Speaker 1: All right. Good evening. This is a Native Conservation Commission. It's Thursday, June 4th. I'm Jeff Richards sitting the chair for Matt Gardner. We have a, an abbreviated schedule for tonight. Agenda for tonight. We'll be continuing three cases to our next meeting or five cases to our next meeting on Thursday, June 10th, Speaker 2: Wednesday, June 10th. Speaker 1: That's what I said. Wednesday, June 10th. And then we'll be doing an order of condition tonight for one of the cases. So with that, we'll, is anyone on? Speaker 2: David is online. We do have two other residents.
One of them I believe is the representative for 16 Peterson. Speaker 1: Okay. So we have a, we have, we have a quorum. Yes Speaker 2: We do. We've got a quorum here just in the room actually. David is excellent, is the bonus and just, I'm not sure the folks named resident, which case you're on for. But again, there will not be any discussion on any of the filings this evening except for 16 Peterson Road. All of the other filings have been continued to the June 10th agenda. Okay. Speaker 1: With that. Alright, so we'll start, we're gonna be opening up 1 36 South Main Street,
which is across the determination of applicability in accordance with the Wetlands Protection Act, mass General Laws chapter 1 31, section 40 and NEX local wetlands bylaw Article 79. The Native Conservation Commission will hold a public meeting on request for determination of applicability filed by Edward Garland for property located at 1 36 South Main Street Map 51 lot 40. The proposal is to construct a detached accessory dwelling unit on the lot of an existing single family home. So as you said, this will be continued to the meeting on Wednesday, 10 June.
So do I hear a motion? Motion to continue. Second. All right. So all in favor, David on line? Yes. Great, thank you. All right. So we have continued that case. The second is 24 Peterson, which is a notice of intent In accordance with the Wetlands Protection Act. Master general Laws Chapter 1 31, section 40 in Nat Local wetlands bylaw Article 7 89. The NA Conservation Commission will hold a public hearing on a notice of intent filed by Peter Lavo, DNL Design Group, Inc. Representing Marcello Al's, new generation custom homes
for property located at 24 Peterson Road Map 15 lot 1 69 H. The proposal is to demolish the existing single family home and construct a new single family home with associated site features. So again, this will be continued to our meeting on the 10th of June. So I have a motion to continue. So moved. Seconded. Seconded, seconded. All in favor, David? Yes. Thank you. All right. The next is 2 73 West Central Street. Again, this will be continued in accordance
with the Wetlands Protection Act, mass General Laws Chapter 1 31, section 40, and the Na nex local wetlands bylaw Article 79. The NA Conservation Commission will hold a public hearing on a notice of intent filed by Natty King, Fort Point Associates, Inc. Representing Eddie Meter, Gable's Residential Services, Inc. For property located at 2 73 West Central Street, map 39, lot 30. The proposal is to demolish the existing building and parking lot and construct a new multi-use building with approximately 219 residential units
and associated site features. And this will be continued. So we have a motion to continue. Motion to continue. Thank you. Second. Second, George. This Speaker 2: Gonna be very easy minutes, Speaker 1: David. Yes, thank you. All right. So those are the three that had to be open. The existing were had been previously open. So 56 Beaver Dam Road will be continuing that to the June 10th meeting. Have a motion to continue. Motion to continue. Thank you. Seconded. Yep. George seconded. All right.
All in favor, David? Yes. All right, thank you. The next is a notice of intent 1 0 4 West Central Street. I have a mo a mo a motion to continue. Motion continue. Seconded. Okay, George. All in favor, David? Yes. Thank you. All right. So those were all the, the, the cases. The next will be the notice of intent for 16 Peterson Road, which is to review the order of conditions. You said the the applicant is not
Speaker 2: No. Joe is on the line. Joe, just to confirm you guys did not have any questions or concerns about the drafted order of conditions? Speaker 3: Nope. No. No questions. Everything looked fine for us. Thank you. Speaker 1: Okay. I showed just in, in condition 31, the word two need to be inserted. Speaker 2: Yes, it does. Google reminded me of that as Speaker 1: Well. Thank you. Speaker 2: Should I read through them all or at least the S conditions Speaker 1: At least? Sure. Speaker 2: So in starting off, we do have our standard administrative information, a summary of the proposed project and the approved documentation, noting
that the project does meet the performance standards of 10.585. Based on the review of this commission with the mitigation planting area that was provided on the site plans, an 850 square foot mitigation area strip will be installed along the rear of the property line between the yard and the wetland resource area. And the project does also meet the requirements of the town's stormwater bylaw, scrolling through to the first special condition, which is condition 24. This is our standard stormwater inspection condition.
We just added in for the projects that have stormwater management systems. Condition 27 relates to the mitigation planting area, noting that the planting area shall be installed per the approved plans and comply with the following requirements. All planting work shall be performed by hand or with handheld equipment. All planting work shall be performed or supervised by a qualified qualified professional. And contact information for the professional selected shall be provided to the conservation office in advance of any installation. Installation of mitigation plans shall occur during appropriate seasons between April 15th and June 15th,
or September 15th and October 30th. If landscaping must occur outside these windows, the applicant shall inquire with conservation staff prior to installation to ensure proper watering protocol is established. I added this condition because the planting area is gonna be behind the fence that's gonna be installed. So I just wanna be sure if there's gonna be a watering need that that's figured out before the access is more limited to that area. Yes. Speaker 1: Do they, I mean right now we're in a water ban, correct? Speaker 2: Yes. Right now we are in a water ban. I am fingers crossed, hoping that, that by the time these mitigation plants are installed,
we will be out of our drought. But if there is a water ban, Joe, feel free to reach out and we can talk about what that looks like. In terms of the mitigation plans. I believe because these plants are a permit requirement, they are allowed to be watered even during the watering ban. Speaker 3: Okay, thank you. Speaker 2: Letter D. A memo completed by the qualified professional who performed or supervised the installation of mitigation plants, including photos of the installed plantings, shall be provided within 30 days of mitigation plants being installed. The memo should note compliance with the approved planting plan and detail any changes made from the plan, if any.
And finally, all mitigation plantings must install, must survive. There we go. A minimum of one year from the date of planting in order for the site to be eligible for a certificate of compliance. And Joe, just so you're aware, that doesn't necessarily hold up the certificate of occupancy process. It's just the closeout for the wetlands permit that that puts a a Hold on. Okay, Speaker 3: Great. Thank you. Speaker 2: 28. The applicant shall provide three mitigation saplings on the lot to replace the three trees greater than six caliber inches proposed to be removed from the site.
These may be included in the mitigation planting area or elsewhere on the lot since almost the entirety of the lot is within the wetlands. Jurisdiction species shall be submitted to the conservation agent for review and approval prior to installation. And then the last couple of sort of changes to our standard template because of the location of the rear fence line and the fact that the 25 foot and 40 foot no build zones are fully off the site. I just noted that the rear fence line should be marked with our required markers. Garage placard is required. And then finally, as an addition to our certificate of compliance process, just a a follow-up written statement
from the person who installed the mitigation plantings, noting compliance with the survival requirement and the 10.585 performance standards. And then in our perpetual conditions, we're just adding in that the riverfront mitigation area shall remain in a naturalized state and perpetuity per 10.585 H. And lastly that the stormwater system operation and maintenance plan requirements remain in effect in perpetuity and are the responsibility of the current or any and any successor and interest of the property. Speaker 1: Okay. Alright.
Is there anyone else? Any abutters? Speaker 2: The public hearing has been closed questions, so we don't actually take any public comment. Alright. Speaker 1: So that's it. Any questions? Commission? David, any questions? Comments? I'm good, thank you. Alright, well with that we have a, a motion motion to approve those conditions. Seconded George? Alright. All in favor, David? Aye. Yes. All right. That is it. Speaker 2: Oh, and then one more continuation for 43 Cyprus. Yep. Speaker 1: Well, thank you Joe. Speaker 3: Thank you guys for your help.
I appreciate your time. Thanks. Have a good night. Speaker 1: You too. A good night. And then the, the, the final case, 43 Cypress Road has that, that was previously opened, right? Yes. So this is just a, a motion to continue. So I, I hear a motion. So moved. Second. Seconded by Jim. All in favor? Aye David? Yes. All right. Speaker 2: Just one quick update just 'cause I did have the site visit out at the Jennings pond today with the JPPI residents. I just wanted to share some photos briefly
with the commission of the current water levels. We'll, we'll I do have a more substantive discussion item for this on Wednesday's agenda, but just since I was out today, I just wanted to see if folks had any differing opinions that I should communicate to the residents. So this is the current status of the Beaver Dam, sort of further down the access road on town forest. By my approximation, it looks to be holding back about two feet of water, maybe a little bit more, maybe a little bit less, depending on where exactly along the dam you are. Currently the, I'm going the wrong way with my photos.
Apparently the sort of larger wetland area, this is the sort of looking back upstream of that Beaver dam. Overall water levels look fairly bog standard in this area upstream of the Beaver dam. I didn't have a chance to walk down the blue trail today. I had to run for another meeting. But based on where the water levels are in this area, I would expect that that trail is wet but not flooded right now. I can get out there and check that out before the meeting next week.
And currently the here is folks are able to see it. It's really hard to get iPhone photos to display properly because of how big the files are. There we go. So this is the Beaver Dam at Oak Street. So I know there's a lot of vegetation in the way, but this is that beaver dam. And you can see the two sets of cages for the flow leveler in the background. This beaver dam is much higher in height, but the flow leveler device is functioning. There is water moving through the pipes coming out at the
outlet on the big Jennings pond side. It is not a huge stream of water because of how, what the water levels are in big Jennings pond right now. But there is certainly a, a visible flow coming through that culvert pipe. And then the, again, a little bit difficult to see with all the vegetation in the way, but the water level is above the bottom of the culvert pipe under Oak Street in Big Jennings Pond. The water levels have dropped from what they were right
after we breached that Beaver Dam north of Route nine as one would expect. That was sort of an influx of water that is evening out and currently at the outfall for Big Jennings Pond, the water is a few inches over the weir, the top of the weir boards, which are at max height right now. And so there is a, a steady outflow of water from this structure leaving Jennings Pond, the residents. Do those get adjusted? Speaker 1: Hmm? Do those get adjusted? Speaker 2: I did have DBW add another board back in,
but they are now at the max height that the metal structure allows for. My recommendation was not to breach at this time, especially given the increased drought status, but to do another site visit in two weeks to just check in on what the water levels are because of the increased doubt drought status. I do want to make sure that we are not seeing extreme dry conditions in any of the water bodies, but I also don't want to unnecessarily breach the Beaver Dam and dry out an area that currently has what appear
to be very healthy water levels. I mean, if folks have driven around town and seen the various water bodies throughout Natick, Charles River Lake Constituit, they're all quite low right now. I would say probably six inches to a foot below the sort of standard watermarks and water levels. And we're Speaker 1: Getting rain on Sunday. Yeah, Speaker 2: We're getting some rain on Sunday. We're still about an inch and a half to two inches below what we need to get drinking water out of our drought status. But I'm hoping that some of this additional spring rain will help sort of pull us out of that. The management task force should be meeting next week.
They usually meet the, are you meeting today or they're meeting next week? The Speaker 1: Drought, Speaker 2: The drought management task force at the state level. Yes. So I just wanted to see if the commission felt any differently about the water level situation in town Forest. If they do feel like a Beaver Dam breach would be appropriate now at this point. But I, I do think that a site visit in two weeks makes the most sense based on the discussion at the last meeting. Some of the research that I've done, I know Mike prepared some comments that I'll have available for the commission at the next meeting as well for a, a bit of a, a bigger discussion about the topic. Speaker 4: So there were two beaver dams though, right?
We're talking about the first one you showed. Speaker 2: So yes, the first one. So there's two Beaver dams, there's one right at Oak Street, and then there's one further into Town Forest. That's the one that the volunteers would like to breach. Speaker 4: And then you, you breached one that was north, north of this Yes. Speaker 2: Up in pick Pond. Right. Speaker 4: Well, what happened then though that that didn't like affect this dam? It didn't like, oh, so Speaker 2: No, there was a huge amount of water that came through there. It was, it was actually over topping the dam. It was at Oak Street, which means it was likely over topping the, the upstream dam as well on one. Okay. Because I, I did check repeatedly after that breach
and you know, the water level rose quite substantially in Jennings Pond after that breach. But because it's a weir controlled pond, it has that sort of max level that is established by the weir structure. So all of that water essentially moved in and then immediately moved out of the system. It was sort of a known net increase because of that. I see. Speaker 4: Structure, see, Speaker 1: Are these the same beavers? Speaker 2: Well, I mean kids, cousins, nieces and nephews, but likely all of the beavers in Natick are, are somewhat genetically related just based on proximity.
Speaker 1: But I mean, it's not the one lodge that's maintaining all the Speaker 2: No, there's at least three lodges between the pond systems that I'm aware of in Town Forest and Jennings Pond with at least another two lodges in pick pond. As far as I'm aware we were drowning in beavers, Speaker 1: But they didn't, they, when they topped their dam, well they come out and build it higher or, or they just not. So Speaker 2: When it, as far as I can tell with that natural over topping event, it does look like they may have added a little bit of material at the Oak Street Dam,
but it doesn't appear that there was any sort of new construction at that upstream dam. My guess is that the influx of water was so brief that it didn't necessarily trigger them and they're also limited by the bank height in that area. So they couldn't necessarily build it higher at that upstream location. Speaker 4: Okay. So w were the neighbors happy with all, all that Speaker 2: The neighbors would like to breach? Oh, they do. They feel like the, the drop in water level from the influx that was a result of the earlier Beaver Dam breach I is the start of a larger problem. I I did try to sort of go through a lot of the points
that we talked about last time and then I let them know that I would, I would talk about it with you all tonight if, if you felt differently than my recommendations that you are the jurisdictional body and that, that would be the sort of marching orders. But that my recommendation at this time would be to wait another two weeks for a two weeks Speaker 1: Visit. Speaker 4: Oh we are, it is a drought too. I mean water water's gonna go down Speaker 2: Anyway. Yeah. And that is my concern is, is the water level in those systems is very healthy compared to the rest of town. So my concern is that if we're continuing to draw water out of the sort of wetland in town forest, those water levels may become low enough.
Obviously they're getting feedback from pick pond as well, but there's additional beaver dams. So it's, I'm trying to look at the whole hydrologic system that is moving through that area. Speaker 1: The water's moving over the, where even at the highest point that means that the, the, the Gen Big Jennings is. Speaker 2: I did try to explain that. Speaker 1: So I mean that's the barometer right there. I mean, and then even, I mean you could even drop it down one and probably it would be okay to see what the flow is before. Speaker 2: Yeah. Speaker 5: Who, who's the owner of the Weir? Is that the town? Speaker 2: The town? Yes. The town built Jennings Pond.
That, that used to be a stream. Yep. I've seen the photos in, in Doug's wife offices, Doug's wife's office of them building the weir structure to create Jennings Pond Speaker 1: For Speaker 2: Recreation. Speaker 1: So is that why they own the land underneath? Do they own Yes. Speaker 2: That's why the town owns the pond. The town owns Big Jennings Pond. Not the commission. The the town. The town. Oh, Speaker 1: Not the people owns like to the center. Speaker 2: No, not for Jennings Pond. It, it varies based on water body. Speaker 5: But that's the other set. Little Jennings. Yes. Speaker 2: In town forest, the owners own two about, so
Speaker 5: The road basically, Speaker 2: Yeah, it's, it's, it's like most of the way, three quarters of the way through the wetland and some of the lots, it's, it's all the way to the access road, which is why we got those owners permission before we installed the flow leveler device. So yes, those are my updates at this point in time. Okay. Speaker 1: Any, so there was some articles in the report about the, the dam breaching and about some, you know, last minute appeals by some people on one side. Speaker 2: The, oh, is this about the the actual human made dam? Speaker 1: Yeah, the dam in Speaker 2: All of our permits are in place.
All of our regulatory agencies are on board with our process. We actually submitted the notice to proceed to US Army court today that has to be submitted a minimum of two weeks prior to the start of construction. Currently the anticipated start date for mobilization is June 27th. Speaker 4: Wow. Really? Speaker 1: June 27th. When do you think they'll start the breach? Speaker 2: The in water work is allowed to start July 16th. Speaker 1: Okay. Wow. Speaker 4: They selected a, a contractor. Speaker 2: Oh yeah. Contractor's been selected. I have a, Flynn is the selected contractor. Apparently they have quite a bit dam removal experience. Adrian Dun from G-Z-A-G-Z-A is on board for the entire construction process for administration.
We have a weekly construction standup meeting that is scheduled between all relevant parties, including myself. We did do, if folks recall that order of conditions, the, the pre pre-construction site visit where we talked about methods and means with the contractor after that notice to mobilization date, the inspection for the erosion controls Yeah. Will also occur. Speaker 1: Would we do a, Speaker 5: Because that was what they had what some, there was like wood chips and other, Speaker 2: So they, we are doing matting with wood chips. I think the original detail just called for wood chips,
but the contractor did choose to add in the option of, of the, the matting as well. Speaker 1: Smart. Would we do it at least like once they start really mobilizing a visit at some point during the project? Oh, we Speaker 2: Can absolutely arrange that. We're, it's, it's a bit of a delicate process of balancing sort of the public observation of an active construction site. And, but as the commissioner, as a permitting authority, I'm sure we can arrange something cool. Maybe a nice picnic lunch. Speaker 1: Nice. I think that reports that there are,
the town is long in the park to be the viewing area. Speaker 2: Yes. Old town park on the north side of the river will be open for public access. Grove Park on the south side will be completely closed Speaker 4: For public access. Speaker 2: Yeah. And Speaker 5: I'm surprised some entrepreneur hasn't done something with the, the concrete that they'll be removing, you know, halfway memorial little, Speaker 2: Oh, that's like how they did with fragment, the school that came down. The bricks. Speaker 4: Yeah, the bricks. In fact, Doug said he wanted something, wasn't it? Maybe the gate mechanism or something. Oh, Speaker 2: Those will be staying in place actually. Those, the black gate mechanisms, those will stay as sort
of like the memorial for the the historic dam. Speaker 4: I have an unrelated question. Do you want Speaker 2: Adjourn or is it a relevant question? Speaker 4: Yeah, it's sort of relevant. But Fisk Pond to Lake Constitu. Yes. Does that wooden structure that that it's a dam. Oh yeah. Who, who's D-C-R-D-C-R owns? Okay. Yes, because it looks unsafe broken. No one end. Speaker 2: Oh, you talking about the boardwalk? That's Speaker 4: The boardwalk, right? Speaker 2: Yes. DCR is still the answer and Okay, that is, it's technically closed to public access, Speaker 1: But water's like pouring over it. I haven't seen that before.
So, and the water flows into Lake right into Lake, Speaker 2: Yes. Fisk Pond, I believe Speaker 1: It goes, Speaker 2: Goes into the upper lake. It flows north into Speaker 1: Lake Lake, yeah. Okay. And we've Speaker 2: Screwed up all the natural drainage patterns, this area. It's Speaker 1: Crazy. Thanks. But, but Duck Pond does not get into, Speaker 2: No. Duck Pond is part of the Charles River watershed and actually drains south to Indian Brook and then to the Charles Speaker 1: River under by the ice. By the ice rink there. Yep. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Alright. Speaker 2: Oh, and the ro pond rebid is out
and closes June 18th. Wow. Speaker 1: Great. Excellent. Thank you. Alright, well with that, oh, Speaker 6: I'm sorry Claire, did we resolve that we are gonna accept your recommendation and give it two weeks? Oh, Speaker 2: That is actually a good point. I, I don't need a vote or anything, but just a formal consensus of the commission. I I would, Speaker 6: I would agree with that. I Speaker 1: Agree. I agree with Nate. I trust you Claire. Yes. Speaker 2: Great. Speaker 1: That was all. Alright, well, with nothing else, I have a motion to adjourn. Let's adjourn. Second adjourn. All in favor, David? Very
Speaker 6: Good.