--------- Okay. Um All right. Welcome. Um uh let's let me Hold on. I need to record this meeting. I think >> it's being it's recording. >> Oh, it's recording. >> It is recording. Yeah. >> Okay, perfect. Great. All right. Welcome
to the uh July 28th um 2026 meeting of the Milton Community Preservation Committee. Um my name is Tom Callahan, the chair of the committee and representing the affordable housing trust and we'll take the role. Uh uh Kathleen
>> here. Do you want to just introduce >> Oh, Kathleen O'Donnell, general member. Yeah. >> Steve, sorry. Steve O'Donnell Historical Commission. >> Rob >> Rob Lee Bash Parks Commission. >> Jenny
uh Jenny Russell, vice chair and member at large. >> Robbie Robert Powers for the Housing Authority. >> Hal Hal Munger, planning board. >> Pete Pete Jackson, treasurer and at
large member. >> And Kim Cam Jackson, committee clerk. >> Great. All right. Thank you everybody for um making yourselves available. Um hopefully we can get through this. It's
a short agenda, so hopefully we can get through this uh um pretty quickly. I know people have other commitments uh later tonight, including myself, actually. So um there's some incentive there. Um, so, um, the first order of business is, um,
I'm not looking at the agenda here. That that would help. Um, I just want to make sure, yeah, is review, discussion, approval of a letter to eligible applicants explaining the committee's recent decision to recommend at least one project for consideration at the fall of town meeting. Earlier today, um,
I sent around a draft of what that letter might look like. Um, Jenny, uh, thank you for taking the lead on that. and Jenny and I collaborated on on that draft um um this morning and just um
wanted obviously to get it in everybody's hands. So, let me um um call that draft up if I can. Um hold on. Sorry about this.
>> You also sent it around, Tom. So, >> I I did, but I also just felt like >> Yep. >> If I can have it on the screen, we might be able to make edits in real time here. Um,
so, um, share my screen. Okay. All right. So, there's the letter. I think this is the same version. Yep. Um yeah. All right. So, um I guess let's
open it up for discussion. Um um comments on on this draft um or proposed edits if people want to really jump right into it. But um but um obviously what we're trying to do, you know, we had some discussion at our last meeting
about this. What we're trying to do is um be transparent about um the process looking a little different or or being a little different this year um with the with the recommendation of Tucker and um while we haven't voted yet on a fire
station recommendation, you know, the anticipation is that that recommendation might come before our normal, you know, spring u process. So, um, obviously we haven't received anything updated information from fire station building
committee yet, so that's still to be determined, but but, um, that's that's what this letter is referencing. Um, and, um, you know, just an informal conversation. I'm not sure if there are projects that would
choose to try to speed up or or not choose, but that need to speed up their timeline. Um, but we're trying to be transparent about, you know, our actions and just inform inform all the applicants. So, so let's open it up for
comments. Um, Rob, why don't you start us off? >> Yeah, sure. So, appreciate the letter. I think it's great for to let folks know why why the decision was made uh why the committee went ahead for the fall and
letting applicants know. So, I appreciate that. think it's a good letter. My only my only uh feedback is whether we need to put in the do do we need you know I guess is that last paragraph where it says we anticipate
most of the projects have applied for CPA funding this year can remain on schedule. I'm just wondering is that necessary to put in or should we remove it? you know, I I would open it up for discussion whether that's the case or not, but I think it's good for transparency that you know that that we
say that this is going to happen. And then just for future reference, not specific on the letter is I don't think it's a time in place for tonight, but I think we should discuss the the process uh moving forward. And I know um we've
had conversations about that. Um, I think we just need to let applicants know kind of the process and and how we're going and whether we want to have two, you know, whether there's like an open enrollment or whether we change the the process uh potentially. I think
that's all for another um time and something that we should tackle in the future. Thanks. >> Okay. >> Yeah, that's for another time. I I agree and I agree with you, Rob, that Pete. Sorry. Sorry. I don't have a way to raise my Okay, >> let's go. Go ahead.
>> I don't have a way to raise my hand. I'm on my phone. So, >> okay. Um, >> either way. >> Yeah, either way. Steve had his hand up and Kathleen had it. >> That's fine. I'll go after Kathleen. >> Okay. So, Steve Steve, go ahead. >> Just a technical item. Friday is
September 25, not 26. Oh, good point. That's an important maybe technical, but it's very important. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thanks, Steve. Um, Kathleen,
>> um, one of the things that that first paragraph in this round, we received a record 22 applications requesting over 6 million. The way that reads, it sort of sounds like 22 applications could have requested $6 million each. Um and so so
it seemed to me that it should be said record applications um totaling uh requests of over $6 million because I just want to make >> sure that it's all of that. Um and then um uh
changes as I type them. >> I do. Yeah. And so the other the other um you know issue I have is that you aren't you know this is a technical one for typo you know editing thing is that you've capitalized annual town meeting but not fall town meeting and those
should be consistent and I had a teacher in high school who would never let us have a sentence that said this is a firm deadline. It's this what it has to modify a noun. So this date is a firm
deadline. This So just you can't have a sentence that just says this is and go straight to a verb. So um uh that's just something that was hammered into my head by um Mr. Fuller and I can't get over it.
>> And so anytime you've got while this does not guarantee funding, you should that's in the third line of the third paragraph. you know, while this what you know, this uh this recommendation does not guarantee funding. Yeah, it's just it's not clear what you're talking about
there unless you modify it with a noun. >> Thank you, Mamarin High School. >> I just I just passed through Mamarin. >> Yeah. So, as I said, fall town meeting and it's you fixed it in one spot, but you didn't fix it in the next one, which
is at the end of that paragraph. >> Okay. I'm Okay. And I think I think keeping with that um I wouldn't I wouldn't um capitalize fall because I only reason I capitalize annual is that
is the official title of that meeting and and and technically the fall doesn't have it's just >> special town meeting. >> It's a special town meeting, >> right? >> That's fine. But yeah, I'm sorry about that but I you know I can't let it stand like that.
>> Yeah. No, this is great. This is great. Um, Pete, >> um, I want to support Rob's suggestion that we not leave it open for people to come, you know, and start asking to be considered again because that'll open up a can of worms for us.
>> Um, you know, to have to meet again and and other people might flood in trying to get early decisions and things like that. So this is just a decision we made and I would think we should leave it leave that whole idea of inviting additional people out.
>> So would you so Pete you're saying this this sentence I have highlighted would would we delete that entirely. >> Yes. Yeah. while while we anticipate I would think that another thing that we
might consider but I don't know but I drafted after the budget overrides I could say the committee has committed $300,000 to a project to be presented in the fall STM leaving approximately
$700,000 for new projects with about 16 projects yet to be considered and that gives them you know and Again, I don't know if we want to get into that detail, but that would give them an idea of the universe that they're competing against, you know, with 16 projects, but, you
know, I don't know if we want to get that specific or not. >> Okay. All right. Hold on. Let me just take all these comments and let's hold on and that I cross that out, but you know, I obviously want to get further feedback on this, too. So, I just trying
to keep a little bit of a ongoing record here and I'm sure Cam will uh correct me if I don't get the record straight here. So, um All right. So, uh Steve, I think, and then Jenny, >> um real quick, with respect to
Kathleen's high school teacher, what about this deadline is firm. >> No, we just said this date is a firm deadline. That's fine. He put in the word. Yeah. >> Invites you to submit an application due February. You know, September. This date
is a firm dead. That's fine. >> Yeah. Steve, I don't know if you can see I'm making changes as we speak. So, I mean, this deadline is firm is is fine sentence two, but I don't think >> I think it's stronger to say this date is a firm deadline. >> Yeah. Okay. >> I think that's a stronger voice.
>> I didn't see that. >> Yeah. All right, Jenny. >> Um, I'm not sure I agree with Pete's detail whether we need that. Um, >> the extra sentence he read.
>> Yeah. Yeah. I would be hesitant to get into that level of detail. Um but I think Rob, what you were talking about was um being transparent about the fact that this presents a new um evolution for the
committee and it opens up the process uh discussion which we will have. And so I think what you were getting at was um and actually we had it in an initial paragraph that um that this this this
will um that we're not this isn't just a one-time thing, but this opens up the door for us to re-evaluate our application process. >> Yeah. May maybe there's something that says um the committee will is is evolving the application process for for
later maybe like next year or whatever. I think that might be something fine to say. I and I I don't know Pete if we need to get into the details of the funding. I think this is enough but to just say like you know we we understand that the you know as the years go on um
you know situations change and such so the committee's evolving um the process as we move further you know but we don't want to say that for this year obviously for for later years I think is is more important.
Yeah, I don't want to pre I don't I think that's good. I think I don't want to prejudge that where we're going to end up, right? Because we could end up with something that looks >> maybe slightly different but largely similar to our current process, but we could
>> but we could end up with something >> that's you know two rounds or you know um like that. So, I would be hesitant in this letter to get um for some of the same reasons people said to us to >> Yeah,
>> I understand that. >> Yeah. Yeah. Um and let's see. Um Jenny, >> no, it's okay. It's >> okay. Um >> yeah, I guess we need to add a sentence. It it does beg the question about
whether we want to invite still current applicants to come before us since we um allowed one whether we want to open that door. And by taking out this last sentence, it basically does not open the door for that.
>> Right. Right. That's why I that's why I put it in there. Um I think um well this is a kind this sentence is actually a combination of something Jenny wrote and something I wrote. Um um so um yeah I
walked away from the last meeting feeling like at least some members of the committee might want to put that in there um and invite that. I you know the sentence is structured frankly to say
we're not expecting a flood of you to come forward >> obviously uh I don't know it might be encouraging and discouraging all in one sentence um is is what I maybe was going for but um but I you know I would defer
to the committee's wisdom here about whether or not this is advisable or needed or um Um, I suppose you could make the assumption
that just this letter without that sentence >> uh to the to someone who feels under severe time pressure will likely result in them reaching out to us regardless of whether
the sentence is in or out, right? I mean, if somebody reads this letter and says, "Oh, >> one project is or at least one project's going to the fall." Um um we have, >> you know, um it doesn't invite that clearly without that sentence in there,
but it also um you know, this this disclosure of the fact kind of opens up that possibility, I guess. >> Do we think we have anybody that is anxious that way? I not that I not that
I know of. Um I mean obviously we don't know what we don't know because we haven't asked that question in that way before. Um but um but not that I am aware of. >> I mean the people who want the I mean people that want the money now have been
pretty clear about that. I think there's the danger that they they would that they think, "Oh, maybe I can get my, >> you know, my project considered in advance of having to compete with all these others, >> right? >> You know, I can get my funding and, you
know, the poor people who wait till the second round, you know, they're competing, you know, against >> just more competition for limited money." I I think it'd be a mistake. >> Yeah. I mean, so I I think obviously
I had uh I was outspoken last meeting. Um but my the the main my main issue was is that we were we were going on a we were going different than a process that you know than we typically do. And what
I would say is is that um for town committees and and town boards and such that are going out for public projects that are more than $50,000, even even if you're not a town project, if it's a public project, which most CPC, you know, all CPC projects are, you'd have
to go through an RFP process. And to do that, it takes some time. Um, and so knowing that the committee may want to rethink right in the future like timing and and and a rolling application
process and such because of building in the RFP process because our decisions usually aren't made until December and then you're not typically um, you know, you don't have a town meeting vote until May, right? So you can't like it the funding isn't guaranteed until you have
a town meeting vote in May and then the pro and then the funding isn't usually released until July. So in essence um it only gives you about a month or two months if you're looking for funding of that year to go out to an RFP process.
So that was my you know for some of the projects that I'm working on or you know obviously you guys know that I'm I'm an applicant as well with along with the parks department. um you know, some of the projects that are on there are going to have to go through an RFP process.
And so I I think it's fine I I think it's fine to to continue on with this process, but in the future me we may want to uh think about that in the in the future just to evolve as we go along. And to your point, Pete, you know, whether or not what things are
fair or not fair, I think it just opens the door, right, to to to the question whe whether it is or not. And I what I'm saying is I would take that out, right? Um because I think yes, we did what we did. We're being transparent and I think
that's fine to go to go that way. At least we're letting applicants know there's this remaining pool of money um that we go through. And I don't personally I don't think we should open the door for other folks. But there's plenty of other people on this committee and you you may feel differently. I would be fine either way whether you
want to open it like leave that there or not. I would just personally I wouldn't leave it there. >> I agree with Rob. >> Other thoughts? >> Um I just wrote a sentence that we might be able to add uh in the chat. I don't
know in instead of that last sentence that away. I I agreed that it is implied that if somebody really wants it, they'll come to you Tom with questions. But by adding something like the committee will be reviewing the overall application process with potential
changes next year or be advised or something like that. >> I'm sorry I didn't is in the chat. >> Yeah, I didn't see it. >> I can't see it either. >> All right. I forgot to send it. There it is. There it is. There it is. Oh, >> that's a good good reason why we
couldn't see it. Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. I don't think that um overpromises, right? >> It doesn't it doesn't. >> Mhm. >> Just potential. >> So, where would you put that in the letter, Jenny? >> Yeah.
>> But I guess >> like la lastly, like the last >> And I'm not sure whether it would be attached to that paragraph or just by itself. Um um maybe by itself. I don't know. >> No, I can sit in that paragraph. That's
fine. >> Yeah, >> cuz we're talking about spring meetings and we're talking about, you know, ball meet Yeah, I think that's okay. >> I think it could Yeah, I think it's I agree with Kathleen. I think it could sit at the end of that paragraph.
Okay, other comments. So, I've made changes. I think I've incorporated all the changes that it seems like there was at least of the people that have spoken um agreement on. Um, I guess I would look, if there's no
other comments, I guess I would look to a motion um to approve this letter um from someone. >> I'd move to approve the letter as amended. >> Second. >> All right, we have Kathleen motion. Uh,
Rob second. Um, and um, any other discussion >> other than thank you to the people who drafted it? >> Well, >> yes. Thank you. Thank Thank you, Jenny. Um and um um so let me call the role here. Uh
Kathleen, >> yes. >> Rob, >> yes. >> Jenny, >> yep. >> Steve, >> yes. >> Hal, >> yes. >> Robbie, >> yes. >> Wendy, >> yes. >> Welcome, Wendy. And welcome, Wendy.
Sorry. >> I saw you join and forgot forgot to interrupt myself. No, no worries. >> Um, did we lose somebody in the middle? We lost. >> Did you lose Pete? >> We lost Pete.
>> We did lose Pete. >> What happened? >> He was He was on his phone. >> Oh, maybe he went in that dead zone if he's in the car or something or whatever. Um, all right. Well, we have we have our eight nothing vote
that we we started with or eight person vote. Um all right, let me stop sharing here. Um I already did stop sharing, I guess. Um all right. Um okay, thank you. So, we have So, um Cam
and I can work to get these out forth with u since we're um a little week after our or almost a week after our original um meeting. Um and then I just the only other thing on the agenda is I just wanted to review um
the the the uh fall meeting schedule. Um, and um, tell me if I've gotten Jenny, I know you keep these closely, but this is what I have on my calendar. Um, I know we went
over this last time, but oc I just want to make sure and we have some new members and and obviously Cam is new. So, October 5th, October 19th, November 2nd, November 16th,
and I think we discussed the possibility of a December 15th. Is that uh at the last meeting? Cam is nodding. Yes. So, I think I remember that. So, >> 14th, >> 14th, December 14th.
>> Oh, dece September 14th. >> Oh. Um we Yes, but we haven't finalized that, right? >> Yeah. And that was um to talk about sort of Cam's uh result of her surveys from other programs in terms of the
application process and start that. >> So am I misremembering this? I thought we were concerned about whether or not we would have enough data by that date.
Um, no reflection on Cam obviously, but just um just I mean I'm not opposed to meeting in September, but um but I I don't know. Do we think we'll have
enough? >> Well, I think whether we I mean Cam, you can just certainly just make some calls. You don't have 200, you know, surveys kind of thing. >> Right. Right. to the right people and you get a sense of what other people are doing.
>> Um >> yeah, I think for before us are pretty clear. >> Um and I just think we need to talk about it more. I mean, do we have rolling? Do we have twice? Do we prioritize? You know, sort of all those things. So maybe the thing to do is by September 14th is just to clarify what
are the questions >> and and what do other towns do? >> Do we need a meeting for that? I mean, wouldn't we just >> Yeah, I don't think we need a meeting for that. I think we can give Cam some advice individually. Um, and I can, you
know, Jenny, you and I can work with her to make sure we have the questions that reflect I think people's concerns or or people not concerns, but what people want to learn >> possibility. That's why.
>> Yeah. I don't think I think I think um my question is whether or not we can we can get August being a big vacation month um whether we'll get a lot of like um I'll talk to you when I get back from
vacation. It does leave us a couple weeks in September. Um so September 15th is not until midepptember. So, I'm again I'm not um saying we shouldn't meet in September, but um >> well, Tom, why don't why don't we hold
it and we can always cancel it. >> Okay. Um so, we just that date that we did tenatively identify was September 15th, right? I remember it was a Tuesday, not a Monday. >> I Well, I had on the 14th, but I can do
either. Well, um, that is problematic for I think I I I'm I thought I said this out loud, but maybe I didn't. Um, I'm coming. I It's a family thing. I'm probably not back on
the evening of the 14th or just getting back. So, I I'm likely um >> Make it the 15th. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, all right, Hal. >> Yep. Sorry. Um the I believe Tom you did s suggest that you would not be back in
time for that. So I think we did agree that if you were going to have that meeting we would push it to the 15th. >> Yeah. >> Um and then the second thing is October 19th I believe I saw is from the select board's uh meeting last week was >> you said this. Yeah.
>> Is Tom meeting. >> So that is one of the I think that's the primary reason we scheduled the December the December meeting. I I had forgotten that. Um, Steve I think had indicated that town meeting is likely to be October 19th.
>> But wouldn't you want to schedule the meeting for the 19th in case you have to have a meeting of the CPC prior to the fall town meeting? >> Good. >> At the town meeting >> that was discussed. Yeah. >> Excellent point. Excellent point. Yes, >> I won't be there. I think I'll be in California,
>> but let's keep that on the calendar. understanding that that may be a short meeting prior to the formal time the special town meeting. Yeah. And that you know if we have to amend the the green sheets or what have
you with >> Yeah. I mean you just don't know what >> I think we already have it. It's in my calendar as like 7 to 10 or something for for that date. >> So we we might have already discussed it. town meeting >> October or >> October 19th
>> for us? For us, you mean? >> Yeah. So, I I know we must have discussed it, I think, at our last meeting. >> Yeah, I do as well. >> Okay. Um >> I I guess I should also put in town meeting.
>> Okay. I'm glad you all have it because I don't have it in my calendar. Um I don't know how that happened, but that's good that you have it in your calendar. Um, >> the only other the other thing that I I wanted to I just wanted to figure out
timing wise and maybe do now that we have like this process if I'm just trying to think if we our typical um review process lasts how long right now? Like four months typically.
I I think it might be it might be easy I think what might be helpful for us is to like see and maybe Cam could help us out with this is like something you know obviously a very visual and like what the what the a visual of like how long
we do our application process for where we are in timing because >> I think what I just described previously was like if we were to flip this thing or to move it back or whatever, right? Maybe that helps us all like in the future. Um, and I don't know what that
looks like, you know, can we wait till January to like start it all over again in a year? Um, maybe, you know, and so that's what I'm >> That's a great idea. And right now we have a process that's the better part of nine or 10 months if you if you add it
all up, right? We we sort of usually publicize the eligibility applications starting in March. The deadline is in May. There's that's a couple months obviously. Then we evaluate the eligibility applications then give them to September and then we usually spend a
couple months post September evaluating. So if you add that all up that's a that's a 10-month process. I mean some soft times in there because >> no one really submits an eligibility application in March. They wait till May.
But still, um, but I can we can put that we can put that into a visual. I think that's a good idea, Rob. >> And our our our our funding is always May 1st, right? I mean, sorry, July 1st is always when the funding goes out. >> So, um, I'm just trying to think for the
committee, you know, like that's a hard date and we can't move those dates. Um, and then the typical is a May date. And we always do we always have an a fall meet, town meeting. >> Basically, >> I think we usually do, right? So, we
always do. Yeah. Yeah. >> So, >> yeah. I don't know. I mean, we can ask that question of whether or not there's been, but it feels like we always do. Yeah. >> Yeah. And and may maybe Tam that's something you could ask like other towns
like ours that are structured. We either have spring town meeting or we have like a fall and it would be interesting to know if like do other towns um you know when do they do their vote at town meeting for funding? Is it in the spring or is it in the fall? Because if we went
the fall route that builds us in a little bit more time but we'd have to like reshuffle everything. >> Yes. Uh Tom, one other thing just I've noticed on the uh the application form that's on the website at the town does
not include Rob's um amendment of question of uh number five. So Cam, can you make sure that that gets in before these letters go out because if they start downloading the application, it won't be what we approved. >> Good point. At the last meeting. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. Yep. I don't know how you fix that. You got to get into the town meeting website. Yeah, I think we'll have to have um although there was some progress on that um Lynn Dapoli said um she has made
herself available to um tell uh to to uh train Cam in up uploading our own meeting agendas which is prog progress. Um >> have some time with Lynn at the end of
the week. >> Oh, you do? Okay. Okay, great Cam, that's excellent. Um, so yeah, so that we can add that to the list of can can we get trained on that? >> Should that happen before the letter gets sent so that people don't download
>> the wrong form? >> This is a priority. >> Yeah. >> So before the letters go out, the application has to be cleaned. >> Absolutely. Yeah. So we'll we'll get that done. >> Great.
>> All right. Um All right. So we have our schedule. I think the uh we'll keep the se September meeting uh on the calendar but tentative depending on um the need for it obviously. Um and >> can I just say something Tom? I'm sorry
for the September meeting. >> What I can do is um share I have a Google doc and kind of share some information from what I will have information from like now up until September. That way uh the committee can decide if we do need to meet in person. But maybe some information um will be
reviewed on the Google doc and then if people want to meet with me individually to kind of get more information if that's an option um we can do that too. So just leave options open just so we know. >> Great. Great. Sounds like a good plan.
All right. Um I will uh uh entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved >> and second. >> Second. >> Okay. Somebody say second. Good. Thank you. >> Um, all right. All in favor, Kathleen.
>> I was muted. Yes. >> We could read your lips, but it's better. It's It's better when we can hear you. >> Uh, Rob, >> yes. >> Jenny, >> yes. >> Steve, >> yes. >> Hal,
>> yes. >> Robbie, >> yes. >> Wendy, >> yes. All right. And Tom, yes. Um, so, um, by the way, I voted yes on everything because I didn't call on myself on the other vote. I was a yes.
>> Just do the talk to the hand thing. Yeah, >> I was I was raising my hand to myself. Bye. >> All right. Thank you everybody. I appreciate it. Good job. You got it all done in time. >> What's that? >> You got it all done in a half hour.
>> Uh, 36 minutes. Not bad. Oh, close. >> Close enough. >> We'll take it. We'll take it. Part: 2
all set to go. Uh I think we've got our quorum. Um so there are two public meetings going on. So first we'll announce the uh public meeting of the Milton Conservation Commission. So welcome all members of the public and other other boards to the Milton
Conservation Commission uh meeting of 28th of July 2026. Uh we really have one issue on our agenda this uh this evening and that is to discuss the u park department proposal not as a vote but
ratherformational purposes only at this juncture. Uh as a matter of formality we introduce ourselves for the record and so the public is aware this is being recorded. It is a public meeting. We invite comments, questions, everything uh from members of the public. Uh but we
do ask that you identify yourself uh for the record purposes and again as a matter of formality we introduce ourselves. Can I go across the screen Steve? >> Uh Steve Ibis conservation agent. >> All right I'm just reading across the screen. John Kieran, conservation. Phillip >> Philip Dris Philip Driscoll,
conservation clerk. >> Hans >> Hans Vanling, commission member. >> Charlie, commission member. >> Uh Tom Palmer >> Tom Palmer, commission member. >> Wendy. >> Hi, I'm Wendy Garpo, one of the
commissioners. >> Arthur >> Arthur Doyle. >> And that's we've got everybody. Thank you, Rob, or somebody from the park department. You want to open up? >> Carolyn is now chair, so I don't know if you >> All right, Carolyn.
>> Hi, everyone. Carolyn Cahill, chair of the park commissioners. Rob Levash next. >> Yeah, Rob Levash, member >> and Steve. >> Steve Novak, member park commissioner. >> Kevin Chrysom. >> Kevin Chrysom, park director.
>> All right, good. And I still don't know who Molly Molly the notetaker is, but uh Malcolm Molly. Um so uh Rob, do you want to make a presentation? Uh our agenda item field issue. >> Yeah, sure. So um I first would just
like to thank the board for having us this evening. What I do want to do is introduce you to our tyin bond uh consultant who has been doing our recreational master plan. like to turn it over to uh Ryan who's our PM on the
project to share a presentation uh with you folks to just kind of share uh what we've been doing as well as talk about the main agenda point which is Flatly Field um as well as Alli Alli Cook as well as is here from Ty Bon as well. Thanks Ryan. >> Thanks Rob. Excuse [clears throat] me.
Um I'm gonna try and share screen with everybody. Um, let's see. I probably need to move this over here. Going to work this out first. So now if I go to
Zoom, share screen. >> Steve, if you're the host, you may have to share your screen. I I sent >> No, I just Steve >> I just he he sent a request and I quote unquote allowed him to do it. Good. >> Thank you, Steve.
>> I think you should be looking at a large screen that says Tyion Bond partnership with purpose Milton Recreational Master Plan. Is that fair, guys? >> Yes, it is. >> Yes. >> Perfect. Y Thank you. >> So, just a little bit about what we've been doing with the parks commission. parks commission has given us an
opportunity to help them with this recreational master plan. During this [clears throat] time, we've um we're trying to determine or help the parks commission determine what do they need for additional facilities. Um where are their short shortfalls for the community? Where is the community being
underserved or maybe overd uh facilities? And so to get there, we've um assessed existing parks and fields and courts uh and supporting amenities. We did an initial assessment in the fall of 2025. Um we went out to the parks commission.
We looked at each one of the facilities. We graded them ourselves. Um kind of walked through what's being done at each facility with Kevin. Everyone was nice enough to kind of give their uh ins and outs of what's being played there and what's what's happening there on a a
seasonal basis. After we did that, we spent some time reaching out to the community. We did surveys and some public meetings to kind of discuss what the community saw as needs and shortfalls within the recreational programming. Just kind of as a reminder, the town has an open space and parks
plan that's being worked on. This this master plan was more focused on athletic recreational facilities, either passive uh athletic facilities or active recreational facilities. After we were able to talk to the community from a survey perspective and public reach out, we've talked to
individual coaches uh and community members that help coach uh different leagues within the community. And that really helped us kind of understand where the gaps are and what issues there each each individual user group is facing with the facilities. And then we worked with the parks commission once we
were able to identify where the shortfalls are with the uh field demand. we were able to provide some conceptual layouts and planning level cost information um to kind of help the parks commission decide how they may want to move forward. And we're kind of I'd say in a draft portion of that kind of talking through what our options are
with the parks commission and kind of shooting ideas back and forth at the moment. Um if any point during this presentation somebody has a question, wants to stop me, wants to add something, if you're from the parks commission because I've forgotten to talk about something we've talked about over the last year, by any
means say something, speak out. Don't feel like you're interrupting me. Um, from [clears throat] Tai and Bonds, uh, assessment of the facility, generally what we saw was that the recreational facilities that are from the town are right on par condition wise with what we
would expect for uh, recreational fields for a community. They're not perfect. They're not collegiate level. They're not even what I'd say high school level are. They're on par for recreational facilities. Usually the problem with recreational facilities is one, they're way overplayed, and two, um there's
limited maintenance staff to to kind of keep up with the number of fields that are there. And so you have kind of very typical um issues with them. Planerity issues. Some of the grading may have gotten awful over the years. Athletes dig their cleats in certain places and create an unsafe condition. Natural turf
showing signs of degradation. This is a telltale sign to us that the fields are being overplayed, if we can tell where spots are in the fields. Um, and there seem to be inconsistent areas. For instance, like if football's being played on a field, you're going to find wear spots down the center of the field. If soccer is being played, you're going
to see at the goalie mouths and along the sideline of the fields where you're seeing degradation. And then we saw things like minor safety improvements, fencing a little bit out of line, tripping hazards, small things like that. Um, one of our other big takeaways from our field assessments was supporting amenities are lacking. Some
of the supporting amenities have been aged out, whether that's been dugouts or we have an updated bathroom facilities, water drinking, you know, really popular now is water bottle filling stations at at playgrounds. Some of those supporting amenities are are lacking at this point.
Um, and then limited availability of athletic lighting. There's there's very few places in the community that have athletic lighting that allow user groups to play into the night, which can create scheduling issues. We can also create a limited availability for a community to make up gains if there's been a rain
event like I don't know some of you may be facing today or maybe you're going to get it tomorrow but um it's pouring here at the moment and so when you have that rain out event if you don't have lighting you have no capacity to expand your usage in a given day to kind of make up games or make up practices. Um,
one of the like really big selling points to me and and to Kevin's kind of credit there, there was irrigation at the majority of the facilities, which is kind of rare for community fields. You don't often see uh that level of irrigation being provided across uh all
the facilities. Um, field conditioning issues we heard from users was issues with pet feces. This isn't uncommon at community level fields, but something I think we're talking about with the parks commission, how they could address maybe providing dog parks or providing designated areas to walk dogs, but oftentimes users come
out to the facilities and there's, you know, pet feces in the facilities, they got to clean it up before the kids can play. Um, you know, one of the comments we got was municipally owned facilities are not quite as nicely maintained as private facilities. um drainage issues, whether that be from planerity or just poorly draining soils as soils become
compact when they're overplayed. They're less likely to drain quickly. Um and that results in an ability to play after a rain event. And then they they agree that there's degraded surface or lack of turf coverage in certain fields during certain times of the year.
This slide is a bit redundant um but this came from survey that we did. We had sent out a communitywide survey that went to I think got three 1300 respondents. The next four or five slides are going to be some key slides we picked from that survey presentation we did. Um but what we heard in the
survey from the not from the coaches user group but from the public was poor field conditions including uneven surfaces, mud, flooding and lack of grass coverage um limited amenities which included parking um lack of restrooms and insufficient shade. and
then safety concerns due to poor field maintenance. This also was a slide from the 1300 uh respondents from the survey. Um as you can see this slide talks about um what are the most frequently used parks. Um
some of the top parks included Andrews Parks, Cunningham Park, Kellyfield and Flattly Field with 38% of the respondents playing at Flatly Field. Um I would say that you know Andrews Parks, Kelly Fields and Cunningham Park are some of the bigger parks with the most
amenities um at them and so Flatly um and then Milton County and Turner Pond are um some other notes. You'll note that the um blue bar graphs there are private entities um while the orange uh
bar graphs there are town-owned parcels uh that have recreational facilities at them. Also from our respondents, what were the number one locations they wanted to see improvements? Um, Flatly Fields was the
leader at 38%, Kelly Field was uh third at 31% and Lower Guile uh was the second highest at 34%. And obviously the public is aware that there's a potential for a project there that just hasn't taken off at this moment.
Really quick, you're including H Hotton Pond as a town owned. >> Um I think I think we said it wasn't privately owned because it's it's governmentowned. And so you're right in saying that's not a town owned parcel. It's a stateowned parcel. Um we were
just, you know, I think we broke it out from privately owned and maintained to kind of understand who had the ability to schedule it. >> Okay. We also asked a number of questions about what the community would support for facilities. Um,
and mine's I'm kind of blocked here. Sorry. Support for additional fields. 80% of the respondents were in support for additional fields being added. Um, the 82% were in support for the town acquiring fields. And the way this was
phrased was acquiring land for more fields. Um and then 82% of the public was in support for additional fields even with increased staffing needs. So it was good to see like the community is in support of adding more fields um
which match some of our um observations about field condition when I talk about the fields being overused and degraded um from a national turf standpoint. preferred addition to Milton Recreational Fields. Again, this is from
the 1300 respondents. 61% of them said they'd like to see multi-purpose rectangular fields. Um, and then passive activities was the second highest with uh baseball and softball being located at 16% and 13% of the of the fields. I guess another notable outcome there was
7.5% of the public didn't think they needed to add any more fields. And so, um, a little bit before I move on to this inventory of of fields, and you can see here, Hans, that we've got H Hotton Spawn listed as state or high school category versus being town owned.
Um what we what we kind of notice from the fields, and this is very typical for communities, is when you have a inventory of natural turf fields and you have such a robust um athletic recreational program that the town has,
it's very easy for fields to get overplayed. Um, and typically the way we try to combat that with athletic facilities is one, you have more fields than you actually need to play on and you give athletic fields time to rest
and you move the user groups over to another facility or you provide synthetic turf which doesn't really care how much you play on it. It it will hold up. It really degrades from sun exposure. So, those are the two ways we can address natural turf fields that look overplayed.
um just kind of from an inventory perspective because we wanted everyone to kind of like understand where the field inventory lies within the community. We have seven multi-purpose rectangular fields within the community that currently serve the recreational program. I want to note that there's additional rectangular fields within the
community but currently don't serve the community. For example, there's there's fields at Curry College that are not currently being used. When we pulled the group, uh, a number of the respondents, no one said they're currently playing events at Curry College, um, there is
folks playing at Milton Academy field hockey field, and I think there's additional rectangular fields at Milton Academy Field, uh, Milton Academy, but they're not being played on by the recreational group at the moment. So, this is really just a list of the fields that are available as far as we understand to the community. So, you
have seven multi-purpose rectangular fields um, within the community. You have three 90 foot baseball diamonds and we've listed where those are located. You've got 60 or you got seven 60 foot baseball diamonds. Um you've got 60 or
six 60 foot softball diamonds. And then you've got one T-ball field at Andrews Parks, four basketball courts, two at Andrews Parks and two at the high school and a total of nine tennis pickleball courts. I should note that I think there's another basketball court in the making, Rob. Right. There's one being
right over the town hall, but it's not up and running at the moment. >> Correct. >> Where is uh Brooks Field on here? >> Brooks Field is um not on here because we're looking at this from the recreational group. And so our
understanding is there's very limited capacity beyond the high school to serve the recreational user groups. And so we've not included that in the uh analysis. We've had I think it's the don't hold me to this. I think it's the
women's lacrosse group or youth lacrosse group that gets to play on that field at some times, but it's really kind of rare that they get their ability in >> and so we've not included that in our assessment. >> Um, okay. Although it's a little misleading to say there's an inventory
of the fields where some fields are left off. >> We're just trying to say what what serves the recreational community versus what serves the there's, you know, fields that serve the high school. There's fields that serve Milton Academy. There's private fields. There's there's more fields. They just don't serve the recreational group.
>> Okay. >> Ryan, can I ask a question on >> Of course you can. >> Do you do you or does anyone consider uh Milton Academy uh Curry College in terms of renting fields?
>> Yeah, Milton Academy they they are currently renting fields at that college at the moment. What I will say is that each one of those user groups already has their own field demand and so access to those facilities based on the feedback we've gotten from the coaches
has been with its own constraints uh to it. For example, the field hockey group runs Milton Academy field. They can only play on a very limited window in Saturday and Sunday. um and the like the times they have to be off in the field
and the times they're allowed on the field really kind of limit the program that they can build there. Um while they're very grateful for the opportunity to be there, right, because it's a great facility and it's it's worked out for them. Um the ability to expand upon what they currently have um
has kind of not been able to be developed any further. Is that fair? >> Sure. Sure. And Curry is what said no. Curry has has been in the past opportunity, but my understanding is currently because of their programming,
they don't have much ability to take on additional users at their facilities at the moment, but in the past they have community to play there. >> This past spring there was kind of a pilot >> this spring uh Milton Soccer uh did use
>> Oh, great. >> field at Curry. Yep. >> And how did that go, guys? >> Uh 5050. The first time we t tried to have a game there. I'm a I'm a soccer coach. Um there was confusion about the availability of the field. We had to reschedule at the last minute. The
second time um yeah, there was a field available. It went okay. >> Okay. And do we think that's going to develop more? >> I think that depends on Kevin. >> Um we hope we hope. We went to a meeting
with them. um and hopefully partner with them more in the future. >> Okay. >> Also, I just want to I just want to add um pilot the pilot committee in town has added a park and wreck um commissioner
to that board so that we can hopefully be part of those conversations too. >> Great. So earlier you heard me mention we had a bunch of conversations with all the coaches and talk about what they needed. Those conversations were anywhere from
30 minutes to an hour long um and were wide ranging in conversations depending on who I was talking to. Tried to like sum it up in a slide to not bore everybody with the details. Um, but you know what they would like to the main points I took out of it is they want
they'd like improved maintenance on the facilities. They'd like more opportunity to practice. Kind of the biggest takeaway I took out of that those conversations was the number of coaches that have to really limit practice with this with the kids or cancel it alto
together once game season happens because there's not availability of field space for them to play. Um, and then the ability to have add lighting to the facilities was the was kind of the second biggest takeaway I took out of that. Um, I had coaches tell me during
during their conversations that, you know, they practice as they're like preseason and they kids get like one or two practices per week leading up to games and then once games start, practices have to stop all together otherwise they have no ability to play
games. Um, and especially if there's any weather that happens in a week, all practices get cancelled right away. Um, it can be pretty difficult for them. And what they're finding, and I think I put this on another slide, but I'm going to say it now, they're finding is that as kids mature through the age ranges in
their different user groups, because they're falling behind in practice, they're either transitioning to a travel ball team or they're dropping out of the sport rather than staying in the wreck league. Um, so just uh
kind of some other more detailed notes. Poor drainage is causing them to cancel games and practices long after the rain stops. Uh, you know, one of the things we tried to talk about is, you know, the town resources are, you know, of course limited. So like what other opportunities are your user groups
taking to kind of get a practice in? Maybe it's not on a game day field and maybe it's not the perfect situation, but could they do ground ball practice in a what we used to call in my school or my community a cow flop field? It was like a had no care taking care of it. It was just mode. You know, we're finding that the coaches are finding like the
little corners of facilities to play practice or, you know, stretch or get half a practice in before the field opens up. And so we we do feel like the coaches are trying to max out the space and have, you know, not just asking for a full field space. Um,
and you might see my note down here. Out of town options for private have proven to be difficult to depend on, expensive, and have many restrictions on time. Um, one of the notes I think we've received from some of the coaches is the the amount of money they spend on renting space outside is is pretty significant.
And if there was an opportunity for them to play in the town fields, that money could go towards maintaining or uh improving town facilities rather than going towards private facilities. Um a little bit about conclusions. Uh existing system is operating at or above
capacity especi especially for multi-purpose rectangular fields. Uh natural turf fields have no recovery time and have limited ability to be rotated. Um another one of the things you can do for a rectangular field earlier you heard me talk about having wear spots that are common for different
different field play. uh if you're able to rotate a field, you're able to on overlap where those wear spots have and you give the field a little bit of time to recover. But because of how the facilities have been built over the years, there's not much of the like wide open space to rotate fields like there
is at like maybe flatly has the ability to rotate field space. Um additional land versus synthetic turf. Um, one of the the common themes we talked about earlier was you can either add land or you can add turf in order to prove field inventory. Well, if you
replace a natural turf multi-purpose rectangular field with synthetic, uh, it usually adds about plus two fields as long as you add lights to it. So, uh, we say about 200 uses per year on a natural turf field seem uh,
appropriate. We normally would just find a use on a national turf field as two hours of play um throughout the day by a team or multiple teams on that facility. Um if you add synthetic turf with lights, you're able to get 600 uses on that
field. And that's not a that's not a factor of the turf will break down. That's a factor of like hours in the day in school being a limiting factor for that. So we usually say about 600 to 700 uses can happen on a synthetic turf field. So that's like adding two fields. Or you can add land and you can add
additional multi-purpose rectangular fields. A typical multi-purpose rectangular soccer field is about 90,000 square feet which is about two acres of land. Uh and that does not include amenities for parking, restrooms, facilities or anything like that. Our
identified needs after talking to the coaches and understanding the scheduling constraints were that the town is short about three to four multi-purpose rectangular fields and about two to three additional 60oot baseball softball diamonds. The town also is in need of
walking trails, athletic lighting, and more passive recreational opportunities. I would say during the survey portion, the passive community was very vocal and saying, you know, they'd like to see more opportunities for them to get out and enjoy the parks um other than just athletic fields. And we we had a number
of pickle ball users come out and ask for dedicated uh courts during that process. Is there any questions about that slide? >> As well as the fitness the fitness uh court as well, Ryan. >> Yes. Thank you. Just really quick,
>> pickle ball or recreation is passive. Is pickle ball a passive recreation? >> I find it in between. I I actually definitionally I'd say no. It's active. I would say some people are playing it passively and some people are playing it actively.
>> That's a real uh conundrum. >> Yeah. >> Um >> sorry, I think I saw another question there. >> Yeah, sorry. Um, just really quick, there's a backs stop at flat license. Let's talk. Is that included in that inventory or No,
>> we did not include that back stop in this analysis because to my knowledge, nobody's playing baseball. >> No one really uses No one uses that, Hans. Uh, as a as a as a baseball softball facility. That back stop is there, but no one uses it. Actually, >> I don't even think there's bases over
there, right? Am I wrong? >> I think it's just left there. I mean Kevin you you might you might have more insight but I don't even think we we used nothing happens there right? >> No that was from when Flatly had the nursing home there and that was the employees that played softball there
after work. >> Okay. So it hasn't been used in a long time. >> Not alone. >> Okay. >> Conceptual plan summary. You know our idea today is not to go through every one of the conceptual plans that we've kind of considered with the parks commission. We're going to focus on Flat
Leafly Field, but kind of let the the conservation commission understand of the different ideas we've talked about. Uh Flatly Field has been kind of the largest centerpiece to what we've talked about for opportunities to expand uh athletic facilities there. Um but Milton
High School, we looked at making uh revisions to Middleg Guile. Um but unfortunately, every which way we placed the facilities at Middleg, we couldn't add field space. It's pretty maximized as it is. We could take away a baseball field and add a rectangular field, but what we've learned is that the baseball
folks really would like the three 90 foot diamonds in the in the community and um it really couldn't fit all three in there. It wouldn't be awkward and you wouldn't have any permanent fencing there. Um, additionally, I think the parks commission has already started to
spend money on some of those facilities there. I think there's been recent athletic lighting updates done there and there's the dugouts to happen this year, Rob, or next year, sorry. >> Yeah. Um, we looked at Andrews Park and, you know, I think Andrews Park is part of this solution, but we're uh
preserving existing uh fields, baseball and softball fields. We're replacing dugouts, completely replacing the National Turf soccer field, which I think is under review for uh CPA funding at the moment. um adding walking path, fitness stations, and parking lot improvements because one of the biggest uh survey things we heard was that uh
the parking at Andrews Park is under parked at the moment. And I think based on our evaluation, we agree with that statement. We also looked at Pierce Middle School. Pierce Middle School is currently uh being used by uh flag football teams, but we were trying to see if we could expand usage over there
at all by adding a larger field or or a more developed complex there. Unfortunately, due to the size and the parcel constraints, there's not much ability to do anything with that space. Additionally, and then we looked at Kelly Field. We played with all different kinds of uh shaped fields and
rotations to try and get more out of Kelly Field. Unfortunately, due to the existing geometry and kind of some of the hardscape features that are around the field space, there's not much ability to expand there. It's it's laid out pretty well for what it is at the moment. Um, and without blowing everything up and starting over, which I
don't think anybody wants to take on at the moment, um, that facility uh, doesn't really have much ability to expand upon its current uses. >> Um, what about H Hotton's >> Dr. Hton? Hoen's state a state uh, park.
uh understood but I mean it's a huge area and >> it's a huge area but I think for this study because we can only control the land that we own or as town owned is so that's was our focus on that um and just
and just some of the feedback from folks that have used the H Hotton's pond as well is there's been many issues I mean Steve who's on can attest to that for baseball like we can't bring equipment boxes there we've had ma major issues with like painting lines there for
soccer field. So there's been you know early on in the presentation that Ryan said like there's just been issues with Hoen's pond. >> Understood. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's interesting. Very few actually said they use H Hotton's Pond regularly. They said like normally they'll say, "Ah, we got pushed over to
Hotton's Pond because something was happening at that field." But the minute they could come back, they came back. >> Yeah. I've just I've noticed other towns don't have the same issues and I don't know if it's specific to the Blue Hills or it's so other DCR properties I mean
are are widely used by other towns. It's just it seems that like I said I don't know if it's something specific to the uh to whoever operates homes >> could be anything anything I'm missing
from like what we evaluated for opportunities. I know we looked at a small church parcel St. Mary's. Is there any opportunity to like expand usage there? Even though it was private, there was not much opportunity to get fields under side. >> Yeah. I mean, I I think the overall piece here is is that we really did look
through all these other pieces. So, it led us to flatly um where really it it's it's open and there was a lot of uh things that we could potentially do there. And that's where we want to uh share with you today. And obviously this
is kind of a conversation as we kind of move forward. >> I'm going to skip this slide because I think we've we've kind of have priorities how we've prioritized you know what we could do. Our first priority is expand field capacity advance. You can do that by advancing
synthetic strategy only because that allows you to bring a field on right away as a compared to pursuing pursuing additional land which usually that process takes time. um you can improve existing natural turf so that it plays oops plays better. Four, we could
enhance and support amenities. Five, pursue land and funding. And then six, continue community engagement to understand how each one of these uh I >> I think I think one other important note here, Ryan, that we that we didn't potentially uh say was we also looked at
not only our existing parks, but we looked at land that was owned by the parks commission as well. um which we know that there was land over by the town dump that was a potential uh parcel, but we know that there's a lot of remediation to be had over there.
It's also um it's also sandwiched between conservation land, which just made it it made our it made the issue uh that much harder to like develop into fields. Um I should say that's pretty accurate,
right, Ryan? We went walked the field, you looked at some layouts. We basically deemed like it's not even worthy land for us to even use for any any type of recreational fields. Now granted, may maybe in the future you could do paths
and and whatever, but I I don't think for field usage we we could really utilize that. And then I think there was like there was another few couple parcels that we also looked at. One over by Brush Hill Road. So we did also look at other other spaces and at the end of
the day I think the general principle here is as well is that while we can while people might be in real support of getting other land we all live in Milton most of us on on the call and there's not readily available land for sale and it's very expensive land if you were
even to get it. Um and so for the park land that's owned by the parks is we're kind of um you know sandwiched in between uh making some hard decisions. So yeah, the the only other piece about that land that was by the
uh by the dump was the topography across it would have been like a crazy earthwork project to get a twoacre flat piece of land anywhere. >> There's there's a lot of drop off down into Yeah. like that goes out to Yeah, >> it was it would be really hard to
develop that parcel, you know, I don't want to say impossible, but really expensive. >> It would be expensive. Yeah. >> So, that led us to Flatly and we've kind of been playing with this layout over the last couple of weeks or I'd say last
couple of months. Um the main improvements here um that we're showing is an addition of a synthetic turf field that's lighted. This synthetic turf field could be played for soccer, field hockey, lacrosse, uh youth soccer or
full-size soccer. You could play flag football here. You could play any sport on this size field that plays on a multi-purpose rectangular field. Um other than high school football, it's not long enough for high school football. doesn't mean we couldn't change it. This is just one conceptual
layout, but right now high school football wouldn't play here. Um the parking lot is a 60 place uh 60 spot parking lot. Uh it's pvious in land area. We've kind of taken a shot at the conceptual layout for it. Um one of the
feedback points we got for this layout was that there's some issues with the existing parking lot that has about 60 spaces on it in the norththeast corner here. And so they said, could we consider an optional additional driveway? We're just showing that conceptually. We haven't talked to anybody about that or the legality of
it, but that may help mitigate some traffic concerns. We're showing a youth playground. It's a This is got two sizes on it. Currently, there's a two to five playground here and a 5 to2. Um we're showing walking trails throughout the facility. Most of this walking trail
already exists, but we're trying to add continuity between all the different uses. We've got two natural turf youth fields outside of the rectangular field. Um the way youth soccer has played on this facility and mostly this facility has been used by youth soccer in the past couple of years is my
understanding. Um is that there's uh natural turf fields being kind of like youth fields all over the place. The idea here would be that we'd have natural turf fields, but these fields could be played on by anybody. Um there's a 75 by 105 field uh just to
the north of the rectangular synthetic turf field and then to the uh west of that field there's another 135x210 field so it's a youth level field. Um we've also added pickle ball courts. Um as I had mentioned we got a lot of feedback from the pickle ball folks that they
wanted dedicated field court space. Currently, I think they have uh nets that they put up at the existing tennis court facilities, but that kind of creates an issue for them. And so, they they were looking for dedicated court space. And so, we're providing two uh pickle ball courts here.
Um this facility would be, you know, a kind of a state-of-the-art facility in comparison to some of the other facilities that the town has. Everything would be updated. There'd be full electric there. Um, the playground would have full rubber surfacing. Um, you
know, you're talking about big play structures and and uh swings and uh spinning devices inside the facility. Um, we're currently showing some minor landscaping in this image. Obviously, you know, I think Rob, you had mentioned earlier that you'd want to up the
landscaping on the site. Certainly, I think, you know, we would want to add some trees and add some shade. Again, one of the feedback items we got from the community was they want to see shade out on their sites and so I think we'd want to add additional uh landscaping and I think the rendering that I have
after this to show the group is is uh kind of shows some more of that vegetation on site. But um any questions or Rob, anything you want to add about what we're showing at Flatly and and what your concerns or thoughts might be? >> No, I I I think that that was just the
only thing that I would hit. You know, I keep referencing for anybody who who's um close to town, um Cade Field, which is in Quinsey, is a field that also has a synthetic turf field, but a lot of landscaping,
a lot of um there's basketball, there's playgrounds, there's um physical activity. I think that's a good reference, I think, of what we're trying to do here. And then obviously um you
know trying to make this um you know do a lot for the town passively as well as um with recreation um for the different sports that are in town as well as any recreational users and and um you know the senior home that's that's here. I
think you know a lot of folks that are residents here can also use this a as a amenity um in the community as well. So I think um it's really in our view it's really like an opportunity uh the biggest land area in town to to
uh have an opportunity to to do something here. Um and so that's that's it. I think we're you know at this point ready to open up you know for for conversations and and uh questions. >> Sure. I I think there are there are
several points of interest to place the the enhancement of these fields in context. Um the first one is that you know the conservation commission I think had eight may have been seven hearings on the lower road regarding the
artificial turf. Uh we did issue the permit but it was a split vote. Uh it went to D. They issued a superseding order um allowing the the permit to go forward. The neighborhood opposition group took it to an appeal at the OADR,
which is the office of alternative dispute resolution. And uh just recently within the last month or so, [clears throat] the OADR issued uh a very I thought comprehensive and thorough 44page opinion on that
addressing all the concerns in terms of PABS and POS and um nano particles of of plastic and our filtration system and it really addressed the two biggest issues for the conservation commission. One was the heat of the water coming off of the
artificial turf and how to make sure it's cooled before it gets back into any kind of a you know navigable stream. And here u the sensitivity is that this is an ACE area of critical environmental
control uh concern I'm sorry area of critical environmental concern and that by itself just by definition involves another layer of review that's a meer review um after the conservation commission uh makes a determination of
the the weatherless protection act uh criteria Yeah. So, it is a sensitive area. We're near Paul's Bridge. Um, and I don't know where the line goes, but I believe this area that we're looking at
right now is within the ACE. Um so we we just have to be sensitive to that and that these other issues including making sure that there's no um contamination going into the nearby Neponet River um
and we make sure that the water coming off the field because it is going to be heated during the summer that it cools down before it enters uh the Neaposit River. and the river is far enough away that I'm sure it can be done um because we've done it at at Gile Road. But those
are going to be the issues and then to place in context those issues that we need to address. Uh we have the conservation restriction and u um Caroline and and the parks commission.
You should be aware that all commission members have received a copy of the Tom Flattley's conservation restriction and it does address issues like putting anything on top of the currently existing fields um and uh the desire
that it be it meaning the whole Flatly Field complex be used for recreational purposes and Tom was he [clears throat] had enough foresight to say you know I want to make sure that this is good for the use of the kids. um to play, you know, football, soccer, lacrosse,
whatever. He named a bunch of them and we all have a copy of the CR before us. Um so those are the issues that we have to address or we will have to address if you come in with a proposal. For instance, uh if you came in with this as
a notice of intent, you'd like to do this. uh those are the questions that we would be asking and that is how do you ensure that the drainage from the fields is going to be clean before it hits an
aonet. um how do we ensure that it will be ambient temperature that it's not heated because it uh does it part of it is cold water fisheries so that's really one of our concerns and I I think it can
be done it can probably be done pretty efficiently that is make sure that the discharge water is clean and make sure it's uh cool uh before it hits the waterway but those would be the questions that we would be asking asking. So therefore, the question
becomes right now tonight is um how do we address the CR? Can this be done? Um I actually think it can be but um but I I want to make sure that everybody's comfortable with the limitations and as
we read the the restriction itself, there are some limitations. Um, and so my first question is, is the 60 uh parking lot area is that the same that currently exists? And I note that
you said pvious, which is music to our ears uh to make sure that the parking area is pvious. Um, but is that the same parking space or is that >> to be added? >> There's 60 up here >> and then we've added an additional 60
parking spaces. And the reason we've taken this approach is it's my understanding that this 60 parking spaces isn't under the town's control. And so while they're there, they may not they're not guaranteed access to this parking in perpetuity. And so we wanted a 60 parking spaces down here. That in
combination with the fact that the facility is not as near as some of the other ones are to like community development, it's way less likely people are going to be biking out to this facility than some of the other ones. You know, we recognize people are going to have to drive out to this facility.
The existing parking also floods. That's there's drainage issue. There's drainage issues there as well. >> And it ab butts right on a well. >> Yeah, drainage is a big deal for us. [clears throat] But again, I I think it can be it was
done at uh at Lower Road and I think it can probably be done here, but I I don't want to get ahead of myself, but those those will be the the detailed questions that you'll get. Where does the water go? >> Sure. And what's the condition of the water and what's the temperature of the water?
>> And I know we're not there yet. It's just >> No, we're not. We're not quite there yet. >> Yeah. >> I promise we next time we come, we'll come with answers for some of those things. >> The good news is Tai Tai Bond is is the right people to be to to be uh giving us
that next level of detail. So >> the question I have is, you know, as far as the CR, is there anything about the proposed development that we're currently showing that we need to rethink or reconsider or maybe take a different approach to? You know, one of
the questions I had is is the lights that are being shown at this facility, is that something, you know, from a CR perspective that is possible? >> Can I ask can I ask a question? >> Yeah, sure.
Um, Mr. Morrison, have you read the CR? >> I have not read the CR at this moment. No. >> Pretty prescriptive. >> I've read it. Uh, some of the other members are. And, uh, to me, it's really like a threshold consideration of this
project because it's very explicit about what's allowed on the site. And, uh, I'm quoting from it here. I believe is that no temporary or permanent structures shall be placed on the site.
So that's seems to me a very difficult hurdle to get over. It does seem like it's hard to argue that a parking lot or uh plastic field are not structures. So that's I could bring it up on my
screen if people want to look at it. Um, we all looked at it. Something else it says is that on the third page that Milton Conservation Commission shall be solely responsible for enforcing the restriction. So, it really puts a burden
right on us. So, that's that's sort of a threshold consideration for me as a commissioner. I'm told by the restriction not to allow any temporary or permanent
structures. So, aren't I sort of over a barrel here? Tom, let me let me uh and you're you're you're you're correct in bringing that up because we all we're all reading it.
But if you look at uh number um well letter B one Roman numeral 1B says no soil, lom, pete, gravel, sand, rock, landfill or other uh mineral substances shall be placed, stored or dumped thereon. Um right as I understand it
right now there are some drainage issues [snorts] that forget about the artificial drift just leave it as soil uh grass field. Um it it appears that to correct some of the drainage problems on the existing grass field it would
require a change in elevation which by itself would require some soils to be placed on top of it. Now, as a strict constructionist, you could say, "Well, it says no soil." But I I wonder if just that, you know, the normal
maintenance of a grass field would fit within the original intent of the donor, Tom Flattley, um, as to whether or not his intent was to keep the field playable and that would require changing the elevation to create a better
drainage runoff. uh would that fit within our obligation to stay within the conservation restriction? So, what I'm suggesting is there's a little bit of wiggle room here to stay within the intent of the donor.
>> Yeah, I was talking about A, you're talking about B. A is a provision that says no temporary or permanent structures. B refers to fill. And I agree with you that considering that
this has been a town field for a long long time been used for that purpose simply to try to improve the existing fields by adding lom that's a different proposition.
I mean it's more of a judgment call because that's not a temporary or permanent structure. Um, interestingly, you may have, if you read the whole restriction, and it's only three pages,
it restricts the area to the residents and employees of the premises and uh, I assume that refers to the former hospital, but the premises are
defined in the first part of the restriction. and I couldn't kind of scope them out to see if they included the fields and the hospital or just the fields. It's my impression that it was just the fields. So, I would say that we've been in violation a long time by
allowing people other than the residents of the hospital to play on the field. And I'm okay with that violation because it makes a lot of sense to uh invite the town to play there. is a very good place to play. But
>> there's been a significant change, Tom, because the CR was written in 80 was what it 82 or 80 82 >> signed by John Cronin >> and by Walter Tim. >> Yes. But keep in mind that at the time
Tom Flattley owned the land. So the fee was owned by um the Flatly Company, which was not a company. It was he he was a sle proprietor. So he owned the land. Um and he issued he conveyed the conservation restriction. About 10 years
later he conveyed the land not where the the nursing home was but the fields. He conveyed that to the town. So that's what's changed. So the ownership of the fields right now is in the town >> as as the conservation,
>> right? The restriction says that it says the the land is granted to the town and the responsibility or obligation to enforce the restriction is uh turned over to us. >> Yes.
>> Yeah. I I just said that because it it may have an impact on you know the employees of the of the at the time it was the nursing home. those. >> I I went there the other day. I It was yesterday actually. I walked the field
and uh the only two people I saw on the field other than me were two employees walking along the paved path on the north side presumably going to the train at Reedville. Um it was very pleasant and nice then
having it all to myself. I did notice that it did seem to be irrigated as we heard before. And uh also it had these curious what I would call tepee marks like areas with no grass, nothing but
bare dirt about the size of a teepee. I don't know. >> So >> there weren't many of those. >> So So I will I will say too um as maybe some of you know, maybe you don't. My my wife is the president of Milton Soccer. She had a board meeting yesterday and
just anecdotally the the Kate through two program director had mentioned flatly in the poor conditions there. So your observation is very clear like the the overuse of those fields have really left a lot of these fields in in really poor condition currently and the K
through2 director said you know I don't you know they're hard surfaces. It's it's hard and unsafe for some of these kids to play on. Um, so I mean I I do think, you know, at this point in in where we are in the season and the summer is these fields were played on a
ton in the spring, right? And so they were played even if you rotate them, Ryan. Right. I think they've been rotated so many times now that they're they're also one thing that the board should understand is that they might be rotated, but every single piece of one of these is not getting rest time. And
really in order to make it, you know, really good surface time is to let something rest. The programming that we currently have in town is so jammed right now currently that we just don't have any any hope for resting uh for some of these fields. So this is this is
basically what you get now at at this point. Um and there is, you know, to Tom's point is now is the time that you get you get some rest there, but it's also the summer. um grass. So, so it's dormant season for grass, right? It's it's also dormant season for for sports,
but um you know, just anecdotally, that that's that's what I heard um from this morning. >> As you look at that slide, you'll see the corner in the upper left, the narrow corner up there. If you go there, you'll notice that that area is bone dry. And
it shows it's uh doesn't have any green. but move out into the body of the fields and they are green and I thought it was very clever how the irrigation had been installed and I couldn't find it. I couldn't find any top up popup valves or
I really couldn't see how it was done but it is done and that field is green now. >> Does the CR define structure at all for us? >> No. And if you haven't seen it, you I would say everybody has to look at it.
>> I I mean the commission has I'm very well familiar with it. I think the parks commission is familiar with it. Ryan, you know, we can send it to you. Um I think everyone just so that you're you're on the phone is is Ryan's our consultant, right? He he's here to do work. We're happy to share that
information with you. Um but at the end of the day um it's really between you know the the the town's uh commission to to figure out how we how we can move past this and and work through it. >> Do we >> Well, I agree with you, Robin. I would ask you,
do you think you can make these changes and say that they're not structures? I mean, that's sort of what we have to do if we want to go along with this. We're supposed to, according to our charge, we're not supposed to allow any
temporary or permanent structures. It seems to me like a a excuse me, but a a plastic field is more of a structure than a a grass field. But maybe that's
just my prejudice. They are both built. At any rate, that's the question I'm thinking about right now. Yeah, I I think we're willing, you know, we we wanted to present this to you, right? We know that there's a lot of conversation
uh regarding turf and and grass. Um you know, what I would ask back out to the commission, maybe to you, Tom, is you know, I think as we went forward is like listen, I I think the graph and grass and turf debate is I would love to do
like those four grass fields in town, but where where does that happen? And I think what we've done with our rep master plan and Ryan specifically is to say, "Hey, let's look at all these other opportunities in town." What what we're at right now is that our programming so surpasses what we currently have in
facilities that the only solution at least from Ryan and and you know and Tybon's view is that we can solve our programming here. Now listen, I think at the end of the day, if we just did grass here and and we could go through and on that
piece, it won't solve our programming, right? And so we're then looking for additional land in town, which is going to be expensive. And I don't even know where it is, right? It's probably privately owned. How how you figure that out? So I think that was the point of the the uh master plan was to really
figure out how we solve for programming um and and kind of figure where we are. I think as as a you know from a standpoint of like a discussion point I think any of the stuff that's on the table is is open for discussion. We want to work together with the town the conservation commission to identify how
we would move uh you know forward in a progressive manner uh to be within the you know what flatly wanted in in the uh you know his wishes when when he gave over the to the town. So for instance like if the parking we wanted to do a pvious we would do a pvious surface uh
any other surfaces we would we would try to try to identify. So I think that's that's kind of the manner that we're we're looking at uh from that. >> I hear you. I'm I'm uh I'm just stuck at
that first place which is the explicit language of the restriction. It just it's it's not very long and it's not vague either. So it sort of seems to define my role and
uh I'm my role is not to solve the recreation problems. The CR says what my role is and uh I'm looking at it. >> Let Tom let me ask you a question. Um because there is a doctrine in law
called the cyp prey doctrine where a court intervenes and uh interprets what the original intent of the grantor was or would [snorts] be. It's kind of a speculative process but it's recognized in law and courts often do it. So when
you look at it A, it says no building, road, mobile home, sign, billboard, or other outdoor advertising display, wall, utility pole, tower, conduit, lines, equipment, or fixtures, or any other
temporary or permanent structure. Um, how do you define structure? I don't know how you get to structure. I mean, if you're talking about a building, a mobile home, you know, a tower, those that's how I would define structure and
is a turf field than a structure. That would be what the court would be asked to define if we uh we or or the parks department were to ask for a cypra interpretation, what a structure. Yeah.
>> Yeah. you know, um to me a structure means something that's built. And you can contrast it with uh if you go down further on in this uh restriction,
it emphasizes the last paragraph. restrictions are intended to maintain the premises in perpetuity predominantly in their natural scenic and open condition.
Now, uh natural speaks to the difference between a grass field and a plastic field and open speaks to the difference between the plastic fields that now exist in grass fields because all the plastic
fields in town aren't open anymore. They're all fenced off. So if I'm trying to understand what I'm supposed to do here, I'm supposed to maintain natural, scenic, and open properties.
And uh all I'm saying is this language seems to be very clear and limiting as well. So that's all I'm saying. And >> John, really quick, >> first of all, Carolyn has her hand up. She's had her hand up for a while. That's
>> 100%. >> Um, I guess that was going to be my question is when there is something that's subjective the way they're calling permanent structure, how is that typically solved with the conservation
commission? >> This is an interesting point. >> [laughter] >> Is it town like Milton town council or is it um is it is it beyond that
if anyone knows and maybe we don't know have those answers right now. >> So >> well we we've not been asked to determine what is a structure in the past. So it it is new to us. I think our first step would be to go to town
council and ask the cyp pre doctrine is something that's done by a court by a judge not not by us. Um so the first level of interpretation I think would go to us but we we'd certainly reach out to town council uh for advice
uh in that area. >> Okay. Thank you >> John. I was going to make a very similar point. So given that you've already mentioned the ACC the other constraints I mean if the project is going into MEPA that means that someone's going to look
at it from the article 97 lens to see if it triggers that as well won't they question for council. >> I don't I don't Yeah, it would be a question for council but I don't think we're changing the youth. It's a
recreational field. It stays a recreational field whether it's grass or you know a plastic overlay. >> But John, you have experience with plastic fields in town. Would you agree that they're not as open as this field
is now? >> No, I I have a different and I was going to say something before, Tom, but I don't think open if if you're talking about a fence around it. Um, that's an easy don't put a fence up to if that would keep it
open. I think of open as like open space. So that there's no building there. You know, the sort of the classic structure there. It's open space as it is now. >> Whether it's soil or >> Okay, >> Steve, I think you had your hand up
first before I did. >> Sure, Ryan. And this is I think this is a discussion for another time, but before we get ahead of ourselves in terms of who needs to discuss this, um is there any precedent at this point
relative to that document to go to the flatly company? Now, obviously Tom Flatley is no longer with us, but to talk about with um the heirs and who runs the Flatly company, if there is an interpretation that they would agree to before we went through some of these other hurdles as we think through that.
>> The simple answer is yes. Danny Flatly lives next door to me. Um >> I say I I I I know I I don't want to get into that. I think many of us know the flatly. So before we went to a lot of other um hoops, uh it may behoove us to reconvene and think about is there a
conversation to be had down the road there with with the flatlays. >> Sure. And that might be something that a court would ask if it got to the point of a cypra doctrine analysis, but they're close and around and
available. I was wondering the town um maybe the reason that the conservation commission has never had to define structure before is because the town already has a definition for structure as part of their planning board code and I was wondering if we thought that that
definition in the planning board code applies or would have any applicability to that CR. I I I guess one other question I don't want to like uh jumble things here in my mind like and the concom may know this
atly park we just put in a playground I would define that as structure right that that is a built surface that's plastic surface that's underneath there that we're putting um so I'm just it's very it's not clear to me like what's
structure what's not structure what's open space what's not open space I I think we would need a little bit of guidance on on some of that. >> I agree that Beverly Park to me looks like a structure and uh but on the other
hand I'm not aware there was any restriction that we're dealing with at Pely Park as there is here. But there there was I think right originally there was and then it went to town meeting and then town meeting
passed that that park could be put in there and that all that was all owned by conservation commission. No, actually it's pretty complicated, but it was not. >> Was it? >> Okay. >> It was general municipal purposes and the town on the land swap initially
agreed to give all 44.7 acres to the conservation commission, but we stopped that because it would trigger an article 97 issue because if it went from passive to active recreation. So we did a carve out. So 41 well 40 acres came to the
conservation commission and four went to the park department just to avoid the 97 issue. >> Okay. >> But you're right that we we need some guidance on that. My view is that the structure >> uh that you see there is the equipment
um and that that would constitute the structure. So the, you know, the swings or the, you know, the jungle gym or merry ground or whatever they what whatever equipment has gone in there would be the structure. But again, I'm I'm not weighing in on that from a legal perspective. I' I'd run to town council
for that one. >> The um the other interesting thing is when did the back stop show up in comparison to the CR? >> Where is a back stop on this plan? So Tom, it would be right right behind
the um >> balls on the plan >> to the left of that >> right here. >> So right between there and the other smaller grass field, >> right? >> Um where the cursor is moving now. >> Correct.
>> Right there. >> I got you. >> Yep. >> Yeah. All right. Thank you. [clears throat] I I mean also what I would say is is an irrigation system you know that was put in you know when when this restriction was here
you know whether that you know should have happened or or not I think it's just >> can you can you describe the irrigation system here how it works or >> it's it's run by a well >> we have a well there and um it doesn't
take care of the whole field but the majority of it and that was put in >> before my time. >> How is the water distributed by subsurface drip lines?
>> It by irrigation heads. Is that what you mean? >> Or by uh by sprinklers. I'm Yes. Which is >> Yes. By sprinklers. >> Yeah. >> Ah, okay. Thanks. I was funny when I was walking around. I didn't see any sprinklers. So, >> sometimes they're tricky to find. I I
struggle myself sometimes. >> Um, I agree. You could call that a structure and ask whether or not we should have approved it if we did. >> Yeah. Except if you keep reading that same paragraph, it's it says accepting only such you know buildings, roads,
utility poles. They repeat it um as are required from time to time. >> When uh >> a little bit like two step, you know, one step forward, two steps back. >> When this CR was written, were kids from
town already playing there >> in 1982? >> I don't remember playing there when I was a kid. >> Uhhuh. >> I mean, teams town teams playing there. >> Yeah. Well, my my kids and my kids are now both over 30. They both played
soccer there. Um, from age, I don't know, like 5 to 10 or something. Well, at the age where everybody runs up and down chasing the ball and uh there's lots of um goals there
now. They're like eight goals scattered over the field. The movable goals. >> I I can't see because we're screen sharing. Uh so I can't see everybody. So I don't know if there are any hands raised, but I'd like to hear from other commissioners uh conservation
commissioners um as to questions or comments, but I I I can't see you. >> Mine's up, but I don't know how to get it back down, so bear with me. [laughter] Just press the raise hand, Ryan. >> I see it. Lower it. There we go. Thank you.
>> So, not not seeing Wendy. Do you have any comments, questions, thoughts? >> I'll stop sharing. >> Um, I don't have anything additional to add to the conversation, John. Thank you. >> Okay. All right. Arthur,
>> I would just >> You're still echoing, Arthur. And you've still got a second screen up. >> I I can't get I can't get >> Okay. Not withstanding the echo, did did you
have any questions or comments? If it's not problematic, this is >> speak slowly. This is a par example to me of managing the
climates which is supposed to be very difficult and that's what we're faced with and we have to look at it in the context of time definition intent
maintenance of all most of the variables. That's brief comment. So I'm comfortable with this discussion. >> All right. Thank you. And we may have lost uh Charlie. He was
um on the road and he had an engagement. I I think it was started at 8:30, so we lost him, but um he he was present for most of the comments. Um any any other uh commissioners um
or Steve Ivis or or Phillip you have any comments or questions? >> No. >> All right. Well, I guess you know next step from our pers and and I don't mean to cut off any discussion Carolyn uh you know this is your open meeting as well
uh comments or questions but the next step for me would be that to have a specific proposal uh in terms of notice of intent. Um, and once we see that, we might have to stop and and pause for a minute and get town council
involved because I think Tom has raised Tom Palmer has raised some um issues that we need some resolution on as to how we proceed and u you know what are what is the scope of the restriction for us and and how do we best serve our
mandate uh both on the conservation restriction and and on the uh wetland protection ction act. Um because the questions that we're going to get are the that's my AI talking. Um uh if Yeah, I
think the sooner the better to get town council involved in this. Um because I think we all want to dot the eyes and cross the tees. Um, and it sounds like the uh parks commission has some, you know, some pretty valid issues here that
need to go forward to protect the youth of Milton and uh we need to do it in the right fashion. So, the sooner we get a notice of intent, the sooner we can get town council involved. Um, and they can give us some advice as to what to expect also, not just from DE, well, the DP,
yes, but Meeper itself is going to be taking a look at this. Um, so it's there's a double need to dot the eyes and cross the tees. >> Don, I would just add to that and when I toured the toured the site and also looked at aerials, wasn't obvious to me
that any part of the field is within 100 ft of a wetland might be, but didn't really see it. >> Okay. >> I was going to ask that same question. So has Tai and Bond >> done any preliminary flagging or buffer
line? I'm guessing that the only thing we'd be in is you know out 100 or even riparian zone. >> We had not at the at this point done any flagging or anything out here. We'll pull up some state wetland mapping just to kind of like do a check for us when
we we'll update this plan for that. We were just kind of got into a conversation about where can we add three or four fields. >> Exactly. >> This is great. And then Rob's like, "Wait, I think there's a restriction. Let's go have a conversation before we get too far down this road." >> Yeah. Yeah. To be honest, um, you know,
everyone who's here, we didn't even under we didn't even know that this was conserv this was under conservation commission um, you know, jurisdiction. So, as we were going through, we just had no idea. You know, some of us who are here, um, you know, that's kind of
where we flagged it and said, "Oh, okay." I think we had to go back and and and see um by the in that open space and wreck plan under the committee's plan that is labeled under as parks and wreck by the way under the committee's um jurisdiction. So that that was labeled
uh wrong. Obviously it's been used like that for years but um that so that's where we uh kind of netted out why we wanted to have the conversation with you guys. I think um we very much appreciate having the conversation um showing you
kind of what we've been up to and and everything. >> Yeah. And I just want to share, you know, I think what's actually fantastic is basically whoever laid out all of our fields did a pretty fantastic job. It's
It's not like we're looking at any of our parcels saying, "Oh my gosh, if they had put the softball over here, we could fit two more soccer fields." whoever laid out all of our, you know, playing fields over the years did a fantastic job in
doing so that we really don't need to do much on that front. And you know, obviously this has kind of led us to the flatly space that looks like, you know, we might be able to solve something obviously
um if this all is able to kind of work out. Good. The from a historic perspective, U. Hans, you asked about the flagging. Um, do you remember when just probably five years ago, we were on Brush Hill Road right at the entrance to the, um,
skilled nursing facility and the stone wall had been knocked down. We had a joint meeting with the historic commission there. I think there was some flagging across the street. >> Yes. Yes. >> Because our jurisdiction was triggered. So that's actually on the south side of this. I don't know if it's within 100
feet or not. Um it's it's nearby. And on the north side, I have no idea how far the Neponet is. >> That would be over here. >> I wait I can't see your cursor. >> It would be Kennedy Brook on the north side which is sort of channelized and you can see as a kind of a ditch going
through the woods there. But Nepona Valley Parkway itself must be 80 feet wide or it's pretty wide. So doesn't seem likely there would be 100 foot there. um where the river goes, you
could see at the extreme east or left side of the design where the roads come together, there's a parking lot there and the river itself is off the edge of the um >> I think except Yeah, maybe
>> it's north though, right? It's like it's northwest of this, >> right? There might be a little bit up in that corner. Yes. And that looks like three or 4 hundred feet away. So, um, yeah, I doubtful there's jurisdiction,
but as you say, John, where we were that other time, maybe we were close, that would be on the bottom here. >> Yeah, where the entrance is there. You see the entrance in the middle, >> that's where the stone wall was monkeyed with. And we had a meeting and I would
just mention that a lot of good tree planting was done along there. They put in like eight swamp white oaks which are doing well. The gator bags were empty but they were seemed they have plenty of water. They just did a nice job of
planting along there and that kind of helps with the planning that's already done. You see the S-shaped driveway separates the hospital from the fields. Those are really big big trees along there. The ones on the bottom are all
white pies. Up around the other curve, it's beaches and londons. So, there was some landscaping attention to this area going before anyone here was born, maybe. And that's a long time ago.
I'm just guessing when those trees were planted, >> right? You know, it might be helpful, Steve Ivis. Um, and for the others, Steve II just did a base plan for 88 Milton Street where we've got a CR that's
almost ready to go after 10 years of negotiating with the state. Um, but the base plan shows the ACE and I I think it it clips a part of this field area. I don't know that it
>> Oh, it's all it all, John. It goes all the way up to 138. Yes, it's on the other hand, there's a lot that's already built in the ACC. >> Oh, yes. >> Yeah. The Wakefield estate and everything on Avenue A, it's just a
large area. So, it's not the AC doesn't mean you can't do projects. >> Oh, absolutely. >> Complicated. Yeah. >> It's just a level level of review. That's all. >> Yeah. >> Steve, you you may have that uh right at your fingertip. You know, if so, you
might want to send that to uh Ryan and Carolyn and Rob, etc. >> Uh yes, I I shall do that. Sean, did you hear that? >> I did. We did. >> Thank you. >> Good. >> I used to be a wells consultant and I
would have told my clients about this project that yes, it is in ACE that means it has NEPA jurisdiction as they call it. But I think you would escape further MEEPA review quite quickly
simply because the project is not on a scale that triggers further review. So you might have to file an ENF at most. I don't know maybe others would could say what's likely but I don't think it would
be a real hurdle. >> And Tom this is Steve again. Furthermore, >> if you stand on Brush Hill Road, >> uh, where the driveway is and look south, I think you can see a wetland
within 100 ft. Just just for everybody to realize that I believe there may be a wetland jurisdictional wetland within 100 ft of that intersection with Brush Hill Road. That's all >> right, Steve. That's That's where we had
the joint meeting with the historic uh group. >> That's That's >> Yes. Exactly. >> Exactly. That's correct. >> Yeah. Just FYI for the folks who are consulting for the town.
>> We appreciate that. Thank you. >> Well, thanks. And yeah, we we'd have a file on that and I I think the wetlands were flagged for that. >> Yes, I'm sure they were. So, Philip, I don't know if you can find
that file and it'll be out of date because it's more than three years, but uh it would give you certainly an idea of where the flags were >> and again that would be on the west side of >> uh Brushell Road. >> I guess a part of my question and I'm
I'm I'm trying to think about process-wise what this looks like. >> Yeah, me too. I was trying to take a step back because >> yeah, >> we're just finishing a master plan here, right? And so this is very this is very
conceptual in nature and I just want to go back to John when and and maybe you can you can fill us in a little bit more because you you said the next steps. I I think from our process is like defining what those next steps are. I know you
said a notice of intent. Can you just get a little bit more into the meat of that? like if we were to move forward with the like with this what would we have to do um in terms of like the next steps >> my suggestion would actually be to file an ENRAD to find the resource areas so
that doesn't you can do that outside of um having to have the MEPA discussion or just to so an INRAD is you know you just delineating the wetlands identifying the resource areas find out what's jurisdiction out there that locks that
in >> even further. Like, you know, our goal here is not to sell services that wind up not helping the town. Our goal here is to provide services that actually move the ball forward. And while I'd love to send staff out to go delineate
wetlands and understand resource areas and all of that, if we don't understand the continuing resolution and how we're defining structure, >> it that there's kind of two issues here and and maybe they go hand in hand, right? >> Is there a way to start that? But but maybe but maybe that's a a second piece
of this, right? But maybe you need that information, I guess, is what our question is back to the concom. Do you want us to go that route? I think there's two issues here. One is the whole structural what is a structure and like the the mission of of of what this
restrictions here, what what it's possible. And then the second thing here is is like figuring out um what that charge is for the the concom uh you know flagging where we are by wetlands and stuff like that. So I guess we're asking
you is like what what you need from us to to advance the >> when I file a notice of intent like we're much further along in a design process than we are right now and I I just don't want to spend that money if it turns out >> that's true. So I think Hans is correct
that if you do the ENRAD that's that's a simple just resource area delineation that'll tell us whether or not any part of the project is within 200 feet of the Neponet or 100 ft from the wetlands on the as I said on the west side of
Brushill Road. That's easy because that would trigger the need for a notice of intent. But if you're not within our jurisdictional area then you don't have to file it. But we have another role. We have a secondary role here and that is to enforce the conservation restriction.
>> That's that's different, >> right? >> Yeah. You need to identify the resources regardless. But um I mean you wouldn't necessarily need to file an ANRAD. just make the decision based on that. I mean, you could probably just do an off mapping without having to, you know, get people out in
the U um but yeah, I I think the having a conversation with town council, understanding what flexibility we have and making an interpretation of the language in the CR um so to get a legal opinion and
obviously John, you're qualified to do that yourself, but um on on someone that will break down the language in the CR kind word by word to just say if give us the the kind of
not decision but let us know where we have flexibility in in interpretate in in interpreting what's what's in that language because when I read it there is towards the end of the CR there is flexibility that's allowed by the
conservation commission there's also the the historic work that's been done on the field that is, you know, structures that shows that there's already been modifications to it. So, I just don't want to step on our own
feet and jump to conclusions if we don't have to. >> So, I'm I'm not sure that answers your question, Rob. I >> No. And to be and to be honest, I think, you know, I've spoken to a number of lawyers, too. Um, we we've had some
conversation with town council. I've had some conversation with John. And honestly, even the people here, I I think it's not it's very gray is what I will say. It's very gray the the the deed. And and maybe too, you know,
Steve, um, to Steve's point is do we need to, you know, there is other Flatly members in town. Should we discuss with them before we go too far as well? Maybe that helps us define a little bit of this? I'm not sure. Um, but it sounds like we we need to do a little bit more
homework on our end. Um, and you know, John, maybe I can continue to speak with you as well and we can kind of prod forward with uh town council uh and maybe we set up a meeting or something with town council with with um a few of us and then uh at least go down that one
route and then Ryan, you could help at least do the preliminary work to figure out um how far away we are from wetlands and stuff. Um, and it sounds like we sounds like we have a plan of a number of things here that we need to uh investigate and then kind of regroup
again, I think, so that we we have an idea going forward before we get like too far in front of ourselves as well. >> Sounds like a plan. >> All right. Well, we really appreciate uh the meeting um and to discuss this with
you um and we look forward to not being the last meeting as well. because I'm sure we'll be uh in front of you again soon. >> All right, that's great. Any other comments, questions from conservation commission members? I don't see any
hands. I hear anything. >> Thank you for coming. Okay. >> All right. Thank you. Appreciate it. >> Oh, we have to have a motion to adjurnn. Uh Hans, did you make a motion to adjurnn? Thank you. Seconded. Arthur. Thank you very much. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor? I
>> I that's unanimous to adjourn from the conservation perspective. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you everyone. >> Thank you. Appreciate your time. >> Thank you. Thanks.