done
by June 20 June 30th. Um, so it would only be one application, but hopefully we'll get more funding so that we can continue that um as an ongoing maintenance um thing for the upland. And um so and then on the reforest
reforestation area where we've been planting all the trees, we will have about seven well we will have 700 trees and shrubs um at least by planted there by uh the end of this winter, early spring. Um and so what we want to do
with that area is again u hand removal of all the invasive species in the around the trees. And so that includes um again the veg but also uh bittersweet and common mug work that has been growing out of the mulch that's we put
all over the trees and they're thriving in that. And uh Peter and his crew did remove a lot of that but it's just hard to get to um with this time limitation now. So that'll be the reforestation area and the hill. And then on the metal
area and then on the repairarian area there's a lot of or I'm sure you know um a total amount of um oriental bittersweet and all kinds of other invasives along the river. And so what we will do is we've uh scouted out a
site and I think Jessica has some photos of that that's on near where you enter into the Miller's Meadow and it's where the trees where it's behind where the trees um have been planted, the young trees have been planted there. And so there are some paths that go down to the
river. And so we decided that that would be a better um be a pretty good vista once we could remove some of the um all of the invasive species there. And that would be a hand removal thing. And he would do that and Peter and his crew
would do that through the spring and then um create a fishing hole area. We'll put some sign promotion out and maybe a sign and uh so it'll be a vista and a fishing hole area and that um so it'll be about 20 25 feet and that'll be
a window cut to take out the the vines from there so that people can walk down and fish off the ledge and I'm sure there are are already people that are fishing down there because there's quite a few trails around there. Um, and so in addition, Peter got another grant uh through the Franklin Conservation
District will allow him to plant more trees. And the trees were donated uh for the from the Connecticut River Conservancy from Eversource. And so there's about um close to a thousand trees or something like that, I believe. And then he's got labor he's got money
from the the conservation district to do pay him and his crew to do the labor for planting that. And that's pretty much it. We'll keep us all busy by the spring. Again, the money has to be spent by the end of spring. So, the project will be concluded by then and hopefully
we'll have continuing funding either through CPC or some other folks to keep the management going. And I know I sent you all a letter and we will do if we get awarded the funds, I understand probably have to do a um pesticide um
herbicide, I'm sorry, herbicide management plan. So, we'll be ready to do that and also uh talk about the hand removal and then anything else that you all need from us. And then from you guys, if you approve our project or
going ahead with submitting the grant, um I would draft a letter because I would need a signed letter from either the chair or Jessica. I don't think it probably matters by Thursday hopefully. >> Okay. You need the sign letter by
Thursday. >> Yeah. Or early Friday morning >> and I can draft the letter for Jessica to to um review and get it to whoever needs to be signed or I can take it to whoever needs to sign it.
Or we can accept a PDF, too. I do that all the time for grant contracts these days. >> Yeah. Wow. You have a lot going on. Um, thanks for the update and I don't know, do we have any discussion
on this? >> It's been a great team effort. I started the grant and based on a lot of the CPC work that we all did and then we put it in a Google folder. So, it's got some good input from the whole team including Eric and Jessica.
I'm curious about your work schedule to like use the the money allocated from the grant and um achieve your goals by the deadline. What did you say? It's June 2026.
>> June 30th. Yeah. No, we um actually Chris Pollin had submitted a proposal to us to do a three-year herbal herbicide management program, but we cut that back. So, he's only going to be able to do one herbicide um
uh removal spraying and that he said he would conclude by the end of June. So, he's he's pretty good of that. And so, that's what he would do. And that's a small area. And then Peter's got a pretty good crew and he's also got other laborers who work with him because
they're the ones who have organized all the planting. We can probably get volunteers as well. Peter's got a good crew of of volunteers that have been helping out. So I don't doubt I mean I do a lot of project implementation. I have confidence that we can pull that
off to do the invasive removals on on the areas that I said. >> And sorry, did you say that there is going to be herbicide or you are planning herbicide use or not? >> Yes, we are just on the bet on the
hillside area. >> Okay. and I just got his revised proposal, so I did not send that out, but it is uh described in our um letter. And that's a um not a very it's just um it's like an
acre. I believe most of our our areas for the test for the management um are just over an acre, all three of them. And that would also be combined with some with hand removal as well from
Peter and his crew. Okay. I guess the the reason I was asking is because I went back and I looked at the um uh the RDA that we approved for uh for work on this parcel before. And
the description that it had was the project proposes to establish 1.65 65 acres of forest and meadow on the slope adjacent to Cole Rain Street. An educational kiosk or sign will be installed and the hole will be backfilled. Oriental bittersweet will be removed along the Green River through
cutings with no herbicide being used. So >> yeah, and that's what we've done with the MVP project. >> Yeah. So, I guess I I was just thinking if I I was just looking at the map, too, and all the way up to the street is about
260 ft from the river. So, some of I don't know exactly where the riverfront area is, but if herbicide was being used in the riverfront area, that might need another application
uh for the wetlands protection act. >> Yeah. No, it's only going to be up on the upland area right along um Cole Rain Street >> and where the the trees are planted. So that's above the metal and it's above where the silage is now because that's
where the metal's going to go and it's all along the hillside is where we're proposing because it's really tough to keep all of the veetch out of there. So if we could do at least one herbicide spraying of the veetch and then along with hand removal um through the spring, we hope
that would get a better dent in it. So even if it's an technically an upland, if it's within 200 feet of the Green River, it's a resource area. >> Okay. I
don't know. It seems to me like it would be 200 feet from I don't know if Jessica has >> Yeah, if it's more than 200 feet, it's not our jurisdiction. But if it or unless it's bordering land subject to flood, which it looks like you also have. Um >> Well, it is subject to flood. not I
don't think on the hillside itself but um >> well it would be an elevation that we would need to look at or a FEMA floodplane map um and that that's a that's an elevation that we would need to you know be jurisdictional for
>> my understanding was that it would require another application but that this meeting like this time was just to kind of get the green light to say yeah go ahead and get the grant and then they would file the application to be able to
like use the grant money. And I also think that like if we had to do any filings just globally, like maybe asking for
um you know, administrative notice before chemical treatments and then annual reports summarizing success and failures, that kind of thing, because there is an EPA permit associated with um herbicide applications. So, we would want to like,
you know, just receive some kind of notice, but that wouldn't be a huge hurdle. Athena, it's just, you know, >> Yeah. No, and I trust Chris because he does this. He's into sustainability and does not use herbicides, you know, just
willy-nilly. So, I think he's really good at that. Um, but yeah, if we could go ahead and submit the grant, we could we could if you if we can't do the herbicides, we just do it all with hand management. So, we can just talk to the
wild mass wildlife folks. And I don't see that as a problem. >> I'm not personally opposed to herbicide treatments. I just think that there's, you know, some more protocols to follow person
personally. That's just my personal opinion, but um >> I don't know. Do any other commissioners have any discussion on that? >> No. And I I was just pointing that out just as like a uh just a note like, you know, if this does go through and there
are pesticides or herbicides, we might, you know, it might need to be filed again. But I don't think that I don't I'm not saying that should hold up this application or anything um uh for the grant. So um I'm I'm actually going to motion to
issue a letter uh of support uh for the grant as requested. >> A second. >> Right. We have a motion and a second. Um I'll do a quick roll call. Erica
>> I >> Travis >> I >> I am also an I. >> Excellent. Um so I should put the uh the protocols to be file uh to be followed and come back to visit you guys if we're
awarded funding. I should put that in the letter. >> Put what in the letter? The protocols. >> Yeah. that we would come back to you and discuss protocols for the herbicide and also look at the FEMA map and make sure that we're if we're not under 200 ft and
just discuss that to see if there are concerns. >> If it's in resource area, you'll just have to submit another like an application. So, if it's an RDA or an NOI, um we'll have to figure out which one,
but >> okay. because because it's I think this is considered a different project than the MVP, right? So, it would need a new application. >> Yeah. And that one and >> also just pointing out that we were the applicant, the conservation commission
was the applicant on the last one. So, >> um like we applied to oursel to do it. >> Okay. >> So, it would be we it would be us applying again >> since we're the managing the property. But yes, Athena, good good desktop work
uh to look at that whether you're in bordering land subject to flood, i.e. the 100red-year flood plane. >> Okay. >> Or 200 foot riverfront. And yeah, that's all that's all good stuff. >> Not not to volunteer someone else too much, but um I think Jessica could probably help out with that a bit too.
>> I'll help. I don't know what Wait, what am I helping with? >> Just determine like whether they want to do anything in a resource area that would >> Oh, yeah. No, no. I'm your girl. I just I just need to like have the GIS in front of me and I I'll I'll get you all the information.
>> Yeah, she's a wiz with that stuff. >> No, yeah, I understand. It's wonderful to have her. Um, okay, Jessica, I will uh draft this up and could probably use some input into you as to how did you get the letter to are you in tomorrow?
>> Yes. 9 to two for the rest of the week. >> You're awesome. Okay, I'll be uh in touch then. Okay, sounds good. >> Awesome. Thank you all. >> Thank you so much. Thanks for staying with us. I'm sorry. >> My pleasure. I always enjoy your guys'
meetings. Be well everybody. >> Hey, >> thanks. Have a good night. Bye, Athena. >> Bye. >> Okay, so next on our agenda, um we just have old business. Uh we already addressed 30 Adams Road, but we have the
Community Preservation Act, CPA application discussion. uh commission to review the rough draft of the full application and discuss letters of support received. >> Do we have anybody to open that up? Um
>> yeah, I I can do it. I'm really excited to report we have five letters of support already. >> Yep. We have um from Jonah Keane, the O open space task force, the SGIC,
from Eric uh the director of land planning, and from the Franklin Land Trust. >> Excellent. That's >> Yeah, >> I'm really hoping for the Agricultural Commission. I think that'll like be really uh
>> Yeah, I think uh Elizabeth was going to follow up. >> I think so. >> You know, I just want to point out I want to make sure everyone has her correct email because she did update it and I tried to reply and I got a weird kickback. Um so does
everyone have her updated address? Oh, >> I did get that when you said, by the way, don't say whatever. >> Don't say it. >> Just to make sure that because I feel like communication might be breaking down. >> Um,
>> so everyone >> I did get that when you responded to the email and I saw her address and >> Jessica, reach out to me offline if you can't get her because I have her mobile number. >> Oh, I I have it too. I just
>> Okay. >> Um because a kind of like a template was sent out and I just want to make sure you know she's receiving it because I know she was going to follow up with >> Gotcha. >> the ad guy. So, okay. So, um uh let's see this.
>> Oh, yeah. Then I' I've been working on the application. >> I can share my screen. Uh let me just >> Okay. Yeah. >> I'm just gonna I'll be Can I just like use the ladies room really quick? I'll be so so fast. So fast. So fast. Yeah. >> Okay.
>> Okay. So, it's up on the screen. >> Let's wait for her to get back. >> Okay. It might um sometimes when you look at it in Google Drive, it cut like some of the text boxes you have to scroll down through. And I think you can't do that
on like you might have to download it and just I noticed that like after um like when you sent the link out um I noticed some of the text boxes there's like too much text and you can't see it all. But if you if you have it open in
like Adobe Acrobat or whatever you can scroll down in the text boxes >> it's hard to write enough you know it's not too much to fit in those boxes. Oh yeah, right. Okay, so that's better, right? >> I think so. Yeah. >> Okay. No specific product.
>> I don't know why that one has different font. Oh, I think the font like gets smaller as you fit. >> Oh, it's like selfcorrect. >> Oh, changes. Yeah. Or it looks like it almost looks like it's bold. The number two. >> Yeah. I don't know. I didn't make it bold.
>> Maybe not. Maybe it's just >> Should I Should I >> When Kristen gets back, should I >> I'm here. I'm here. Sorry. >> Oh, hi. >> That was so fast. I know. Sorry. Sorry. >> Uh, should I do you want me to read this out loud for record?
>> I don't know if we have to read through everything. I mean, I tried to send it early enough that if people wanted to review it before the meeting, they could look through it. Um, but I know I didn't send it as early as I had hoped. So, >> well, it's it's pretty much what we
talked about, right? just that we wanted to try to try to build a bank account kind of thing so that if we got some land >> Yeah. >> we could purchase it. >> Yeah. And that first one kind of describes um like what it can be used
for overall and how it gives us like the we can you know have speed and flexibility to preserve open space land by having the money on hand and it we would just need to vote to use it and it doesn't require any other approvals at that point.
>> Um and then there's a that says there we could use it to do any of the following. purchase land for conservation. Pay for title searches, legal fees, other costs to assist in the donation of land to the city to become conservation land. Pay for all or part of the cost of conservation restrictions on private property to permanently conserve it. Pay
for all or part of the cost for agricultural preservation restrictions on private agricultural land to permanently protect it from development and to rehabilitate any conservation land that is purchased with CPA funding in the future. So overall, that's what we could use it for. Do we want Emily
uh to chime in or has she already? >> I haven't I haven't heard anything from her specifically um in in regards to this full application >> since she, you know, is sort of like involved in grant writing and that kind of stuff. Um
>> but >> I forgot she wasn't going to be here today. >> Yeah. Do do we need a vote on this tonight? I mean, this is all gravy to me, so I don't know why anybody would be opposed to it, but do we need anybody's >> We do. >> It's due November 17th. This has to be
in by November 17th. >> Yeah. And the next We don't have a meeting until after that. But last she did give her input last meeting when we talked about the pre-application and she did say, you know, the things
that it could be used for uh for conservation restrictions and I could go back through the meeting and send you, you know, her >> sure >> her like what she said, but >> yeah. >> Um >> if that would help. >> Sure. I mean,
>> it all sounds >> good and better to me, so I don't know. >> Yeah. I mean, I guess the the main thing is like we know that it can be used for all these things and we know
why it would be useful. But the hard part now is there's a limited amount of CPA funding. Why should the CPC use the funding for this instead of other projects that are up for funding
this year? So, um it's really this is like the competitive part where we have to like sell the project >> and why it's important. So, >> I mean diversifying investments is important, right? This is an investment.
>> Yeah. Yeah. And I will say one one comment that I heard was, you know, right now the CPC um you know when a project comes up, people have to do this whole application and describe what the project is and the CPC gets to decide whether to recommend
funding for that specific project or not. So the comment was, well, if we put money in this conservation fund, then the CP does CPC doesn't have any say at that point in what it's used for other than that it has to be used for one of these things, but this specific project
they wouldn't they wouldn't get a say in. >> So they're kind of it's kind of the CP would be giving up some control over what CPA money is used for. >> So was that a negative comment kind of thing? >> Yes. Yeah, that was >> okay. But on but on the other hand, I
mean from our point of view is that you do have to I mean go through all this and wait and wait for them to make a decision and if we need the money right then we don't have time to do that. Yeah. >> Um, so that's our, you know, kind of our point of view is, you know, we don't we
don't want to like do anything behind their backs, but sometimes we need money right away. And, you know, >> yeah, >> I will say if if this is super competitive, maybe for number three, um, for who will benefit from this project
and how slash why, we should, yeah, harp on the climate resiliency. So, there is a climate resiliency tool um which I can share a link for if that's relevant, but I think that like
we should just like beef that up a lot um because >> there's a lot of funding available for climate resiliency and um particularly for any you know permanent protected land that's
like within jurisdictional resourc areas or riverfront or flood plane, you know, >> Mhm. >> that's not going to be otherwise subject to development um or encroachment. I would think would be
great. Or what if there were any uh flood plane restoration opportunities going forward um for problems in downstream watersheds or whatever? uh that kind of thing.
>> Mhm. This is where I wish Athena was writing this because I'm sure she would do it. Um yeah, I don't know if you want to scroll through just a little bit more. Um
>> uh how is it creative? So yeah, in this one number four, um you know, I I said like this is the first time that this would be done in Greenfield and why it would be great because it would give us the ability to uh get the money quickly. Um, and then I did point out that other
municipalities are doing this, putting CPA money into conservation funds and showed that in Northampton they've done that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2020. >> Yeah. So, it's our turn
>> for $627,000. >> Um, so >> it's been like 15 years of them doing it. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. We're also on the >> like a weird unique thing that's never been done before, you know, like this is a >> thing and that we would like it to be a
routine thing in Greenfield. Um >> well, I think that this like this concept of what like how we want to use it, it requires like vision, right? And everything that they have been looking at up until this point, it's almost like
two-dimensional and this is threedimensional. Like there's like we need to be able to grow this account to have an impact. >> And you know if if we don't get you know it's just there's like a sense of
urgency just to grow it. >> You know it's like hurry up and wait like you have to have something to make a a dent whatsoever to have an impact. And um you know if they're just looking for that kind of immediate
like gratification of seeing you like then nothing's ever going to happen for >> for open space. >> Yeah. And that's another thing I'm pointing out is like we haven't funded any open space projects yet through CPC. And
>> the CPA law was originally intended to give money to towns so they could buy open space. Like that was the whole point of it in the beginning. And we haven't in Greenfield, we haven't used any money to preserve open space. It's all been recreation and historic housing
which are all great things too. but um hasn't met the open space. So I in number five there I put in quotes open space priorities from the CBC plan and then how this would like address those
different um priorities. >> That's good. >> Speaking the language. >> Yep. Uh, and number six, that's what we'll need to fill out some more with like letters of support. I figured like at
the very end, however many letters of support we have, like fill that out in number six. Um, number seven, I think, is kind of important because a lot of times in the CPC meetings, it's like, well, you know, we don't have enough money to go around.
What if we just gave you a little bit of money? like what would that do? And um you know, I just wanted to point out that even with even if the full request of $50,000 uh which we could lower if we think
that's too ambitious, um even if that is not uh uh you know, if they if they don't give us $50,000, there's still things that could be done now, you know, with um a smaller amount of money. And also, you
know, it once the money's in there, well, you know, it stays there until we spend it. So, >> is it in escrow or is it just like does it accumulate any money? >> If it doesn't >> That's a good question. It's held by the
treasurer, the city treasurer. And I don't It might be one of those where there's like a 01% >> Oh, great. Yeah. >> It's negligible. Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. >> But also that's this is another thing
that like when I first became the chair of the conservation commission and I talked to >> like the city finance people and they didn't even believe me that we had such a fund because >> yeah it's not allowed for commissions
and city boards to have like a revolving fund. And I was like, well, it's generally not allowed, but it is state law conservation fund and it was established in Greenfield 1971 or whatever. So, um, so that's another
thing that, uh, we might have to, you know, there might be a little friction there trying to actually use it if they don't even understand what we have and how it works. Just to point that out. But that's a reason to have money and to
use it so that you know like city finance people know you know like get used to that happening and um like know how it works. When when are the decisions made by? >> Um,
April or May. Okay. >> Something like that. And then yeah, like beginning of the fiscal year, like in July, that's when the money would um be transferred. >> Yeah. State agency fiscal year end is June 30th. So
>> yeah. Um Yeah. I don't know if you'll scroll down. I think next is funding. Oh, budget. I um yeah, it's kind I can't really like fill out what an exact budget would be since, you know, we don't know what the project would be,
but uh Emily did send me um some like budget information. I don't know if I don't know if you uploaded. >> I did. I have. Okay. >> Um I think Yeah, I think that's pretty much all that's left here other than like maintenance. Uh if you scroll down a little bit, there's like a maintenance
section. And uh I just said, you know, it depends on what type of project it would be. You know, if if conservation land was acquired, then the conservation commission would be doing on ongoing maintenance and you know. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's hard to be you can't like be
specific about any of this stuff. >> Yeah. If you want to take a look at the budget real quick, uh it was just a quick um estimate um Emily put together with her colleagues of how um I I kind of like reworked it a little
bit to make it a little more readable for the CPC. Um but basically at the top it's just like how would land values be determined? It depends on the type of land or what the project would be. And then there's this big section about agricultural preservation restrictions
and how that works and how you know they need a 5% local match um in a right to if a if a right to farm bylaw has been established and it has in Greenfield. So um that this conservation fund could be
used for that 5% local match. Um and I also added this quote from the community preservation coalition's website. The Community Preservation Coalition is basically like MACC for us. Um, and it says, you can see right there, one of
the challenges to using CPA funds for APR projects is the APR program has a year- round rolling application procedure. Thus, an APR project may be approved and ready for closing at any time during the year. Since all CPA projects must be approved by a community's legislative body, there could be timing issues that might
frustrate the use of CPA funds for the APR local match. to avoid timing issues. Some community preservation committees recommend that the legislative body transfer CPA funds to the municipalities conservation fund ahead of time. So that's what we want to do. So I put that
in there as a quote uh to show like you know >> it's even on the website. >> That's why it's a good reason to do it. That's why that's why it's a good reason. Yeah. And then at the bottom, the next page is just um uh some estimated costs associated with
conservation land projects. Um just to kind of give an an estimate for, you know, obviously we don't know like if a parcel was going to be purchased. It depends how big it is, where it is. So we don't really know
like what, you know, how much the purchase price would be or whatever. But this these are all the other like fees and appraisals and everything that would be associated with it. >> So in the B budget section of the full application you wrote >> I wrote see attach. Yeah. See the
attachment. Um yeah. So that's basically what I have. Um I guess the main question that I have is uh I know we're almost at 8:30 here tonight. Um the uh
total amount of money that the CPC has um this year is like just over $200,000 and um I had originally put 50,000 on here just because it would be nice to like you
know get a nice little bump there in the conservation fund and since there aren't any other open face projects. However, um uh I was going to see if I could find it really quick. Um there is a specific
amount that uh Okay, so the CPC has $262,000 this year for projects. Um, we haven't gotten all the applications in yet, so I don't know what the total amount of all the applications are going to be, but I
bet it's going to be like $400,000 or something. So, it's going to be pretty competitive. Um, but >> $27,600 of that funding has to be used for either open space projects or recreation projects.
So, um, a more conservative approach might be, um, requesting $27,600 and just say all of that open space recreation money, give that to us
because that money um, it doesn't say recreation on the website, but it is for recreation, too. Um, you know, recreation projects have gotten to date, oh my gosh, I don't know, 400,000 or 300,000, something like that, but there
hasn't been a single open space project funded yet. Um, so I think it's reasonable to say, and I don't think there were that many um all all of the pre-applications. So, we have to submit a pre-application, then a full
application. All of the pre-applications are online right now and I'm trying to think um which ones were moving forward and I don't think there were very many recreation projects this year that were moving forward.
So, it might be a fairly easy ask for well, I guess the only recreational one moving forward that I know of is the Miller's Meadow uh
playground. That one didn't go forward. That one didn't go forward. Beacon Field. I think maybe Beacon Field cornhole boards went forward. But so it's Beaconfield, cornhole boards, uh the
Miller's Meadow, whatever they want to do for recreation there, and then us. Um that $27,600 has to go towards one of those or it doesn't have to go towards any of them
and it could be saved until the next year, but it probably will go to to one of those or split in some way. So anyway, I don't know. Does that make sense? Uh >> do you think asking for more is going to
hurt us or >> a little bit? >> You do. Okay. Because I mean because you because you did write in there that we'll we'll take whatever you give us, you know, kind of thing. Yeah. Um, >> I think I think that might be like
Kristen with the with the uh uh rain garden earlier, like, well, if you only needed $27,000, why are we asking for 50, >> you know? Um, yeah. So, I I don't know. So,
>> well, I'm just I mean I just you know well I mean if you think it might hurt us but I was going to say you know you know if we ask for 50 and they just say no we'll give you we'll give you 30 that's more than the 27. So you know we might get you know >> Yeah. Isn't that like negotiation 101?
>> I don't know. I don't know. I mean >> but as to lose out on something by asking too low you know kind of thing. >> Yeah. Well, the main reason I bring it up is because last year I I think in the first two years we did a lot of like oh
like okay well if we fund this one half and we fund that one half then we can like stretch it out at you know in the CPC and then last year it was basically like well let's go down the list of the no the ones that we want to fund fully and then see if we have any money left
over after that. So they were prioritizing at least last year it was like you know these are the ones we want to fund fully and then if there's anything left maybe we'll you know put it towards one of the other projects. So that's sort of the
reason I thought of that cuz you know right now we would be asking for um you know a fifth almost of the total CPC budget for the year and there's uh quite a few applications but not not
all of them are moving forward but yeah so anyway yeah this is why I left it as 50,000 for right now because I'm like I don't want to ask too little, but uh I think it would increase our odds if we did ask for less. So,
>> and it's our first time. Northampton's been going after this for like a decade. So, let's see how our first time goes and we can learn from lessons next year then. Well, and also I guess I'll point out that um like on the community preservation coalition's website, it has
a a web they have a web page specifically talking about like conflicts of interests and how having a member on uh you know like on the CPC you're required to have someone from the conservation commission, planning board, historical commission, yada yada yada,
and how it's not a conflict of interest for someone to be on both boards. even voting on a project from the board that they're from. So like there's no conflict for me talking about and voting
on this application from the conservation commission at CPC because in both cases I'm doing it in the public interest and it's not, you know, it's not going to benefit me financially or anything. >> It's not a conflict of interest. So,
I'll be there to, you know, talk about all this and say like, well, we could at least do 27,600. So, you know, I plan on doing that. But, um, yeah, just thought I'd point that out, too. But, it might be good at some point. Um, like uh when reviewing
applications, a lot of times they'll have the applicant there to like ask questions. And so I don't know if um if like Elizabeth could come or Jessica or someone just someone other than me so it's not just me on both committees
talking about it, you know. So >> Emily would be good too. I mean >> or Emily. Yeah. >> Yeah. She'd be great. >> So just throwing that out there as a thought, too. But I don't want to take up too much time. But I do I do need to This does need to get submitted by
November 17th. So, >> and we don't have a meeting before then. So, do we have to do anything right now or >> um I think uh
I mean just to make it like the most official I guess maybe we could just vote to say that we are going to submit the application after revisions that were discussed tonight. maybe um or then Jessica will submit it
for us. Um and that I so I'll I'll make a couple changes. I guess I can I can send an updated one with a couple changes with um like adding more of the climate change stuff in and then maybe Jessica like right before sending it in filling
out the section of like how many letters of support we've got. Um, >> okay. >> And I don't just look through there are I think there were there was another section like what date was this submitted? Like I don't I don't know when it's gonna be submitted. So >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay.
>> So I'll I'll make a motion to uh that Jessica will submit this application for the conservation commission to the CPC um after revisions that were discussed tonight.
I'll second it. >> So, I'm sorry. We're motioning that Jessica will do this. >> Yeah. And she's our agent. She's >> I know. Okay. Just making sure. That sounded weird. Okay. We have a motion and a second. I'll do a roll call.
Erica, >> I. >> Travis. >> I. >> I am also an I. Jessica, are you an I? >> Yeah. No, it's okay. I'll I'm not doing too much. I'm just really emailing it. >> Yeah, just emailing it
>> because yeah, they they write me back and and the contact on the application >> and thank you Travis for everything that you put into this already. >> I guess I mean the conservation commission is doing this via Jessica
>> via our agent. >> Well, thank you Jessica and also thank you Travis. >> Yeah. All right, I'm going to move on to our next item on our agenda, which I think is our last item. The Conti Golly Conservation Area discuss a thank you
letter from the commission, a site visit out to the land, as well as adding some signs marking the boundaries. >> Okay, so it's official. It's like official official now. We went to the registry of deeds. Um, and it's, yeah,
it's an official conservation area. Um, I drafted up some I know. It's so great. Um, I drafted up a couple thank yous. Um the mayor sent one for their um official
like records for tax purposes, but I thought we should send one too cuz we're the ones who kind of received it and are managing it and been communicating with them the whole time. Um so I just I just
wrote up a letter. I wanted to see if I have your blessing to send it. Uh, send it. >> That was so thoughtful. Let's see it. >> Okay. >> I thought there I thought it was good. There was one place where it actually >> Oh, did you read it?
>> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Um, in the in the eastern one, I think there was one place where I don't know word actually pointed out like this didn't make sense or something and it's like blue underlined. I I on behalf of the Greenfield Conservation Commission,
I want to express our deepest gratitude for your incredibly generous gift of two parcels of land. >> Yeah. >> Got it. >> Um, >> but yeah, I thought it was great. I thought it was very Yeah. >> Should I Should I read it aloud or
should I share my screen? >> Well, >> what would you guys like? >> Yeah. Yeah, I mean I haven't read it yet, so I wouldn't mind seeing it really quickly and it would make sense to share it in a public meeting. And that is such a thoughtful I don't know if we've ever done that before. Like you're the first one who's ever thought of that at
>> since my tenure anyways. That's really thoughtful. >> We'll just send a thank you. I mean they gave it >> I mean well I don't know if we've got a bunch of hand but >> yeah it's been a long time and I've only been on the con for five years but still that's very thoughtful. Good good job.
Um, okay. So, I said, "On behalf of the Greenfield Concom, I want to express our deepest gratitude for your incredibly incredibly generous gift of two parcel of Atlanta March 19th, 2025 assessor parcel this and that. This remarkable
contribution of 12.296 and 14.186 acres respectively is a permanent gift to the community and will be protected for future generations. As you know, the city of Greenfield formally accepted this donation following a vote by the
city council on August 20th, 2025. The deed was recorded at the registry of deeds on October 14th, 2025. This gift of land will be managed by the conservation commission used for conservation and passive recreation purposes. And side note, this is like
for their record so that they have when they're dealing with like taxes and stuff, they need kind of like a formal declaration of like the facts. Um, so that's why I was getting so specific. But back to the letter, a decision of
this magnitude requires careful thought and consideration. Your commitment to the long-term well-being of the community is an inspiration to us all. These actions ensure the property's natural resources and scenic qualities will be preserved and a lasting part of the city's legacy. Uh, please keep this
letter with your d records of the donation. Thank you again for the extraordinary generosity. Maybe I said generosity a few too many times. Uh, and then sincerely Jessica Seagull, conservation agent. Um,
so yeah, I signed it because I opened it with on behalf of the Green Pill Concom. Um, >> yeah, >> I would like to. So anyway, >> any uh feedback. >> So So where to underlined I think you
want the word of that talking about Erica >> in the beginning. Okay, >> I'll edit that. And my only other thought was, you know, because you were being very specific and I don't know if it make it would sound make it sound nice was to say maybe following a unanimous vote by the city council.
>> Oh, yeah. Yeah. >> Yes. >> Was unanimous. That's right. >> It was. So, I mean, I'm not sure what we'd do if it wasn't list like since it was since it was >> it was
>> it makes it sound even more like you. Yeah. >> Yeah. Exactly. Exactly. And everybody appreciated it and you know >> Yeah. Everyone did. Yeah. Absolutely. I was wondering if we could add the name of the conservation land like maybe where it says this gift of land would
managed by the conservation commission as the Kygully conservation there. >> Okay, that's a good idea and used for conservation. >> Yeah, then we'll make more tags like we have for Griswald. Love it.
>> Love it. >> Um Okay. Yeah, I'll I'll make those edits and I'm gonna mail them out tomorrow. And I I do think it's interesting >> think it's interesting just like on a
note about the dates like how long this process takes. You know, we've been talking to them for over a year, right? >> Um >> and you know, they they made it official on their end on
the 19th, but it took until you know, October. So, Six months. Yeah, >> that's not even that long. Actually, that's a smooth process. >> Yeah, I know. I was like, have we heard from the lawyer yet? Have we learned I just I'm like, let's you know, cuz they
need they need it to happen by a certain point like in the tax year for them to do the stuff on their own. >> I was I was sweating it a little bit, but we did it. So, um >> Good job. It's very happy. Hey, we
haven't had an actual donation in a long time. So, that was really exciting. >> Well, so if I just want to add to the excitement a touch. So, um Randy, one of the donators
brother reached out >> and he's considering donating his parcel just to the south, which is this highlighted one. Um, >> does it have a road to it on the south?
>> It doesn't matter if it's contiguous with the other open >> I think well traffic supposed to think about for access right >> on the east. >> Yeah, it's just the shelter. So basically he just called right >> but there is access but there would be
public access off that end that dead end right by the end of R 3720-0. So, there could be another public access point on the south. Is that what you're thinking, Travis? >> Yeah. I'm not sure that's actually a road, though, because it doesn't connect to anything
>> on the right. >> Oh, over here. This >> Yeah. Yeah. >> No. See where your white or >> No, that's like that's someone >> ement or something. >> Yeah. I don't think that's that's not like a real road. See, it goes from the back of someone's house. >> Um, so so basically
>> he just called. Um, so this is like very preliminary. These weird little boxes are actually like parcels within the parcel that are not owned by him, which is super strange. >> Really? Wow.
>> And his other brother is up here and when I send um this person's name is Thomas. Um, when I send him information, he's going to talk to his other brother. So anyway, this is there's there's potential. And then
there is like a little driveway pulloff on the other brother's land. >> Um, but it's all very steep, you know, it'd fit like a car. Um, so
and the city owns this parcel up here, 37-38, but I drove by it today and it's basically bedrock. It doesn't look like you can I don't think we're we'd be able to create a
public access, but that ideally that would be great right off Mohawk Trail and then you could like hike up. >> Anyway, there's um this ball is has not stopped moving. There is momentum and um I will keep you guys updated. But the other
thing I wanted to do besides um uh besides the thank yous tonight was just talk about if you guys want to go there with me. Um because I'd like to do a site visit when it's not frozen and um
just check it out now that we own it and then you know potential signage. Um, it's definitely not ready for public like we need to like talk about public access and trails and you know maybe that's a CPA application in the future
um down the road but um anyway anyone up for a site visit? >> Yeah, circulate some dates. I mean, weekdays are always hard for me cuz, you know, I work, but um >> yeah, >> you know, circulate some dates. That' be
>> okay. >> Good start. >> Okay, great. >> Awesome. Um, so we don't need to like do any vote or anything on that. That's just an update.
>> I don't think a vote needs to happen. >> All right. Uh well then next on our agenda we have enforcement updates. Any new updates on enforcements or project monitoring correspondence or site visits? >> Um
no. Well, then that concludes our agenda. And then just as a reminder, our next hearing or next meeting, which was normally scheduled for November 11th,
was cancelled, right? >> Yes. >> Veterans Day. >> All right. Veterans Day. And then the one after that is the 25th, which is kind of close to Thanksgiving, but it's only 2 days before Thanksgiving. So, we could still do that, right? We're still
hanging on to the 25th. >> Yes. >> So, our next scheduled conservation commission meeting is November 25th, 2025. >> Yes. >> Okay. Just making sure um we are on
record. I will definitely be there. Do we have any other business that wasn't um you know foreseen or reasonably anticipated that anybody wants to address?
>> I do not. >> I'll move to ajourning. >> Love it. >> I heard an motion in a second. I'll take a roll call. Erica >> I. >> Travis. I
>> I'm also an I I'm like turning into a pumpkin. I'm so tired. >> Well, it's good to see you guys. Sorry I was I had technical difficulties tonight. Um >> that was actually not bad. I don't I mean yeah >> really I I tried to log into my phone all fast. That was so frustrating that
my computer is like shut. It was like we're rebooting now. I was like what? I'm in the middle of a meeting. >> This is so annoying. Well, probably I probably would not have even noticed except that he said something like, "Oh, Kristen, does that make it better?" Or like it was like pause.
I'm like vlogging into my phone all fast. I'm like, "God damn, she's still looking for something like you know." >> I'm so sorry about that. That was Yeah, that that was a one ina million thing. So, all right. Well, I guess have a wonderful Veterans Day.
[Music]