Speaker 1: All right. This is the Native Conservation Commission. Welcome everybody. This is our second meeting in June. Just to remind everyone, we have one meeting in July, which is on July 17th. Yes. But let's go ahead and open the public hearing part of the meeting. And of course, it has changed my page on my computer. I'll get back to that in a second. But the first item in the agenda is a certificate of compliance for seven Merrifield Lane. And apologies, I was clicking around and I'll get back to it in a second. All right. So seven Merrifield Lane. This is a request for a certificate of compliance,
but under checking the box of work never initiated. Correct. So it was, there was an order of conditions that was issued work wasn't done, and there's a request or a need to sell the property. So we want to go ahead and do that. So, sir, if you wouldn't mind introducing yourself for the minutes and just beyond what I just said, let us know what's, what's going on. Speaker 2: Certainly. Good evening everyone. John Townsend, resident of Natick seven Maryfield Lane, at least for a little while longer. Also, if I look sort of vaguely familiar to people,
I'm also the Deputy town administrator and the Director of Finance. So, yes, back in 2018, seems like forever ago, we did want to do some improvements to our backyard, put a deck up, do some path work, put in some proper steps down to the deck. But then financial considerations, very expensive. COVID hit, just never sort of got the project off the ground, never even started it. Fast forward to 2025, I'm at that particular age, which I am actually gonna retire. So we did put our house on the market, have an agreement
with a lovely family, love Natick, love the neighborhood, love the house, love the backyard too. But one of their requests was that I did get the certificate of compliance with regards to the outstanding order of conditions around the plans that we had for the backyard. So here this evening, just requesting that in order to facilitate our sale of the property. Happy to answer any questions you may have. Speaker 1: Great. Thanks Mr. Townsend. And thanks for all the work that you've done for the, for the town. When is your official retirement? Or Speaker 2: September 25th? 12:30 PM 12. Count me down.
That is at 90, 92 days. Yes. Yeah. Speaker 1: Excellent. Well, congratulations for that. That's a, that's a big move. Thank you. So, Claire, you've, you've done a site visit, no work has been done. Correct. I did Speaker 3: A site visit yesterday to the property and did confirm that no work has been initiated. Speaker 1: Great. So with that, if there's no further discussion on that, would someone make a motion to issue a certificate of compliance indicating that the work was never initiated? So we can close out Mr. Townsend's, open Order of conditions. So moved. Thank you, Jim. Is that seconded? Second. Thank you, Jeff. Any further discussion on that? Any questions? All those in favor? That's it, sir. Thank you, gentlemen.
Thank you very much. Appreciate all your work. Have a good evening. Thanks. Thank you. Enjoy Speaker 4: The beer guard. Speaker 1: I don't know if we'll get there. We got a full agenda tonight, brother. We'll sure do. All right. Next item on the agenda. Internet slowing down. Next item on the agenda is a certificate of compliance for 29 Indian Ridge Road. Clear? Speaker 3: Yes. And we will likely not have anybody on the line here tonight. The owner lives outta state. If folks, oh, Speaker 4: I'm here. Oh, hi Speaker 3: Heather. Apologies. Speaker 4: Hi, Heather. I'm her daughter Heather Blasberg. Speaker 1: Great. And so certificate of Compliance.
We have a, from Cornerstone Engineering, we have a letter indicating that please accept this letter as certification. The septic system was completed in substantial compliance with the approved plans. Great. That's a good piece there. Claire, have you been out there site all buttoned up? Speaker 3: Yes. I did go out to that site yesterday as well. The site is, the work has been completed and the rear yard is stable with grass grown in. Speaker 1: Great. Heather, anything to add? You're the daughter. Anything from your folks place or that Speaker 4: Oh, I miss it. We, we sold it. It was my childhood home and Oh yes.
Oh. But that's gotta be Speaker 1: Bittersweet. Speaker 4: It was bittersweet, yes. Speaker 1: Got it. All right. Well, let's close out this bit of administrative stuff so you can move on. Any questions from the commission about this hearing on someone? Make a motion to issue a certificate of compliance for 29 Indian Ridge Road. Speaker 4: Thank you. Speaker 1: So moved. Thank you, Jeff. Is that seconded? Seconded. Thank you, Jim. Any further discussion on that? Goes in favor. All right, Heather, you got what you need from us? Thank you all. Good luck. Speaker 4: Thank you. Do you send that certificate or how does that work? Heather? Speaker 3: I'll reach out to you by email to confirm the address that it goes to. But I can send that by mail. Absolutely.
Speaker 4: Okay. Or email is fine. Speaker 3: It does have to be recorded at the registry of deeds. So there will need to be somebody to either mail it with the fee payment or drop it off at the registry. Speaker 4: Oh, okay. So you, you, you just email me the instructions then? Yep, Speaker 3: Yep. I'll follow up by email. Speaker 4: Perfect. Thank you very much. Course. Appreciate it. Of course. Thank you Heather. Speaker 1: Bye-bye. Alright, next item. The agenda is a request for determination of applicability for 14 Brewery Lane. Let's go ahead and formally open this. So, in accordance of the Wets Protection Act in Natick's local wetlands bylaw article 79, the NA Conservation Commission hold a public meeting on a request for determination of applicability filed
by Nick Arthur for property located at 14 Dr. Lane map. 13 lot 180 5. The proposal is for minor grading and a retaining wall associated with a new single family home. Welcome. Speaker 5: Thank you very much. Nick is on vacation. I'm Ryan Yitz. We are part, Speaker 6: And I'm Debbie Anderson online, the wetlands scientist for the project. Speaker 1: Great. Thank you. Great. Ryan, just give us a voiceover of what's going Speaker 5: On. Yeah, so we're proposing a construction of a new single family home that is outside of the 100 foot buffer. There is some grading and an extension of a stone wall that will be
inside the 100 foot buffer. Claire sent us some comments. Those included some trees that will likely be removed and what we will replace them with as well as a, a recommendation to move the infiltration system into the, a little bit further into the property inside the 100 foot buffer from where you see it on the plan. Speaker 3: Yeah. So based on the soil testing at TP one and the depth to groundwater, I did recommend that the applicant shift the system to this location where there's additional surface cover.
So they'll have additional depth to groundwater and just give the, the system a little bit more room to breathe. Considering this is outer buffer zone and the project's erosion controls will still capture this area. I did not feel that that was out of bounds in terms of a suggestion in, so, Speaker 1: Sorry, I gotta get my, where, where is the new proposed location for the, so Speaker 3: We will get revised plans showing this before the determination is issued, but my recommendation was to shift the system that's currently proposed right here to this area over here
where it's higher up. So there'll be additional cover giving, additional depth to groundwater for the system. Speaker 1: What kind of regrading would then be necessary to accommodate that? Because that's a sloped location, right? Speaker 3: Almost none because of the depth that the system is gonna be installed at a top of stone 1 54, it'll be sitting quite deep in this hillside. Even if it comes up a little bit, the hillside will likely be able to be graded over it with no issue. Speaker 1: So the top of it is at 1 54, Speaker 3: That is what the current system plans show? Yes.
Speaker 1: Okay. And Ryan, in your experience, I mean that, that's technically doable. You guys can park that there without any problem. Speaker 5: Yeah, there that side of the property is very steep. So that's kind of what Claire's getting at, that there should be plenty, there will be more ground cover over it Speaker 1: Than if it was in the other place Speaker 5: Than if it was in the other place. Yeah. Okay. Speaker 3: Because of the way that the lot is sloped. Speaker 1: Okay. So there's no, so this, this here, I mean this really, I mean, you know, there is some regrading that's going on, but it's in terms of the final grading, I mean,
how will that change what's proposed here? 'cause, 'cause you know, there is some feathering that was gonna be proposed on the corner. Oh, Speaker 5: You mean with the move? Speaker 1: With the move? Speaker 5: Okay. Yeah. No, it will be li likely exactly the same as Speaker 1: What's proposed here. Yes, yes. Speaker 5: Okay. Speaker 1: And you'll be providing finalized plans that show the move that'll Speaker 3: Be referenced in the determination. Okay. Okay. That was the, the letter was provided 'cause they didn't think they were gonna be able to get revised plans in time for tonight. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 7: And the, the, so I'll let you dig out, will be
used on site someplace or Speaker 5: Yeah, most likely. I don't know how much soil is coming off of there. Do we have that Claire? Speaker 3: You guys have the overall cubic yards of Earth movement, but I don't think that we have a specific amount of fill that was coming off of the site. Speaker 5: It is gonna be a walkout basement, so I don't, I don't expect much to come off the site. I do expect it to mostly be used to grade out what is there and what we, what we build. Speaker 3: Yeah. So this patio here is at the grade elevation at the
lower portion of the hill, and then the driveway comes in at the higher elevation. Speaker 1: So agreeing that the, you know, so, so with the assumption that the, the system can go, or the infiltration can be moved to where it, it's proposed to do. Sorry, I just lost my train of thought. Let, lemme look at this. Look at this. Yeah, keep going. It'll come back to me. Anyone other, other questions Speaker 7: There? There's just an administrative thing on the, on the letter that Ms. Anderson prepared. I was reading it. It said that the, the property is on the Northerly side of Porter Road. I I, it may have been a template that was used to do that
because Porter Road is on the other side of town. Correct. And this is, so Speaker 6: My apologies. Thank you. Speaker 7: No, no problem. I was confused to him is that Speaker 5: You're like, do I know where River is Speaker 7: Now? Yeah. I was like, oh, Porter Speaker 5: All Speaker 7: Time by Porter and, but Speaker 6: Yep. Buke Speaker 3: Debbie, since we need to get those revised plans, if you want to submit and edited one. Speaker 6: Sure. Speaker 1: Yeah, that's, I just answered my own question, so I'm I'm, I'm good there. Yeah, so I think with revised plans, I think we, we've got what we need for this. Speaker 8: I just, I had a quick question.
The other, the other system Yes. It's actually under the driveway. Is that, that that's gonna be, yes. Speaker 3: So there are, there are several inspection ports that'll sit in the asphalt so that the system can be inspected per the annual operations and maintenance plan. Okay. Generally we prefer to see systems at least partially out from under the pavement, but given the slope on one side of the driveway and the other utilities to the left of the driveway, there isn't a lot of space at the front of this lot for that system to shift. Speaker 8: And again, in just simple terms,
moving the other one over, it's going to, it is gonna be essentially up higher a a bit. Is that, is that Speaker 3: It might be a little bit higher, but it will likely sit at a very similar elevation as where it is originally proposed. It'll just be more earth on top of it, graded out in that hillside. Speaker 8: Okay. Speaker 1: Do we have where stockpiling is going during construction? I mean, it really is, it's kind of, it's an advantageous site for you guys to be building on. It's kind of sloping, not away from, but kind of parallel to the wetlands. So the likelihood of stuff getting back there
is pretty, is pretty limited. But do we have, yeah. Where would stockpiles be be stored on the site you think? Speaker 5: I would likely say front, left and kind of where the rear infiltration system exists on the plan. Okay. Speaker 1: But certainly contained within erosion controls? Oh yes. Yeah. Speaker 3: The erosion controls extend Speaker 1: Across the back. Yeah. Yeah. Speaker 3: If you wanna have Kevin add those to the plans, Speaker 5: Sure, I can definitely do that. That'd be great. Speaker 1: Other questions, comments, concerns? Speaker 9: I see I see it a little bit differently than maybe some, so I, I see a, I see a valley
where the cut is right, which is obviously the walkout basement and it looks like it's funneling it directly to the wetland. If you follow that contour. Speaker 1: Which one? The 1 59 contour. So if you Speaker 9: Look at, you see the valley between 1 58 and 1 57. Right? I think Speaker 3: I'm running like Speaker 9: 1 56 Right. Speaker 3: Cursor along it on the screen there, Mike. Speaker 9: Correct. So if you follow the, the topographic indicators, it's directing it towards 1 58, 1 57, 1 55, 1 53 meaning, Speaker 1: So kind of a swale like feature. Is that, is that, Speaker 9: Well it's just, it's so topographically
before the cut it went to the north and east water. Okay. Now we're moving water from westerly to the valley or the, you know, whatever you want to call that the saddle say. Okay. And it's no longer going to the north and east, it's going now north. Speaker 10: Which water are we talking about? Speaker 9: Any water. Speaker 3: So Mike, would you prefer to see the stormwater system stay where it's currently located? Speaker 9: You know, I just, I think what I'd like
to see is just some indications of, you know, when, when trees are being removed, you know, we're losing that capacity of, of, of infiltration and we're losing that capacity of that water to slow down, you know, so anything inside the 40 foot buffer for tree removal I think should be looked at, you know, closely in terms of, Speaker 3: So the tree removal will be contained within the erosion control area. Okay. So it's gonna be within those outer 50 feet of buffer zone.
Speaker 9: Okay. Claire, would you, Speaker 1: Would you go to the, the map, the next map that shows post-construction conditions? Speaker 9: 'cause I guess I'm not seeing any tree removal in the, Speaker 3: It is not shown on the plan. Okay. Which is why I asked the question about it being clarified by the applicant. Speaker 1: And if you could, could you zoom in on the, on that upper left corner of the house? Speaker 3: Sorry, do you mean upper as in closer to the wetland or upper as in closer to the vote. Speaker 1: Sorry, the, the back left. Okay, perfect. Of the house. So there, yeah. Great. That's perfect. So, so Mike, what you're saying though is
that you're seeing 1 50, 1 58, 1 59. Speaker 9: So we have a natural channel we can see that goes along the boundary line. Yes. Along the, the western boundary line of the subject property. You know, that that's clearly a probably some sort of channel of, of something that when water flows, it probably flows down through that topographic contours. Yep. So there, my concern is, is that to the east boundary line, which, which things sloped off in that direction to the north
and the east, that no longer happens for a period of, you know, without having a kind of a, a clue in on the scale here. But just if you entertain me, maybe it's 40 feet, 30 feet from the a hundred foot buffer line to where this new regrading is going to occur that creates this, you know, what I would call a saddle for the walkout basement. So it'd be, I just, I would be interesting to see what that means.
'cause I'm not smart enough to kind of figure it out. But I can see that something has changed with the regrading and, you know, so the opportunity for water to move north and easterly is not possible anymore, at least for that period. That, that space. Speaker 1: Debbie, what's your, what's your take on this com? Comments on what Mike's saying? Speaker 6: Yeah, no. So we're talking about putting, you know, relocating one of the infiltration chambers back there. So the water that hits the impervious is gonna be going into the system
and then slowly going underground, you know, to infiltrate. So are you talking about surface wa Speaker 9: Yeah. Speaker 1: Yeah. It's surface water, mike, right? Speaker 9: Correct. Yeah. Speaker 6: Water. Somehow changing direction because of the Speaker 9: Yeah, well this neighborhood. Speaker 6: And so by the surface we're trying to Speaker 9: Avoid water getting onto somebody else's property or, you know, situations where water inherently wasn't necessarily concentrated in moving towards some area previously that now maybe due to the, the grade change is now acting a little differently.
And that's, that's really my main focus. 'cause we've had in this neighborhood projects where grades have grading has changed. We have a lovely new bylaw based on a project in this neighborhood where, you know, water has strangely started to move in different directions that we weren't all expecting. Speaker 5: Interesting. Speaker 6: Hmm. Speaker 5: I think that, well, Speaker 6: Yeah, I, I don't know how much water is gonna be moving through there over, over the surface.
Speaker 3: And so Mike, just so I can get my notes, the Speaker 6: Minutes, it's gonna be long, I would assume in that area. So it will be infiltrating, so I don't imagine it sheet sheet flowing, you know, off of this property onto Ava's property. And I don't know, is there any infiltration on the property currently? Speaker 3: There, there is not any infrastructure as far as I'm aware. But Mike, your primary concern is that instead of the water ending up in the wetlands, it's these abutting properties on Ferndale that are gonna be adversely impacted by potential surface flow. Speaker 9: I don't think that's my point. Okay. I think my point is just, you know, we're changing grade
water that was, that that potentially could flow to the north and East no longer has that ability for a period of whatever, 30, 40 feet. And inherently, you know, we have an existing topographic, you know, topographically, I'm, I'm smart enough to understand where the water's coming down. Yep. Right. It's along that western boundary. However, there's also some water that goes to the north and east and, you know, that's, that's really my concern is, is that are,
are we creating a situation with the walkout basement where the water now is, is being directed in an area that inherently it never was previously? Speaker 5: Like I just want Speaker 9: That's the question. Speaker 5: I just wanna clarify one thing too. It, the current house does have a walkout basement as well. Okay. So that may mentally make it seem more aggressive of a grade change. And if I could point out one thing, so when you're on this property, this is all grassed yard, including the neighbor's up until the neighbor's house, which is about here.
So this angle, I think is kind of like a natural funnel to the wetlands. And this kind of saddle, as you were calling, it kind of continues to push the water north and east as it exists. Okay. Right. In this 1 63, 1 61 1 59 range. Yeah. So with the new house being there, I think it actually may push more of the water away from the neighbor's house. Okay. Where, see now we're at the 100 foot line with the house and this grade change is actually kind of
bumping the grade towards the back and this wall's coming out to meet the 1 58 grade line. So I think maybe mentally now knowing that the, the, the gray does drop off to an existing walkout basement and the house is kind of pushing back, you could actually see that we are almost managing the water more towards our backyard than what was previously towards what would be the northeast corner. If that makes sense. Speaker 7: No, makes, makes perfect sense. Yeah.
Speaker 3: Brian, I'm wondering, and, and this maybe is almost a, a field change, if there even is an opportunity to take that 1 57 and 1 56 now that this storm water system isn't gonna be under there Yep. And almost push it, swale it so that it's directing back towards the wetland again. Yeah, Speaker 5: That's actually a great idea. And I think, like Debbie was saying with, with the infiltration system being over here now hypothetically the runoff should be directed more towards this back section. If there's an overwhelming of recharge,
the water should go towards the wetlands. Speaker 3: Yeah. The water will be overflowing from that direction instead of this direction. But I do think that it, you know, just that little bit of swilling to keep that 1 57 Yeah. Speaker 5: That direction. And honestly of course that would flatten your yard a little bit better. So everyone kind of wants that, you know, Speaker 7: And there's a driveway to the left of the house right now. Is that that Oh yeah. Here I can you look at the, the topo map Speaker 5: Right here. Speaker 7: I, I think that on the pre-existing one that I think it Speaker 5: Right. E Speaker 7: Exaggerates Speaker 5: And like I was saying, saying with Speaker 7: The gray, but the grade is really exaggerated
by being a flat driveway that dips down and then when you get to the back, it just drops off like a shelf and then it, it, you know, Speaker 5: Kind of goes to the back of the house. Right. Yeah. It Speaker 7: Kind of goes like this, it forces it into, I thought you were talking about this swell right here and then as seems to be like a little bit of a rocky outcropping to the left of that house or that is the, that is the what makes the swale I think it kind of, Speaker 1: So Mike, if there was kind of, of like the flattening of the yard and a more kind, a bit of an intentional direction back to the wetlands, would
that alleviate your concerns? Speaker 9: No, I don't, I I honestly don't have any concerns. I just, I it's more of like Speaker 1: Noting it Yes. Just Speaker 5: Discussing through Speaker 9: It, you know, is there, is there anything that we need to be concerned about? I'm, I personally, you know, I just wanna make sure that we're not creating a funnel of Yeah. Of something that we Speaker 1: Towards, towards the neighbors. Towards Speaker 9: The neighbors, toward even towards the wetland. Yeah. Right. Speaker 1: Yeah. I get it. And I Speaker 3: Appreciate that. 'cause I'm the one who gets the calls. Speaker 9: Right. You know, and, Speaker 1: And actually that, that whole parcel back there is all owned by the conservation commission anyway. Oh,
Speaker 5: Well, Speaker 9: Interesting. So, yeah. But no, I, I used to play it back there. I think it's a very nicely, nicely thought out project and, you know, I'd just, I'd just, you know, I'd be, I'd be remiss if I didn't at least ask are we funneling something totally fair. Speaker 1: Absolutely. Totally fair. Absolutely. So, so I think, I mean, this could also be something that as you're building this out, keeping us keeping clear informed. I mean, if we have to tweak the grading a little bit. Yeah. Speaker 3: I think it's maybe even like, as you guys are prepping for final grading Yeah. Getting me out on site Totally. To do a site
Speaker 1: Visit, walk through it a Speaker 3: Look. Yeah, I can definitely add that as a that's an easy Speaker 1: Condition. Let's Speaker 5: To add that. Yeah. Cool. Absolutely. All Speaker 7: Right. Is there a detail on the wall too? Doing we need a detail on the wall. Speaker 3: It's a, it's a ready rock wall, so there isn't a detail that's been provided for it. Speaker 1: This is the, the short little stump of the wall. Yeah. Do we, do we want one of those to be just included in the file? Speaker 3: We can certainly ask for when they're, they're revising the plans anyway. The ready rock. It's just a standard detail that gets added. Speaker 1: If it's a standard detail, let's, let's put it in there just for completeness sake. Okay. Speaker 7: I mean, would that make the water curb around the,
the downhill side of the wall or is the wall gonna be Speaker 5: Yeah, so it will, it will help direct it away from the house towards the back more, I think like you saw from that image, the driveway kind of pitches down and then everything's funneled right to the corner of the house, kind of towards the neighbor, which is that right side of the saddle I was explaining up at the board. So this will kind of help to, I think it will also help to slow the water down. Speaker 1: Okay. So this is a request for determination of applicability.
The question is, are we, do we have enough information to issue a determination? And if so, what would that be? Would it be a negative three determination and then have the condition in there that Claire has final grading inspection so we can just kind of eyeball what that final grading is and just make sure that water's going in the direction that we want it to. Perfect. Does that work for folks? Speaker 3: Yep. And then just the one other condition, the project has to comply with all the stormwater bylaw requirements. Yes. Speaker 1: Yep. Speaker 5: So we're gonna wipe that off. Speaker 1: Not quite, we're working on it. Any further questions or comments on this? Hearing none.
Someone making can make a motion to close please. Motion to close. Thank you, Jim. Is that seconded? Second. Thank you, Mike. Any further discussion on that? All in favor, determination. This will be a negative predetermination, jurisdictional or determination is that it would not have a negative impact on the, on the resource area. Someone wanna make a negative three determination. Motion please. So moved. Thank you Mike. Seconded. Seconded. Thank you Jim. Further discussion? All in favor? That's it. Keep us posted. Awesome. Speaker 5: Thank you all. Speaker 1: All right. Don't go playing in those. We we'll Speaker 3: Send an email. Just Speaker 1: Do it. We're playing in those wetlands anymore. I know. Speaker 5: No more plane Speaker 1: In the wetlands.
Speaker 3: Not with the ticks the way they are these days. My Speaker 5: Best friend grew up next to this house, so actually thank Speaker 1: You. Oh really? Oh that's Debbie. Welcome Debbie. Thanks Debbie. Thank you. Night. I've always, you know, I mean it's, it's wet back there. Oh yeah. You know, I've always had this, you know, like this eyeball on the maps and like can we get a trail or something in there? But there's no place to put one. It's actually Speaker 5: So crazy like that the, it almost seems like the whole Ferndale neighborhood was like built on top of a wetlands. Speaker 1: Yep. Right. I mean it was probably just, you know, probably a lot of fill that came in from the pike construction and the Yeah. Speaker 5: Yeah. Good point. Speaker 1: Alright man, soon. Thank you.
Appreciate your time. Thank you all. Speaker 5: Thanks. Speaker 1: Alright, that's it. Oh no. We've got a request from the applicant to continue two 16 to two 18 South Main Street under the Wes Protection Act and the bylaw and the, the stormwater bylaw. Someone may wanna make a motion to continue that to July 17th. So moved. Thank you Jeff. Is that seconded? Thank you Jim. Any further discussion? Those in favor? Alright, that's it for the public hearing part of this. Let's get a couple of updates, Claire. So we've got minutes from April 3rd been reviewed. Good. Speaker 7: The 30th. The 20th was in there too. The 20th of March.
Speaker 3: But that was from the last meeting. I apologize. I forgot to delete it. Alright. Okay. Speaker 7: Good Speaker 1: Though. So, so the minutes from April three are good. Someone wanna make a motion to approve those? Please Moved. Thank you. Jeff. Is that second? Second. Thank you Jim. Any discussion? Those in favor? Invoices. MAC dues. Do we have, do we wanna keep paying dues to that? No way. Woke organization? No way. Terrible people. They like wetlands. I just said that in public meeting didn't. I'm kidding. And Speaker 7: It's in the minutes. I'm gonna be looking for that. I wanna see that term. Speaker 1: Alright, so we'll make a motion to pay our dues. $845 out of account 2102 from our wetlands fund. Motion.
Motion to pay the dues. Thank you Jim. Is that seconded? Second. Thank you Mike. All this in favor? Not a opposed. Alright. General business discussion. Beavers. How we looking? Beavers. Speaker 3: The solutions is gonna be out on Monday doing the work at the town forest flow leveler device. They're gonna be clearing and repairing the existing devices and also adding an additional device to make a true multi-point system with the hopes that if the beavers come back and get, if they cloud one get wise again, they, we maybe have enough backup to keep water going through there.
Speaker 1: And is that all part of the scope of work? Are we having to pay additional money for that or is that Speaker 3: So we do have to pay additional money for that. It's a, we are getting a discount because the, the existing system failed. We also get a discount because we have a number of locations with Beaver solutions here in town. It'll be about $3,000 for the, the total work. Speaker 1: Okay. And that would come, does it need to Speaker 9: Be permitted or is it under the current, Speaker 3: It's under the existing order of conditions. Speaker 1: And that would, that would come out of our wetlands fund. Speaker 3: That will come out of the trails and forest stewardship funding. That is where we've been paying those bills out of in the past. Okay, good. Technically the beavers are not the
administration of the Wetlands Protection Act. So we cannot pay out of the wetlands fund, but we're at the end of the fiscal year. So where we've got no issues covering those monies. Speaker 1: Aqueduct design, work update? Speaker 3: Yes. Folks will see in the general business discussion folder, it's the draft GPR plans from Feldman. Again, we are really focusing in on those areas where the existing manholes are, so that way we have the best opportunity to confirm pipe location and depth. I just wanted to get the draft plans up there so folks could see it is looking quite good in terms of where the pipe is located versus
where our trail is located. The hope was to minimize the number of crossings of the existing pipe infrastructure in order to be able to really do the design work that we're hoping to do. 'cause the, the geotechnical testing for the boardwalk design is gonna be limited by the location of the aqueduct pipe itself. So we should have the formal report from Feldman in the next couple of weeks. Great. Pick pond. Connector bridge. We are still under review for chapter 91.
Determination of applicability. I check on it every day in the homes. Speaker 1: Is that a bad sign? No, Speaker 3: It's not a bad sign. We're, we're still within the window of review period. It's just a, a waiting game unfortunately. But in discussions with Matt earlier this week, I think we're gonna try to publicize the July meeting to have a bit more of a community engagement discussion about the bridge project in general. So there will likely be some flyers going out to the neighbors if I can manage to squeeze the mailing funds together at the end of the fiscal year. But there will certainly be Facebook posts, website posts and other news blasts to the relevant board
and committee email lists to hopefully get some folks out to hear just a little bit about that project. Speaker 1: Great. And then I Speaker 3: Have two other small updates just so that the commission is aware, sort of tangentially related to the work that we do. But the recreation and parks department, I am technically a part of the project team, but they're leading the application has submitted a letter of interest to the community preservation application process regarding the next year of work
for the parks improvement project. In trying to align the timing with the dam removal project, we're gonna be focusing the next year on permitting the parks projects. The dollar value that goes along with that is not a dollar value that is competitive at a grant level. So we determined we were not gonna try to go for MVP funding for the permitting process, but we are looking to CPC to hopefully support that work. It's about a hundred thousand dollars request to support the total permitting and final construction documents and bid specs. Speaker 1: And this is for all of the park?
Speaker 3: All three of the parks, yes. Okay. They'll be coming in as one notice of intent filing. 'cause the intention is for the work to happen as one project. Speaker 1: Got it. And where do we stand with dam removal? Right now Speaker 3: We are in discussions with the US Army Corps about whether or not the removal of the Charles River Dam in South Natick will impact the Charles River Natural Valley storage area. Apparently the Army Corps has conflicting records. This our dam is included on a list, but that list doesn't actually reference the natural valley storage areas.
It was just filed with the information about the natural. So we're in a little bit of a back and forth with US Army Corps. If it is determined, we'll likely just have to file one additional application with them for a section 4 0 8 finding, which is a rather brief process and we don't expect it to actually delay any of the bid timelines for construction work. We are still on track for removal next summer. Speaker 1: When would bids go Speaker 3: Up? We are aiming, we would be aiming to get bids out likely January timeframe. We are still waiting on hearing about the funding awards for the construction. We have the application in with dam and seawall at the state level.
And MEMA very kindly rerouted our brick program application to the Hazard Mitigation program funding because this dam is noted in our hazard mitigation plan and has been identified as a high hazard dam. We also qualify for that program for funding, but the, the match and the requirements under the state are just a little bit easier. If we can get that funding, we would love it. Super. Speaker 11: Where is the flood storage area? Speaker 3: So there is one small area of identified natural value flow storage area in Natick. It's the Indian Brook area. The wetlands along Route 27.
It is, doesn't extend down to the scale. I was Speaker 1: Just gonna say, why would Speaker 3: The, there there's no, and this is again, why we're they, they have conflicting records. We reach out to CRWA. Apparently this has been coming up in a number of their discussions with the Army Corps about dams on the Charles. So we're hoping that any answers that we find will also help our neighboring communities like Watertown move forward with their hope for hoped for dam removals. Wow, Speaker 9: That'd be great. Yeah. Speaker 1: So it's Watertown and then from Watertown, what's the next dam? Is it, Speaker 3: I believe the next big dams
after Watertown are the start of the That's the Watertown Dam is the one right on Moody Street in that area. Speaker 1: Mo Moody Street and Waltham. Yeah. Speaker 9: Or Speaker 1: Yeah, Speaker 3: Watertown. Walham. It's those three Newton Walham and Watertown are all jammed together in that corner. And I never know which line Speaker 9: Dan Egg's going to put together a river. M-V-T-A-A Speaker 1: Riverboat operation. Paddle boat. Steam paddle boat. Speaker 9: It'd Speaker 3: Be faster than the red line these days. Speaker 1: Faster than the red line. Speaker 7: There's there's nothing like down along like the Charles
River Road, like where you're going through Dover, you know Sorna, that's, there's nothing Speaker 9: Medfield Mill is that? That's all Army Corps that the headwaters of the Yes of the Charles. There is all, Speaker 3: And that's here. I can actually pull up the map that CRWA sent to us. Speaker 9: Yeah, they're pretty particular up there. They can flood that area at, at will, at will if they want to or Speaker 1: Whatever. Turn a handle. Speaker 7: The river gates like right at the bridge, like when you're going over to Dover and Seaborne is that area you go through and the river is like, there's a bridge right there and there's a fire. Yeah, it's always Fire Connection Road.
Speaker 9: It's always flooded. I can't remember the name of the road, Speaker 7: But it's like river. Is it River Road or That's like the back where you take from one 30. So when you come off the 95 Speaker 9: Here, it's, you'll be ready. Are you ready to paddle? What's this? You ready to do some paddling? Speaker 7: I think, you know, I think we, you Speaker 9: Were a jet ski guy. Oh no, Speaker 7: I, I think we list like, you know, for our, for our rideshare program work that you can paddle the work because you can pull up in the broad canal and get out and walk over to, so Speaker 3: Here's the map from the US Army Corp plan.
Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 3: And see if I can get my screen to work properly. I don't want an AI assistant. Please go away. Speaker 1: It's taken over our lives. Speaker 7: That is, Speaker 3: So there you can see the areas identified in red. And so it, it's primarily that area. Along Route 27, the Indian Brook wetland complex is identified Route 16, this is route 16. This Route 27 essentially comes right through the O of Elliot Street right here. And so that's Indian Brook is what crosses our air. Oh, Indian Speaker 7: Brook. Not, not the Charles. Speaker 3: No, not the Charles. It, this does not actually ex it,
it only extends to actually the edge of the Charles is this little portion of red here. So again, we're, we're in that back and forth with them right now. It will maybe require one additional approval from US Army Corps, but we don't expect it to actually slow us down at all. So yes, the rec and parks has submitted a CPC funding request. So they may be looking for a letter of support from the commission potentially moving forward. I wanted to remain off the actual application in terms of applicant just because permitting conflicts, all sorts of fun stuff.
Cemetery reasons. Exactly. And last but not least, the OSRP extension request. I've been working piece by piece in between grant closeout craziness to rework our action plan to extend it for the additional three years. That's the request is essentially taking our action plan and either reassessing the timeline for goals to include the additional three years or even adding in some additional goals to get it the next three years. The state has indicated that they would love to see public engagement around that, those changes.
So I'm gonna be presenting to open space advisory committee as well as the Conservation commission when I have that table finalized, advertising it at large to the public to hopefully get some attendance at both of those meetings in order to have that request ready to go in before the end of the summer. Wow. Speaker 1: Cool. Busy summer for you. Speaker 3: I'm just, I, I, once I get through SEP July 15th of MVP grant closeouts, I, I can breathe a little bit. We got, we got our Hazard mitigation plan grant closed out reimbursement requests submitted. So it's been a lot of payroll reporting
and in kind match tracking for me the last couple weeks. Speaker 1: Alright, I think that's it folks. Anything further? Speaker 8: I just had one comment or question, please. There was water. The water was treated in Fisk Pond. In Lake Tuit. Yes. And I I, I saw it from a telephone pole. I was just want electronically was there, I didn't see anything like on the town website or anything like that, that, Speaker 3: How's that work? So DCR has to send or not DCR the, the company that does the treatments. Solitude. SOLT. Speaker 1: Yeah. Solitude. S-O-L-I-T-U-D-E. Thank
Speaker 3: You Matt. Okay. They're, they're one of the only names in the game who does that kind of work here in the state, except for some of their staff who broke off and formed another company. They have to send out mailed notices to any waterfront abutters. So anybody who has waterfront access and then it has to be posted locally as well as in the paper and in, I believe in the environmental monitor as well. Speaker 1: I believe we have to be told Speaker 3: And we, we, we are told we were notified by email and we also, I, they always just send the notification that they are gonna treat and then I have to send the email back for all, for none such pond.
For this pond. Everyone. I'm like, can I please have the survey information that details why treatment is needed? Yeah. And they always provide it right, right away. But it is always funny that they just never include Speaker 1: It right off the bat. Yeah, I'd, I'd like to kind of, you know, get back to a place where we're getting at least biannual updates Okay. From them in terms of, yeah. Surveys where, you know, where are they treating, you know, I mean that was, that was part of, part of our deal originally. I mean I, you know, they've been doing a good job in terms of, you know, postings and all that other stuff, but I'd like to, yeah, like
Speaker 8: I, I don't think, I didn't get a letter this year, which is usually I do get a letter. Yeah, I didn't get a letter. No. So, but thank God I saw it on the telephone pole. Yeah. But they also picked the hottest day of the year also to shut the, Speaker 3: I'll reach out to Tomlin and see if he's, Speaker 1: See if, see if you can get Tom here just to give us an update. What is the proposed treatment date? Speaker 8: It's gone. It, Speaker 3: It is already happened. Speaker 8: It Speaker 1: Was Monday. It was Monday, yeah. Speaker 3: Okay. Which was the, I think, and then the next day it was announced for closure because of an alcohol Speaker 1: Bloom. No, I, I was just gonna say, you know, now we've got bacteria yet again. Yeah, I'd like to, I'd like to get Tom back on the horse on that.
Which pond? Middle. I mean even be nice to get a, just an update from DCR. Just Yeah, that's Tom, just Speaker 3: A general update. Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, that's Tom from Lakes and Ponds. Speaker 8: Alright, thanks. Appreciate it. Speaker 3: Absolutely. Speaker 1: Alright. Any other updates? Hearing none. So I make a motion to adjourn. Speaker 8: Motion to Speaker 1: Adjourn. Thanks Jim. Seconded. Second. Thank you Michael. All in favor. See ya. Wow. Alright. That was quick.