Speaker 1: Hey, welcome everybody. This is the NA Conservation Commission. This is our, today's August 6th, 2020 sixth. This is our one meeting in August, and then our first meeting in September is on the 3rd of September, and we will be back to our twice monthly schedule at that point. So let's go ahead and, and open the public part of the meeting. So first item on the agenda I've got is a stormwater certificate of compliance for four Grist Mill Lane. Do we have representatives? Speaker 2: I'm so sorry, Matt. We have been muted that whole time Speaker 1: While I was there. I've been muted that whole time. Yes. Okay, lemme start over. Welcome everybody. Today is August 6th, 2026.
This is the Native Conservation Commission. This is our one and only meeting in August of this summer. On September 3rd, we'll restart our regular twice monthly meetings on, again, Thursday, September 3rd. Here. I do ask that for folks who are watching at home, please keep yourselves on mute until your particular agenda item comes up, just to minimize background noise. But otherwise, let's get going with the, with the agenda here this evening. We've got a, David is Speaker 2: Joined Speaker 1: Online, by the way. Great. So let's go ahead and, and, and start the public hearings.
I'd like to start with the stormwater certificate of compliance for four Gristmill Lane. Do we have representatives of four Gristmill Gristmill Lane on the call? Yes. Speaker 2: The property owner, John Van Amsterdam is on the line. Great. Speaker 1: Welcome John. How are you? Speaker 3: Very well, thank you. How are you? Speaker 1: Great, welcome. Alright. It, it's been quite the journey, John, as you know, and so here we are. And so let's take a look at the files and kind of how things are. John, from your perspective, how do, how do things look all buttoned up performing from your perspective? Performing as as expected? Speaker 3: Yes, indeed. At this point it seems to be fully completed
and, you know, we're, we're happy to be at the end of the process, as you said, it's been a long Speaker 1: One. Yeah. Great. We do have a letter from SSFC Engineering from about the compliance with the plan. So Daniel Flores, PE of FSFC engineering partnership, or registered professional engineer in the state of Massachusetts has provided the attached stamped major stormwater permit as built plan dated July 1st, 2026 is required by the Ton Natick Conservation Commission. I certify that the work associated with the major stormwater permit was completed in substantial compliance with the permit conditions,
approved plans and TIC requirements saved for the following deviations driveway. The final as-built site layout as the driveway extending to the back of the house and containing four 4,930 square foot of impervious area. While the existing 2,400 square feet of basketball court depicted in the backyard has been removed by and replaced by landscape and trees. The existing driveway that looped through the front yard consisted of 35 60 square feet of impervious area between the driveway modifications and removal of the basketball court. The impervious area for these features has been reduced by 1,030 square feet. So the deviation is less impervious.
Speaker 2: Yeah. So if the commission recalls there was a major stormwater permit issued, there were some unforeseen circumstances that occurred that resulted in some additional work happening on the property. That work was approved under a separate minor stormwater permit as it was fully separate in its end scope and goal from the original project. But through that process there were some site layout changes that were developed to facilitate the Van Amsterdam's use of the property. And those were documented by Dan in this letter. Speaker 1: Great. So front yard, the front yard was depicted on the approved plan
as having two dry stone walls and landscaping where pavement was removed. The asbuilt condition of the front yard includes a landscape strip with treason shrubs, abutting the right of way and extensive use impervious hardscape materials. So based on his observation and review of the asbuilt plan, it's his professional opinion that the above deviations do not affect the intent or performance of the approved stormwater management design. That the work was completed in substantial compliance with the approved plans and the town in ICS requirements. So we've got, you know, basically a sign off from the engineer. Have you done a site visit? Speaker 2: Yes, I've done a number of site visits throughout the process because of some of the changes that have occurred.
My most recent site visit was on July 6th where I reviewed the final installed landscape plantings with the Van Amsterdam's. A total of 57 trees, two caliber inches or greater. Most of them greater, have been installed on the lot now throughout the front and the rear yard. Speaker 1: Great. Excellent. Any questions from the commission on this? Who do we have from the commission online right now? Speaker 2: We have David, how and Jeff Richards. Speaker 1: Great. Hey David. Hey Jeff. Great. Any questions from the commission on this? Michael, you good? Yeah, David, Jeff, any questions? Okay, hearing none hearing, I'll be happy
to entertain a motion to issue the certificate of compliance for, for Gris Gristmill Lane, if that's the pleasure of the board. Motion to issue. All right, I'll take, Jim was in the room right next to me and the speed of sounds a little faster in the room. David, I'll take you as a second if that's all right? Yep. Great. Excellent. Any further discussions on this? All is in favor in the room. David? Yes, Jeff? Yes. Excellent. John, thank you. You've got what you need from us. Good luck and I wish, wish you and your wife well, Speaker 3: Thank you very much. Speaker 1: I appreciate it. All right, take care. Alright, let's do one more certificate of compliance
and then I wanna move over to the appointments just to, 'cause we've got people in the room here who are waiting around. So got a certificate of compliance request for 57 Beverly Road. Do we have representative, is it 57 Beverly? Hey, welcome. Speaker 4: Yes, hi Nick Arthur, how are you? Good, how are you? Good. Speaker 1: Hope your summer's going well. Speaker 4: It is. I didn't realize how hard it was gonna be to park tonight. Speaker 1: Yeah, fair oversight. Excellent. So Nick, why don't you give us a voiceover on kind of what the status is, where you're at, any twists and turns, bumps in the road, things like that. The Speaker 4: Current status from our perspective is this
project is complete. The homeowner moved into the project over the winter and we opted out of rushing to complete the landscaping in the fall due to lack of stock, poor trees that we could, we could get that time of year. So we landscaped earlier this spring. Everything's fully germinated. Flowers are blooming, trees are holding up. Well, I think it was the right decision and yeah, it, it's buttoned up. Storm water system went in smooth. I, it's complete. Speaker 1: Okay, sounds good. Sounds like there was some deviations
in terms of the retaining wall from the engineering thing. What was going on there? There, Speaker 4: There was, there were, there were two, the rear retaining wall actually got installed closer to the wetland than we originally proposed. And the, there was no mal intent there where we ended up installing the wall. What we did on site was we followed the contour of the backyard and we installed the wall right along the edge. The goal was not to pick up backyard, although we did pick up about six or seven feet of backyard there. So we, we just, we followed the contour and I probably should have had the wall surveyed and staked
before we installed it. I will say the trade off, if you will, was there was another long section of wall that we proposed on the left side that we opted out of installing. After we started to grade the backyard there, we realized that if we had continued the wall as originally proposed, it would've required that we fill in that entire left portion of the backyard, which would've been about four feet higher than the abutter. So we ended up just fi figuring out that matching grades there was, was a better fit.
So I'd say the reason that the wall ended up where it was, was we followed the, the con contour. Speaker 2: I just uploaded the approved plan set for the commission in the Google Drive folder as well. So that you guys can see what the original approved conditions were versus the Yeah, I'd like to see that finished conditions, Speaker 1: Which one was, which file was that? Speaker 2: So it's the, the full plan set that starts with a cover page is the approved plan and then the file that starts with 57 Beverly Road, oh, I'm sorry. They both, the one in all caps is the as-built,
Speaker 1: The one in all caps is the A as-built and then then there's the one that says 57 Beverly Road. Yes. Okay. Speaker 2: What I will say is that the, because of the way that the slope is leading down to the pond, there was not necessarily any adverse impact to the wetland resource area due to the wall extension. Speaker 4: And I didn't even know that it ended up closer to the wetland until we had it surveyed and I saw the distance, it just practically in the field felt like the right place it needed to go in the future that will need to get surveyed. Speaker 1: So in the original, in the original approved
plan, I mean it looks like, Speaker 2: So in the original approved plan, the wall sat sort of right along the 93 contour line and extended along the full length of the rear yard and into the side property. And then under those as-built conditions, the wall still sits, it sits on the further back portion of the 93 contour, which sort of curves along the back edge of the lot, but cuts through the middle of the rear yard rather than extending along the entire rear property line and along the side
Speaker 1: Yard. So it's slightly closer than what was originally approved. Speaker 2: Yeah, the originally approved wall, I wanna say it was 38 feet from the rear of the house and this wall is 44 feet, so Speaker 1: Six feet from the rear of the house. Okay. But then it cuts off. So only about half the, or two thirds of the fill or whatever that was brought in. Speaker 2: Yes, it did, it did reduce the amount of fill that was being proposed in the rear yard. Speaker 4: And the, I would say that that was of course a cost savings to not have to import all that fill, but I think the, a butter to the left
of us probably would've been affected the most with that grade being raised. Sure. Quite a bit there and it just didn't feel necessary. I think the homeowner would've liked a wider flatter yard rather than the terrace that we have now. But it didn't feel like the best fit matching the existing grade felt like a better, better fit there. Speaker 1: So it seems like, I mean, you know, at the end of the day, you know, the, the the, the filter that I put on in most cases is kind of, would, would this have been permittable at the time? You know, and if you had shown us the plan that you built,
would we have permitted it? Probably, you know, in my opinion, I think moving forward get it surveyed and a hundred percent and bring it back as a plan change. I mean we're gonna, I'm sure we're gonna be working together more here in Natick and it's Speaker 4: A standard practice on, I mean we've had some more difficult projects where we're building walls right up against wetlands and actually some of the commission's comments have been, how are you going to ensure that that doesn't cross? Right. 25 foot exactly. No disturb line. We usually have it surveyed. This was so far away and just given where the slope was, it, it was an oversight. Yep. Speaker 1: Understood. Okay.
Any questions from the commission on this? How's the vegetation on the backside of that wall? On the north side, Speaker 4: There is not much vegetation. It's covered Speaker 1: In on the, on the downhill side. On Speaker 4: The downhill it's covered in leaves. Okay. Shaded. Speaker 1: So Speaker 5: With the disturbed areas, re-vegetated has been seeded or something? Speaker 4: Everything that we disturbed, yes. Okay. Yes. There Speaker 2: Were no areas of exposed soils during my site visit on in July. Speaker 4: Awesome. And we went, I actually can't remember the name of the erosion control that we were required to install there, but it was fencing with, oh, those
Speaker 2: Super cell fence. I think we required Speaker 4: Super. It did. Speaker 1: It's a steep slope down to the, down to the pond there. Yeah. It Speaker 4: Did its job. Speaker 1: Yep. Excellent. Okay. Jim George questions in the room? Yeah, you good David? Jeff, questions for you guys? All good, Jeff? He's on mute. Good. Alright. If there's no further discussion, what's the pleasure of the board? Happy to entertain a motion to issue a certificate of compliance. That's the pleasure of the board. So moved. Thank you George. Is that seconded? Seconded.
Thank you David. Any further discussion on this? Hearing? None. All those in favor in the room to issue the certificate of compliance for 57 Beverly in the room. David? Yes. Jeff? Yes. Alright, Nick, you're good. Thank you. Yeah, thanks. Have a good night. We'll be in touch. Thanks Claire. Thanks Speaker 2: Nick. Speaker 1: Alright, I'm going to shift over and exercise chair's prerogative to move the agenda around a little bit. What I'd like to do is to invite some colleagues up to talk about the, we've got trails
and Forest Stewardship Committee appointments to do that I'd like to go through as well as associate position interviews for on the Conservation Commission. So with that, let's, let's start with the Conservation Commission positions. And we have Michael Price in the room. So why don't you come on up and have a seat. Speaker 2: And just so the commission is aware, in the Google Drive under general business discussions, the applications submitted by Mr. Price and Mr. Beatty for the open conservation commission position to which Mr. Downey was reappointed are available, noting their
relevant expertise in this area. Speaker 1: Great. So Michael, welcome. Speaker 6: Thank Speaker 1: You. Thanks for coming. Would you mind just kind of giving us the, you know, the 32nd pitch on you and your background and all that stuff? Sure. And we'll, we'll fire away with a few questions. Speaker 6: Been a NAIC resident for about 32 years, Speaker 1: So a carpet bagger like the rest of us. Yeah, yeah. Speaker 6: Kids went through a NAT school system and I was a town meeting member for about 10 years and recently retired from my, my career as a general contractor,
senior project manager, quality control, sustainability, scheduling. Went through all those different phases Speaker 1: At at Commodore, Speaker 6: At Commodore Builders. Yeah. Right. And so I've been on the other side of the table as a contractor dealing with conservation commissions in various towns and thought I could add a little of that perspective and being retired, had a little more time and thought I could contribute and help out. Natick is we, we've enjoyed living here
and thought I could give back with some time. Super. Speaker 1: Great. So questions for Mr, for Mr. Price? I mean, I'll, I'll I'll start off. What's, what's your familiarity with the kind of the, the laws and regulations that were, were charged with upholding? Speaker 6: Well, from the main thing on, or construction projects was when they, they're out of the ground getting the storm water, the SW plan done, working with the civil engineer
and working with the town, setting the conservation commission, getting the order of conditions, setting up precon meetings and so, you know, certificate certificates of compliance for storm water after when the project completed, getting the erosion control down and then communicating with the con com on as often as they want to visit or have meetings. So I know it's all in the, the CMR, but usually in the project specifications as well.
There's a, in the front end, the whole right requirements and the order for conditions in there. Speaker 1: So nuts and bolts of the process, you know, kind of hands on having bent through it, sweated through it. Speaker 6: If I just remember one major project where the sediment control failed on the side of a hill up in New Hampshire after a rain event and dealing with a call from the client and having to get up there and get that thing fixed before the cocom got out there. Speaker 1: We've had that happen a couple of times. A couple of times. That's good. Yeah. Good. Other questions for, for Mr Press?
Speaker 7: Michael, was your work mostly residential or a commercial or a mix of both? What was it Speaker 6: Like? A mix of both. Mostly commercial, I would say, but yeah, we did, we did a, a dorm down at, at Wheaton College and Multifamily in South Boston and some town buildings out in Littleton. But, so those, you know, we, we'd have maybe four or five major Greenfield, the brownfield out of the ground jobs a year and mixed in with renovations
and commercial industrial retail. So a big, big mix. Speaker 1: Yeah. Super good. One other question is that, you know, one of the things that's taken me, I mean I've been on the commission for a few years, you know, is, is that, you know, there's projects that sometimes can be kind of controversial, you know, look at the dam in South Natick, you know, or housing, big housing developments and that, you know, take up large swaths of land. You know, how, how do you think about kind of, you know, the balance of land preservation, resource preservation development?
I mean Natick's, Natick's a you know, fairly well built out, but at the same time, you know, there's lots of projects going on. I'm just curious, just kind of philosophically how do you, how do you process that? Well Speaker 6: It's a, it's, it's a balance from being in the town for a while and seeing changes in neighborhoods and downtown. The, one of the duties of the town is to maintain the town for the future and for future generations. And same goes with wetlands and, and parks and town forest,
lake chi, you know, to have those resources to last they, they've been here 350 years as a town to have 'em last another 350 years. You can't just pave everything over. But on the other hand, we need to feed the tax base and we need to keep things interesting. Get restaurants in downtown, keep the, the retail going. So it, I just, one instance that stood out to me was, and, and not really related to the Con Kong, was at the,
the block here when you got all upset about having to get the sidewalk to conform to the a DA. Well it's got, once you place it in concrete, it's, it's there for a long time so might as well do it. Right. And you know, that's a pretty simple example, but Speaker 1: Excellent. Great. Other questions for Mr. Price? So the deal is, is that, so, you know, we can welcome associate members at this board's discretion. And the idea is that it's kind of like, the way I look at it is that it's kind of a, kind of a, a,
a bullpen for when openings open up on the, on the commission and as people come and go, you know, our work is fairly technical a lot of the times storm water management, you know, wetlands protection, stuff like that. But then there's also kind of an underpinning policy component, you know, where we're having philosophies of how we're, we're helping to implement philosophies of how development can happen here. So it's kind of a mixed bag, you know, and it's an opportunity to come in and the way associate positions are currently structured and we're in discussions about maybe shifting that, you know, is that fully participate in all debates,
conversations, you listen to all the hearings and all that stuff. The only thing you don't do is vote at the end of the day. But you know, the expectation would be that you chime in, you know, I mean, you know, we want people to be sharing expertise and experience 'cause there's stuff that we, we learn every day and with every hearing. Speaker 2: And as an associate member, associate members would also have access to the Massachusetts Association of Conservation Commissions events. The town pays for the commissioners on our time. Yeah. Education and training through those programs. So it gives folks an opportunity to really build a solid foundation before you have to put your vote onto any decision.
I think Jim can maybe give the best endorsement of that program. Speaker 1: He's been through it. Yep. Alright. Excellent. Any questions for us? Speaker 6: No. Sounds like meetings are regularly twice a month. Speaker 1: First and third Thursdays. Okay. First and third Thursdays. And then site visits. And we usually do, we do site visits either in the evenings during the, when we've got enough daylight during the spring and summer and fall when there's light. And then on Saturday mornings, you know, you know, and we'll find some subset, you know, the whole group or some subset of us who can go and trump around and put eyes on what's being proposed.
And sometimes it's going and standing around a parking lot and other times it's walking black, you know, way back into the woods somewhere and seeing what's going on back there. So it's kind of a nice, it's actually my favorite part of being on the commission is gone and seeing the nooks and crannies in Natick. And I think the trails and forest stewardship people could say the same thing. You just get to see parts of the town that you wouldn't get to see otherwise. Alright, any further questions? Mr. Press? I'd like to introduce Mr. Beatty, so thank you. Okay, so Dave Beaty is another applicant for this. I think he's online. Yes Speaker 8: I am. Hi. Hey Dave. Hi Matt. Hey, Speaker 1: I want a full, full disclosure here. Wait,
Speaker 9: We have a vote to Speaker 1: Appoint. Oh, hang on for a second. Sorry. If you can do, if you have, okay, little full disclosure. Dave and I have known each other and been been good friends for years. I'd appreciate it if someone else could step up and just kind of lead the questioning on this. I will vote, I don't have obviously any financial interest in this, but just for optics purposes, would just like someone else to kind of lead the charge. Maybe I'll, Jeff, if it's okay for me to put you on the spot, guys, vice chair. I would, I'd, I'd appreciate that. So, so I'll, Speaker 10: I'll shut up. Sorry. Couldn't be in the room. Dave.
David, would you go by Dave or David Speaker 8: Since you asked? You can do either one. Alright. Otherwise I'd say David, but yes, thank you. Alright, Speaker 10: So again, you know, following the same format, you know, just kind of give us a, you know, give us an elevator speech on yourself and, and why you're interested in joining the commission. Speaker 8: Super, thanks and thank you all for your time. I come from, I think a very different angle here. I'm not a professional forester, professional builder. I don't know, as Matt called it, the nuts and bolts of the Wetlands Protection Act. I understand it from a high level.
I'm an enthusiastic I amateur, if you will. I've been living in Natick 27 years now. Raised my kids and sent 'em through the school system. One's still in it. Ab absolutely, you know, adore the natural beauty of this place, which is why I actually chose to live here. Pulled my canoe out at the South Natick after a canoe trip and I said, I don't, I think I wanna come here. And not just natural beauty, but also I would say the human geography, which is I think part of the goal of of, of balancing both those things that this commission's job raised in a family with a lot of history in conservancy.
Grandfather had a, had a Christmas tree farm that we worked as we were kids. My dad spent the latter part of his professional career in, in Tr Unlimited and then in Nature Conservancy, he actually opened the first office in Nature Conservancy in, in Oklahoma and, and established what's called the Tallgrass Prayer Preserve, which you might know in northern Oklahoma. We are, you know, spent our entire childhood and young adulthood in the, in the woods in North Georgia and, and upstate New York and all around. And it's something I care deeply about. I'm, I'm very interested in the, I think the dual mandates
of the commission, which are nuts and bolts looking at these wetlands protection, doing the, I'm really glad Matt said that site visits were part of the, part of the mandate for the associate members. 'cause that to me would be exceptionally interesting. But also thinking about how we can advance protection of more of the, of the green space. How do we become a, you know, a a a town that's known for planting instead of cutting. I would love to think we'd be driving Nick one day and say we're one of those tree cities. And I have just recently wrapped up my last volunteer role in the,
in the town, which was being on the MathWorks Scholarship Committee and tomorrow is my last day. I'm retiring. So I have a huge desire. Congratulations. I have a huge desire to give more time to the town. And, and that's my perspective when I, I actually both Mr. Price and I, we both applied for the regular position and, and, and I was raised my hand for, for associate and that's when they said, come to this. So I, that's, that's the level of interest I have.
I also did apply for the trails and forestry because I, I have the time and I have the enthusiasm. I am, I'm a, let's say I'm heavy user of the, the trails and the, and the assets in this town. So that's, that's me. And be happy to answer any questions. Speaker 10: Well, I can tell you, I, I sat where both of you sat back in the summer of 2010 and was asked the same question, would you be willing to serve, you know, as a volunteer, you know, to be able to participate but not vote.
And and I know over the years when people have said no to that, and so, you know, I said yes and it was, it was, you know, of the many bad decisions I've made in my life, that was one of the better ones. You know, because I, I was at a turning point too and wanted to start, you know, giving back to the town that I've lived in and, and being able to sit there and watch and be mentored by people and learn, you know, by this commission and see, you know, a pragmatic group of, of people who make good solid decisions, you know,
both in the interest of the town and, but also, you know, sometimes the interest of them. A lot of times the interest of the, of the landowners in the town too. But we're, I think we're a very pragmatic group of people. And, and that's not the only one to say. I think if people come and, and say that and if you've compared it with some other conservation commissions around, very proud to be associated with it. Matt had said before about some controversial decisions. You, if you've watched it in the past, if you, did you follow any of the recent ones that tend to be Speaker 8: Well, certainly the dam. I mean, that's, that's, I, I live in, I live down here in South Natick and I, I'm, I'm completely open unapologetic about the fact
that I am, I am fully behind dam removal across the entire country. Especially those that provide no value other than, yes, it's scenic, it's a, it's a cultural artifact that we love. But sure I know the river well. I spend tons of time on the river and I know what it means for the quality wildlife. I was actually at the dam I brought up there sometimes in fish and I was fishing and I was at the dam before they knocked it down. And for the first time ever I saw fish trying to get up it, I've been here for almost 30 years trying
to see a fish go up that, and, and you know, I've got three or four shots and of course it's six feet and they could made it two, right? I've seen, I've seen the, I've seen the, the fish go up to spawn and the local tributaries and I know what it can do for this river. And that's before you get into economics, this, I'm purely coming up from the, from the, the health of American river's perspective. Again, raised, raised, raised in that culture. My, my dad fought the TVA like they were, I don't know the Nazis when I was a kid. That was, that was, that was the way I was raised.
And so that, that's controversial. I get it. And I put a lot of input into it. My, with my neighborhood, our neighbor was, was our neighborhood rep there. And, but I understand, I understand the cost in terms of the, the, the cultural change, what is it? 80 years of cultural presence. But I always favor the health of the river, the health of the fishery and, and the, I would love to see every dam between here and, and, and Boston Harbor go down. That's just my opinion. Sorry, I won't apologize. Thank you.
I'll open it up to the rest of the commission. Speaker 11: Other questions? Speaker 7: I just, I have a comment rather than a question for both of you, which is to point out the obvious and that is that, you know, this group, if you watched any of our meetings, you can see that this group is not afraid to use each, each individual voice and we frequently do affect the other's decisions that we, we would expect you guys to do the same. Speaker 8: Yeah, I, I I don't think I could hold back. That's my style. I, I concluded a multi-year career in the national sciences
and in in life sciences and pharmaceutical. And that was my kind of trading card being, being open and, you know, bringing value to the group from my perspective. So I, I have no issue with that. And, and in particular because, and I appreciate this, you're asking us to participate with our voices, not with our votes. And so that means it's even more important that we can be open with you because we would want to you to hear us before you get to the point of making the decisions. No, no issue at all. Thank you. Speaker 1: Okay. Any further further questions, Mr. Beatty? Alright, so here's where we stand. We can have two associate members. Yes.
You know, and I am personally a hundred percent in favor of deepening the bench. You know, we need, I'm, I'm just gonna do a little plug here guys. I would love to get some women on the conservation commission. You know, we don't, there aren't any, you know, no, not, not to cast dispersions on these two fine gentlemen in front of us here this evening, but I, you know, it's, it, it something I certainly notice. And, but all that being said, I love the idea of deepening the bench, you know, and so if it was a pleasure of the board, I mean, I would certainly support us voting,
have both these guys join us and enriching the conversations that we have. But I think both would bring really great perspectives to the, to the dialogue and you know, that that would be my vote. So I'll just hand it over to anyone else who wants to comment on, on this. Speaker 11: And if there are no additional comments we can hear motion. Speaker 1: Yeah. If there's no additional comments, anybody wanna make a motion to appoint one and or both of these guys to as associate members of the commission, I'd like to move that both be appointed. Thank you George. George made a motion to appoint both these gentlemen as associate members of the commission. Is that seconded by anybody? Seconded. Thank you, Jim.
Further discussion, comments, questions. If we go ahead with this vote and they join, we'll have plenty of time to interrogate them. Vote. Speaker 12: Just one comment, right? It, it's not all super excitement and so what do you mean? Just be ready for that. There's some, you know, Matt does a great job running the meeting, so that's good. But anyway, just no, it, we, we do have a lot of excitement but sometimes it's, you know, Speaker 1: You're a sales, you're a sales. Speaker 13: It's the nuts and bolts. Yeah, Speaker 1: He's being I'd I like to make Speaker 13: One comment though, George, that I've been with this
institution for a long while actually prior to our own wetland Speaker 1: Act. It's true. Speaker 13: And there is something that I found very interesting in that and something that is part of the philosophy. You have to do this and so, or you must do this. And that was the state standard. One thing that we had in a number of the issue or a number of the statements made is unless otherwise determined by the NA Conservation Commission. That's right. So it says that it leaves us open
to do an awful lot of, oh, shall we say, discussion with developers, with whomever and having, okay, we'll be a little light on this regardless of what the state is saying one way or the other, but we'll give you a little more. If you actually, and I think this is very important for the future, you give us something back that you don't have to, right? And we have protected pieces of land and things like that that where they could use actually land that technically would not be open,
but we can open it for them if they give us something really, really valuable. Speaker 1: It's the way the laws are written. We have that opportunity to, and Speaker 13: That, well that was the whole thing. And I remember presenting that at the town meeting and Speaker 12: It Speaker 13: Put it very bluntly, it freaked out an awful lot of the people there. Speaker 1: We have a fair bit of latitude under the law to, to interpret I interpolate, you know, and it's, it, it can, it can be quite interesting sometimes. Alright, so we've got a motion on the table
that has been seconded to invite to appoint David and Michael as associate members on the commission if they choose to accept it. Any further discussion on that? Let's vote all in the room. And David? Yes, Jeff? Yes. Excellent. Gentlemen, if you choose to accept it, welcome. You are free to stick around tonight and start participating now if you would like, I realize you may have other things, things going on and hadn't planned for it and that's fine as well. Our first, our next meeting is Thursday, September 3rd where we'd invite you to be here in person and we can take it from there. You will
Speaker 2: Get a very robust email from me next week with a lot of information. Yeah. Speaker 1: But gentlemen, thank you. Appreciate it and look forward to working with you both. Thank you. Great. Speaker 8: Thank you everybody. Speaker 1: Thank you David. Well Speaker 8: I think David, will there be this additional discussion about trails and forestry? Speaker 1: There will be right now. Speaker 2: Yeah. David, if you wanna stay on part, Speaker 8: I raised my, I raised my hand twice. I don't know if that was smart or not, but I wasn't sure where this was gonna go. So I'll then, I'll stand Speaker 1: The one, the one question I have is, you know, 'cause we appoint Trails and Forest Stewardship Committee, can there be, I mean I guess an associate member can be a
member of Trails and Forest stewardship as well, Speaker 2: Right? Absolutely. I think I, if, if and when David becomes a voting member of the commission, we can determine if there's any conflict of interest. But I still Speaker 1: As an associate, because Speaker 2: The Trails and Forest Stewardship Committee is essentially an an advisory body, they have no authority that isn't granted to them by the commission. I don't actually think that there's a conflict of interest. I Speaker 1: Think you're right. Speaker 2: But I will confirm all of that prior to it being an issue. Speaker 1: Super. Alright, do we have some people here for the Trails and Forest Stewardship Committee? Is it all three of you? Yes. Speaker 2: Excellent. Two folks in the room and then David on the call. Speaker 1: Excellent. So why don't we just, sir, at the end,
why don't you just come on up and, and introduce yourself. You kind of kinda heard the drill, it's a little more tailored to trails and Forest stewardship. You just introduce yourself. Where do you live? Have you been a member of that committee before? What's your interest in this area? Speaker 2: Oh, and then Lisa as well, who is here in OBS absentia who is Speaker 1: Also seeking Yeah, no, I've got her, her application. Speaker 14: Yeah, a 17 year Nat resident came into this whole arena as a trail steward initially for a couple years. Great. Then served on the TAFS committee for, for one term. Speaker 1: And what's your name again? Bob Carmichael. Great, thanks Bob. Speaker 14: For the record. Yeah.
Sort of came in with a passion for hiking, software engineering background. Have been able to kind of apply both of those skills, you know, kind of spending time, you know, obviously to just rolling up my sleeves and getting, you know, stuff done. Weeding as everyone does in trail maintenance. But also a number of outreach projects. I've, I've designed t-shirts and stickers. I've, I've built a trail steward app that everyone uses to sort of report issues on the trail. So I've been able to kind of take my interests and passions and sort of, you know, kind of converge with the, with the work that I'm doing on the committee. Speaker 2: Yeah. If anybody has picked up one of our stickers at Earth Day Speaker 1: Or that's Bob's work. That's
Speaker 2: Bob's work. Nice. Speaker 1: So what's your, what's your advice to us and advice to those at home? The thousands of people watching us on TV right now. Thousands. What's, first of all, what's, what's your favorite maybe unsung corner of Natick that people might not be aware of that you've just found over your, the time of your time on the, on the committee? Speaker 14: I mean, I'm extremely lopsided. I spend, I probably in the town force three or four times a week. So for me it's like, where in the town Forest, you know, do you go whatever. I, I, I have, I, I do get to some of the other trails, but for me that's probably my, my favorite spot is basically just
being, being in the town Forest. Speaker 1: And if you were to, based on your time on the committee, what would be your kind of top priority that would, you know, to improve wholesale, kind of the ability of tasks to work well, but also in terms of physical improvements to open space and Natick? What would you like to see happen? Speaker 14: I mean, we're doing, I think we're doing a pretty good job of keeping track of the trails like that we have, I do think that the outreach piece is something we continue to struggle with. You know, it's like getting bodies in, getting people interested. Whether it's people on, you know, sort of more regularly
participating, like people on, on the committee. But also just when we basically go out to try to portrays days and such, basically we're always trying to find the right angle to generate interest. People show initial interest and then they don't turn up for the events. And so, I mean, Doug Renick is dealing with this all the time, but in any case, for me it's like the outreach piece is extremely important and I've spent a lot of time in that, in that area to just try to make people more interested. The stickers, you know, sort of push the word out so that then it kind of pulls it back in. Right. Speaker 1: So it's like the challenge of municipal governance. Yeah. Yeah. Writ large. Right. Yeah. Cool. Alright, any questions for Bob from anybody? Speaker 12: I guess I, I got one. Just what,
what's your number one concern on the, the trails right now? Speaker 14: I mean there are certainly some trails that we find we can't keep clean, right? And so, you know, whether it's like this, like a constant at least broken glass or you know, there's areas that the kids basically spend time in that seem to be just, you know, you just, you go in there and you do a little bit of remedial work and then it just sort of comes up again. And so I don't know necessarily that I have a solution to that, but I think that that's the recurring thing that I think is the biggest problems where you sort of, people just do what they want to do at the end of the day and you can't really watch over the trails all the time. Right, Speaker 1: Right. Great. Very good. Cool. Any further questions for Bob?
Alright, thank you. Appreciate it. Thanks Bob. Yeah, please welcome. Thank you. If you just introduce yourself and what part of Natick you're from and Yep. Speaker 15: Hi, my name is Ko Fuca. I live on ER drive, I live on the co Lake South Pond. I have been in Natick, I'm originally from Japan. I've been in the states 34 years and all my life I have been actually being in Natick and I do a lot of outdoor activities and including like, you know, we use the boarding and kayaking and stuff on the lake,
but also over the years I've been doing a lot of mountain biking and hiking and I discovered and learned the native trails and I really appreciate having those access within the town. But also notice like, you know, the maintenance is done, you know, throughout the year. And I have, you know, I often do those activities with my friend Denise there and started to learn about this committee and the committee's work. And I always kind of wanted to do something more, give back
to, you know, the town that I have been enjoying the resources. And when I heard about opening I thought like, oh, this is opportunity for me to be able to do more actively. And you know, I've been kind of like, you know, trying to really find a way, the meaningful way to connect back and giving back. And you know, a couple other stuff that I started to do is like volunteering for the special Olympic swim coaching. And because I'm a swimmer and I currently teach at the Boston University's Business School, so I can help the students' clubs
and somewhere that I can interconnect and find a way that I can be helpful. So this is kind of my opportunity that, you know, I would love to be able to do more that, you know, as a way of thank you. And for continue doing this as a recipient or the user of the trails and the native resources. Speaker 1: Great, thank you. What do you teach at BU Speaker 15: Operations at the business school? Yeah. Excellent. And my whole career was focused on the process and process improvement and effectiveness and efficiency.
I believe in execution part of, you know, the planning and how, you know, collaboration and getting people involved and, you know, creating the whole vision to one point is something that I've been focused on. Super. Speaker 1: Yeah. Great. Thanks. Questions. So what do you, you live on the lake? Yes. So if I asked you what your favorite part of outdoor space in Natick is? Speaker 15: I, you know, because I live on the lake, I knew about Natick.
I mean the, the lake and then the path around the lake, but there's so many more, which I have never really discovered till I start biking and hiking and being able to kind of like, you know, get them known and also the people, the user, like know how to help out. That'll be probably a great way, you know, to keep it sustainable going in the future as a biker. Again, I know like some of the places always wet, you know, like, oh, this is great to put some of the planting there. Or sometimes again, we notice that, you know,
after the storm, like all the big trees is kind of like, you know, lay down on the path and we, if we know like, you know, what how to communicate in communicate back, you know, both ways as a user and then also like how to evolve for those people who wants to do something. And if we can kind of make a bridge and then it's gonna be become even better and smoother. Speaker 1: That's why. So would you then be willing to help with all of your process, process engineering expertise and apply that to municipal operations and how to make committees run better? That is the idea. Excellent. That is the idea. Okay, good.
Excellent. Any further questions? All right. Hearing none. Thank you. Thanks. Appreciate it, Denise, please welcome. Thanks for coming. Sure, yep. If you could just formally introduce yourself and, right, same girl. Speaker 16: Yep. Denise Roby. I live on Cottage Street. I bought my property abuts the Sudbury Aqueduct and I've lived in Natick a little over 30 years. Don't really wanna say exactly how long. And, and I joined the Trails committee back in when it started in the pandemic.
And so I've been, you know, doing Speaker 1: Is that really when it started? It was in the pandemic Speaker 16: 20 20 20 20 21. Yeah. Yeah, Speaker 2: 2020 was when the other committees were dissolved. Right. And then 21. Wow. This one was officially formed. Speaker 16: So professionally I am, I work in corporate communications, public relations, and I'm a writer and communicator and you know, I've been very active on the committee in all the everything to do with signage and communicating with the public. I'm, Denise Speaker 2: Is one of our regulars at, at both Earth Day
and NA Days for Speaker 16: Exactly. I'm, I'm Speaker 2: Pushing our agenda on the larger Speaker 16: Community. Yes, yes. And I love meeting people and I love, you know, seeing people understand suddenly, oh wow, there's all these trails. Like I introduced Kako to the Henry, we went on the Henry Wilson drill. Oh cool. Nice. And we did this whole like long and we started like going off behind the, the cemeteries and we were very disappointed that it didn't continue and we had to like tiptoe through somebody's backyard. Speaker 1: But anyway, Speaker 16: But those are like the, that's the kind of stuff I love to do.
And I'm, I'm a mountain biker as well, but I just really mostly go from my backyard. And I also love having how a lot of the trails can be connected. You can connect them, you know, so I think that that's really great. And the rail trail's also also awesome, even though it's not under our purview. Yeah. And I, and I also enjoy working with my hands. I mean, my father is, he still works on trails at 91 in New Jersey. That's good. So I grew up with it as well. It's, it's part of me. I mean, I'm a, I'm a farmer four H
or from way back in New Jersey, so I'm trying to think what else. I know. Do you have any questions for me? Speaker 1: So what's on your, what's on your priority list? I mean, you've, you've, you've been around Speaker 16: In terms, I've been around, you've Speaker 1: Been around on the, on the, on the committee and been been around, trumped around a lot of corners of the town. I mean, I Speaker 16: Have, I have, you know, I just, I think, you know, to Bob's point, there are some, some things that, you know, that are perennial, like the glass on Coolidge Hill and things like that. And, you know, there are certain things, I mean, we can obviously clean it up,
but I don't know that we can, can necessarily control it without, I don't know, constant police presence or something. But I do. And there's also, I mean, it sounds like we're gonna, we're making some headway at Pegan Cove, but it would be nice, like there's some places that I feel like we are, we can't really, we're like prevented by, you know, like the DCR R'S involvement or any need to get permission and Winter Woods, there's there, people always wanna go to Winter Woods. That's what I've experienced in, in my years going to Natick days and being in the, in the booth,
people are always asking, how do we get into this? They, they really wanna go to Winter Woods and you really can't, well you can't park there. Speaker 1: I, I want to talk to you about that. Speaker 16: So, you know, so things like that I think, you know, like maybe there's just some things that we can somehow break through and do some exciting stuff. Speaker 1: Cool. Speaker 16: And can and, and I wanna see more connections too with some of the neighboring towns and that would be great too. Speaker 1: Great questions, David. Jeff, you good? Speaker 10: How many positions, I mean, is there, oh,
there are a number of positions that we have to select. Is it, Speaker 2: So everyone who we are interviewing tonight can be appointed to the Trails and Forest Stewardship Committee. We have three members who are up for reappointment. Lisa, Bob, and Denise. And then we have three members on the committee who are actually stepping down and not seeking reappointment. Sharon, Jim Fitzgerald, not Jim Fitzgerald, that's Jim Fitzgerald. Jim Fran and Mary Hudson are gonna be stepping down from the committee. So there are three open positions available, even following the reappointment
of our three existing members. Speaker 1: Great. So questions, comments, someone wanna make a motion to, to reappoint Denise and Bob and to appoint Kako All in one. Yes. All in one. Let's do it. All in one. So moved. Thank you George. Is that seconded by? Anybody seconded? I'll take Jeff second. Any further discussion on Speaker 2: That? Oh wait, we need to interview Speaker 1: David. Oh, sorry David. Ah, David's sitting over here. David, Speaker 8: You just said you were my friend for many years. I Speaker 1: I know, I know.
Sorry man. Yeah. David, if you could just kind of, you know, reintroduce yourself and just talk about Trail Ford Stewardship and would you be willing to do both? Speaker 8: Yeah, well answer the last question first. Absolutely. I, yeah, I live here in South Natick and therefore my trails are eisenmenger aqueduct tca com Kwa, I can have hard time about saying that, but, and the i their trails that fortunately don't have the problems that we talked about, like Cool Hill, but they certainly suffer from erosion. And you asked a question earlier about, you know, what,
what, what would be top of mind for, what would you like to do? I think for the purpose of access, for the purpose of of, of enjoyment, I think signage is really lacking in terms of the trails. I spent a lot of time in Dover Woods and, and they're, they've gone through a massive SI signage, sorry, Dover Woods, Carroll Park, no one at Woodlands Hail Reservation. They, they huge effort in signage and I think that's something that would greatly improve the accessibility and use of the trails. And I, and I also believe that in the area behind the Morris Hospital, that mix of trails in there, there's a,
there's a lot of, a lot of work that needs to be done on them. I'm super eager to jump in that. I, I'm, I'm, I have to say I'm, I'm massively impressed with the three candidates that came before me. You're lucky to have them. And, and I wish that when I was set in operations at BU that she was my teacher. 'cause I left, did a lot better than mine. But no, I, I'm, I'm eager to, to weigh in on, on trail maintenance, trail signage and, and where possible expansion of trail systems. So that's my kind of belief. So thanks. Speaker 1: Great. Thanks David. Speaker 2: And Lisa is not here this evening,
but Lisa Stanley has also been a long standing member of the Trails and Forest Stewardship Community Committee and a very valued one, a retired botanist. She's done a lot of work for the town in terms of invasive species mapping. She's also seeking reappointment. Speaker 1: Great. So George, would you amend your motion that we appoint with David, appoint David and Caico and Reappoint? Bob and Denise. Speaker 2: And Lisa Speaker 1: And Lisa. Thank you. Speaker 13: Are we actually limited to how many members Speaker 1: That that fits within the numbers? We were just talking about that, that fits within the numbers. Speaker 2: Taps is a nine member committee. So the,
Speaker 13: But it's a, they have three stepping, it's basically a committee that we, Speaker 1: We appoint. Speaker 13: So why don't we increase the number then Speaker 2: We would have to update our, the regulations associated with the committee and the bylaw that establishes the committee. But if the commission would like to do that, we can, but at this point, let's think about it. There's no need to. Sure. Speaker 1: No need. So we've got three, three stepping down. We've got two new people to fill those seats. And then, and then, so there'll be one Speaker 2: Open seat Speaker 1: Meeting, three reappointing. We'd have still have one open seat with the current configuration. So would you amend your motion to include David,
Mary, David, Lisa, Speaker 13: David, I, I bet you're gonna screw it up. Okay. Speaker 1: Appointing David and Caco and Reappointing Lisa, Bob and Denise Got, I got so moved. Thank you. Is that seconded again Jeff? We can I will you continue seconding? Sure. Thank you. Sure. Any further discussion? All is in favor in the room, Jeff? Yes. David? Yes. Excellent. Thank you folks. I also just wanna thank you all. Alright. Yeah, thank you David. I just wanna really publicly thank the three trails and Forest Stewardship Committee members
who are stepping down for their, for their service. I worked personally with, with Jim Fran a number of times. Yep. And he's a great resource and really grateful for all that he's brought to the table. But really all three of them just, you know, that's how communities are built is with volunteer efforts like that. And so whatever time people can give, you know, is, is very worthy and we're very grateful for that. Alright, thank you folks. Appreciate it. Let's move on. Alright, next item on the agenda is we're gonna have a formal hearing for 17 Edgewood Ave. Do we have a representative for 17 Edgewood Ave here on the call? Yes,
Speaker 2: I believe Grant Gao is on the call. Speaker 1: Hi Grant. Speaker 17: Hi. Okay, good evening. Speaker 1: Good evening. Let me just go ahead and formally open this 'cause I don't believe we have, Speaker 2: We did open it at our prior hearing, but it was opened and continued without testimony, so Ah, got it. We, Speaker 1: The agenda just wasn't marked continuation. Oh yes. Which is usually my, but it is what it is. Yep. Alright, so yes, I, I remember this. So, so Grant, welcome Grant. Would you just kind of introduce yourself formally and then walk us through the project? What, what do we have here? Speaker 17: Absolutely. My name is Grant Gao
and I work for IC Icon four. I am the general contractor for this project. So we are looking to build a second floor addition over the existing sort of kitchen and area and build a deck outback on the second floor down. And that's pretty much it. Speaker 2: Okay. Yeah, so there's an intermittent stream that runs along the side of the property identified as Dry Brook on the plan set the closest distance
of the sort of new impervious area to that brook corridor is just about 42 feet. All of the newly proposed additions are on the opposite side of, so the driveway sits between the proposed work and the resource area. The prior staff comments included road control barriers and material stockpiles, both of which have been added to the plan set. Speaker 1: Okay. I don't, I'm not seeing a plan that has the wetlands delineated on it. Is that my, my oversight or?
Speaker 2: It's, you can see the brook has been delineated Matt on the screen, big screen in front of you. Speaker 1: That one Speaker 2: You can see the dry brook has been identified right here with the banks delineated with the dashed lines that run along the entire property is within the a hundred foot buffer zone, which I believe is why it's not identified on this particular plan Speaker 1: Sheet. Got it. But this is a dry brook, Speaker 2: It's an intermittent stream, Speaker 1: So it's an intermittent stream and there's, is there any, I bet it's dry, so there's no BVW, there's no, no and nothing. It's
Speaker 2: Just in reviewing the contours and, and the area, it appears that this is likely a, a historic drainage channel that, that qualifies as a, as a stream corridor. I can pull it up on the viewer so folks can see it. But this is actually quite close to town hall. Edgewood is one of the streets surrounding the Coolidge Hill area just south of Natick. And lemme just get my Speaker 1: Screen. Does this, does this Dry brook see flow at any time? Speaker 2: It must, it does. Definitely sea flow. So folks can see here the, the Brook corridor. It's covered by the trees here,
but it runs right here through these properties in the woods. So you can see in these aerial photos from last year that there is water in the brook corridor, but it, it is primarily taking runoff that is shedding from the roadways and in the surrounding area. You can see on the other side of Edgewood how it moves through the neighborhood and originates in the wetland systems that feed into the Davis Brook corridor. Speaker 1: I see. Okay. Yeah. So the flow would be left or right on this photo?
Speaker 2: I can check in. Lemme check in stream stats. Actually, before I, I think that's where before I give any confirmation, Speaker 17: I, I actually have a, a locus map's showing the screen if I, if I may share my screen. Speaker 2: I just need to change my, the permissions quickly. Speaker 1: Yep. Claire Claire's setting me up for that grant. Speaker 17: Yep. Thank you Speaker 2: Grant. You should be all set. Speaker 17: Perfect. Oh, let's see. Yep. So I think this, this map better indicates the, the string a little. A little bit. Speaker 1: Okay. So that's just gathering.
It looks like it's just gathering water, Speaker 2: Matt. The flow is actually right to left. It is right to left. This is gathering from the wetlands behind Leonard Morse actually in the area of the Eisen manger trail. Ah, okay. It doesn't connect down to the Davis Brook corridor that's separated by Morningside. Speaker 1: But it's really, I mean it's the wetlands, but it's also overland flow that just comes from off of Coolidge Hill, for example and things like that, I imagine. Right. Speaker 2: Yep. I'm just pulling up the stream and then stream stats here so the commission can see. Speaker 1: So does this then kind of deposit into the area out being
Speaker 2: Along Cottage Street? Speaker 1: Exactly. Yep. Okay. Right on. Okay. Speaker 13: Should find a different name for it then. Call it dry gully Speaker 1: Right. Or something. Okay. But you know, it's, it's obviously intermittent and it's kind of on an as needed, you know, as, as weather, as rain conditions go. Okay. So, so looking at the plan, the proposed plan, so there's a propo, the proposed second floor edition, but that's on top of an existing first floor, right? That that part closer? That is Speaker 17: Correct. Speaker 1: And then we have a proposed first story edition
that's gonna be just with a frost wall. Speaker 2: Sona tubes Speaker 1: Actually. So, oh, and Sona Tube. So Speaker 17: Sona Tube. Speaker 1: Okay. And then a landing, and then existing Pervi impervious. So the driveway is gonna stay the same I imagine, grant, is that right? Garage is gonna stay the same. Speaker 17: That's correct. There's no, no changes to the driveway or the garage. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 2: We cannot close this hearing, unfortunately, Speaker 1: 'cause of abut abut notifications. No. Speaker 2: 'cause of the file number. Oh, file number. We don't have a DEP file number. Grant has been doing a very good job of trying to coordinate with DEP.
I got an email from the Northeast Regional office that they've received 45 NOIs in the last three weeks. Who, who? And so they are having a little bit of a difficult time keeping up with getting all the numbers assigned. At least Speaker 13: They're not all from here. Speaker 1: Yes. Tell, tell 'em to get on it. Speaker 2: But I, I do expect that we will have a file number for our next hearing. Okay. If the commission is comfortable with me drafting. Speaker 1: So it's a, so it's a one story addition on Sauna Tubes. There's a landing being built. There is a second floor addition on top of the, of an existing first floor floor. And that's it. Right? That's
Speaker 17: It. That's it. Speaker 1: Okay. Questions from the commission on this Concerns. Speaker 5: I mean, is there a reason why we're not calling this part of Davis Brook? Speaker 1: Oh, Speaker 2: So it does connect into Davis Brook much further down in the system. It has to make its way all the way down Cottage Street before it's so, I mean, we can call it an intermittent feeder tribute to Davis Brook. Absolutely. Speaker 5: Yeah. I mean, it's just showing up on a topograph, you know, I know we don't use the topographic USGS map to designate whether it's riverfront
or perennial or all that. You're gonna use stream stats for that. I understand that. I, I guess what I'm trying to just figure out is, is I, you know, I I guess if it's part of Davis Brook, which at least according to my topographic map it is, then we should name it as such. Okay. And not call it dry Brook. Speaker 2: I can note that in the, Speaker 5: Unless it's actually called dry broke, Speaker 2: If it's it, it is and definitely not called Dry Brook. Okay. Would we be comfortable with the as-built plan being appropriately labeled or do we want a revised plan prior to issuance? Speaker 1: But pro process wise though, can we
unilaterally say this? And I don't disagree spiritually, Mike with what you're saying? Yeah, Speaker 2: Well, so we can note in the findings that the intermittent stream that impacts this property with wetlands jurisdiction is associated with the Davis Brook Stream course. Speaker 1: I'm fine with that. Yeah. I, I just don't, I just, I I just wasn't sure if we could just say, just lay start labeling this as Davis Brook. 'cause that just opens up a, you know, I think a, a, a regulatory burden that will impact other projects, which is not a bad thing, but it's just,
Speaker 5: I mean, it shows up as part of Davis Brook. Yeah. Okay. I, I guess like that's kind of where I am mentally on, you know, whether it's regulated, it, it clearly is, whether it's riverfront, you know, I would lead that to folks like Claire and other really smart people to do the stream stats and all, and, and do stream stats Speaker 1: And the burden of proof Speaker 5: That's required for that. You know, I guess when I see things mapped by the US GE Geological Service and it,
and it demonstrates that it's at least part of the Davis Brooks system, you know, it, whether that, whether that fork is actually the West fork of Davis Brook, I can't attest to that, but, you know, it's clearly a blue line stream on a topographic map that is, that Speaker 1: Feeds into Davis Speaker 5: Brook, which, which is 100% labeled as Davis Brook. Speaker 2: Yeah. I was just, I'm gonna adjust my share for the commission so folks can see what Mike is seeing. But I
Speaker 1: Feel like we're kind of, you know, reassigning the headwaters of the Amazon here, you know, Speaker 5: Well we are kind of, Speaker 2: So here's that stream corridor that, that, you know, David, or sorry, Mike is noting, is correctly mapped as a perennial stream feeding as we move down along Cottage Street into the Davis Brook corridor as we hit actually the area right around the Sunbury Aqueduct. Yep. Folks can see, actually, lemme just close out of the why. Cool. So the, yes, the dream stats, there's the drainage watershed
that's accepted into that area. The total drain watershed is under a quarter square acre, whatever the term is. Square, square foot, acre, square foot, acre. Yes. So it does meet, it does not meet the requirements of perennial stream. I, I will note it, if we would like to include the language in our order of conditions, noting that this is mapped as a perennial stream, obviously within the current drought status, a study of observational flow is not feasible because we cannot accept observational studies that occur during a drought period. I would say this is very clearly just from my experience
with the area and intermittent stream corridor, but we can certainly make our finding and if the commission is comfortable, I can have all that drafted for us to review at our next meeting Speaker 1: Before we do anything. I think include, you know, it doesn't impact this filing. Certainly. You know, I also think that even under normal conditions, it's likely gonna be an intermittent stream just based on the conditions that we've all seen over the years. Okay. But I, I would suggest that we include that finding in there back to the, you know, so with that in mind, do, are people comfortable, you know, we can't close tonight
because there's no, no DEP file number. Are people comfortable with the project basically as proposed? Any concerns, any red flags or things that we want to kind of negotiate with Grant on this? Speaker 13: It doesn't sound like there's anything, I mean, Speaker 1: It seems pretty Speaker 13: Straightforward other than the sonar tubes going in, being Speaker 1: On the other side of it. Speaker 13: And, and probably the last step of the stairs coming down would be a cement block, Speaker 2: A little slab underneath to support. Speaker 13: So Speaker 17: Yeah, usually just we, we put a, a concrete, concrete slab Yeah. On the bottom.
Speaker 13: And that's what's, what's that? That's Speaker 1: Four by four or whatever, Speaker 13: A few feet. What was the button notification done? Speaker 2: Yes. About notification was completed. Speaker 17: Yes. I, I hand deliver to each about, Speaker 5: I mean does that stream go any more west or on on the subject property or is it, is it dead ending there as the dash line mean that the, that that dry brook or whatever we're calling it ends at that when the dash line ends? Speaker 2: No, it does continue off the subject property through that area.
Speaker 1: It goes up to back of Leonard Morse. Speaker 5: Okay. Speaker 1: Where the ditch does, Speaker 2: We can also note in our order of conditions that we are not approving any wetland delineations under this filing. Speaker 5: That would be smart. Speaker 1: I think that would be a good way to cover it on this. That, yeah. Thank you Mike. Make it clear. So with that caveat that, you know, we're not doing a wetlands delineation nor approving and this, we're noting, we're noting the presence of a ditch, you know, and a a, you know, part of what we think is, or part Speaker 2: Within the watershed of Davis Brook, Speaker 1: What we think is part of Davis Brook. With all that in mind, are people
comfortable with the projects? We can give Grant some directional guidance at this point. 'cause we can't close tonight, so we'll leave it open. But is there anything that would hold us up from being able to close and issue an order of conditions at our next meeting? Speaker 13: I don't think so. I can't, Speaker 1: I think we're clear. Yeah, I do too, Jim. Yeah. Speaker 2: Clear. Okay. So I'll draft conditions prior to the next meeting. Can Speaker 5: We just get a distance if we're not calling, if we're not doing any delineation of a wetland, can we just make sure that the stockpile distance from this ditch is at least established
so we know that it's, it doesn't become jurisdictional, correct? Speaker 1: Well, the stockpile distance, I mean they have the distances on this map right here. Right. Speaker 2: It doesn't specifically give a distance to the material Speaker 1: Stockpile. No, not to the stockpile. So it's, but it's clearly within 20 feet of the edge of the ditch. Speaker 5: Yes. Yeah. It, so it shows 38.4 feet to the corner of the Speaker 1: One story. Correct. Right. So I, you know, so it's easily within 20 feet. Should we put in the order of conditions erosion control around the stockpiles and all of that, just, you know, in a case of a storm event.
Speaker 2: Yes, absolutely. Speaker 5: What Speaker 12: That's in addition to the erosion control that's there, you think? Speaker 1: I guess I'd be Okay. Speaker 2: Well, I can include a condition regarding if stockpile materials remain on site for longer than seven business days, they need additional erosion controls. Speaker 1: I think that'd be including, but Speaker 2: Not limited to covering with Speaker 1: That two fabric tarps. That'd be a good compromise. Cool. Okay. So with that, I think we're, you know, grant, I think you're, what you're hearing is general favorability for the project as it's proposed right here with some tweaks
around erosion control and, and stuff like that. Any questions for us, grant? Speaker 17: No, thank you very much. Okay. Speaker 1: So what we'll do is we'll continue this, we'll pick this up at on September 3rd at our next meeting and we will take it from there. But it sounds like, you know, again, directionally I don't, we're not seeing anything that causes this great concern and we should be able to issue an order of conditions at our next meeting. Speaker 17: Perfect. Thank you very much. Speaker 1: Okay. Alright. Would someone make a motion to continue this, this hearing until September 3rd? Thank you, George. Is that seconded? Second. Second. I'll take Jim's second. Any further discussion on that?
Those in the room? Jeff? Yes. David? Yes. Excellent. Alright, we're continued. Alright, let's keep going. Next item on the agendas. I've got 24 Peterson Road. We have representatives of 24 Peterson Road here. Speaker 2: Yes. Peter LaVoy, project engineer is on the line. Speaker 1: Welcome Peter, how are you? Hello. I'm fine. All right, good. Thanks. Good. Alright, so let's pick this up. Where we were, where we were before we've gone through the, the project. Peter, I understand that you provided, so we've got the narrative here.
Actually Claire could, could you just give us just kind of an update on where we, where we currently stand. We did get an alternatives analysis yesterday, which we can talk through here this evening. Anything else, Claire, give us an update please. Speaker 2: Yeah, absolutely. And then I am realizing, I think I failed to put one of the revised materials into the, the Google Drive folder, which I'll get in there. The revised landscaping plan, but following, I do Speaker 18: Have it. Claire, Speaker 2: What was that, Peter? Speaker 18: I said I have it with me if you want me to share. Speaker 2: Oh, I'm just gonna get it into the Google Drive folder as well. So the commission can see it on their computers as well. But since the prior meeting we've received
revised plan sets further pulling the house out of the riverfront area. We have seen an updated landscaping plan, which maybe is in the folder. It's so hard to know. It was already in the folder. Okay. Re-uploaded into the folder. We've received a revised planting plan that provides a greater diversity of shrubs within the restoration area that's being proposed. We received updated drainage maps as requested by the prior staff comments. And we also received, which is what is being shared on the screen right now, an updated
performance standards narrative slash alternatives analysis for the proposed project. Speaker 1: So, okay. Alright. So let, we can talk to the alternatives analysis. The first paragraph in the executive summary says that this is being held seen as under as a redevelopment under 5 85, which would mean that an alternatives analysis is not required under 5 85. And I thought we had the whole point, the conversation we had had was that this was in fact a new development 5 8 4. Speaker 2: That is correct. I don't, Speaker 1: Which is why we have an alternatives analysis.
Speaker 2: And I am seeing Speaker 1: In the executive summary of the Speaker 11: Which one? Speaker 2: Yeah. The revised alternatives analysis that was provided does note 10.584, Speaker 11: The 8 5 1, Speaker 1: It says alternative analysis of seven. Speaker 2: So the, the document called alternatives analysis is the old, the original alternatives analysis. Oh, that's the original one, yes. Okay. Speaker 1: Response. Speaker 2: So response alternatives analysis is the, so Speaker 1: I'm looking at the wrong one. Speaker 2: Sorry. Yes. Speaker 11: Apologies. No problem. No, they look very similar. Speaker 1: Yeah. Response alternative. There you go. Yeah. Okay.
Okay. So let's let, let's walk through this. 'cause this is, we need, when we're in riverfront area, we gotta pay for these things properly. Speaker 2: Yeah. So Peter, I don't know if you wanna walk through it, but the proposed house footprint within the riverfront area as the commission see has been reduced to this area here, which is approximately 49 square feet. Speaker 1: And we saw that at our last meeting. Right. Speaker 2: The prior plan, I believe showed a slightly larger encroachment of about 290 square feet. Speaker 18: Yeah, 2 85. There Speaker 1: We go. Okay.
Speaker 2: Okay. So the house has been, the footprint has been adjusted to, I would say, likely reduce impacts into the riverfront area to a great extent, yes. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 2: So yes, Peter does walk through all of the 10.584 performance standards in this narrative. So he does note that the proposed work avoids direct impacts to resource areas, that there's no work proposed in any other resource areas besides the riverfront area. There are no priority or estimated rare habitats in this location. Under the alternatives analysis, Peter notes that
alternative building locations and configurations were evaluated. These alternatives include shifting residents towards the street, reducing the building footprint, rotating the building orientation, modifying the driveway alignment. These alternatives were found to be impractical because they would create conflicts with required setbacks and drainage requirements or other physical constraints of the property. Additional reductions, I'm guessing that's the slope at the rear that he's referring to. Additional reductions in riverfront area intrusion would substantially reduce the reasonable residential use of the lot while providing little or no corresponding environmental benefit. The proposed design represents the smallest practical encroachment into the riverfront area,
while accommodating a code compliant and economically reasonable single family residence. Accordingly, no practicable or substantially equivalent al economic alternative exists that would accomplish the project purpose with less impact to the riverfront area. And I really wish I could tell the state that they need to come up with a better phrase for the alternatives analysis. 'cause that one is a tongue twister. Speaker 1: It is a tongue twister. Okay, let, let's keep going. Just flipping through it. So, yep. Speaker 2: And then no significant, no significant adverse impact. The project has been designed to minimize adverse impacts with a very small encroachment to the riverfront area.
Erosion controls both surrounding the project limit of work as well as temporary eria controls to prevent sediment transport associated with stockpiling. The project does not impede wildlife movement and they are providing, as they note in section five mitigation, while it is not a requirement under the 10.584 standards, they are providing some restoration plantings at the rear of the site, at the edge of the limit of existing one. Speaker 1: Okay. And we now have a diverse planting program back there at this point. Yeah.
Speaker 2: So the plan now includes three red maple saplings, five witch hazels, five gray dogwoods, three service berries, and two black choke berries, which I think is a, a nice mix of wildlife supporting species. Speaker 1: Okay. Alright. So in terms of the, the process, the, you know, the, the papering as we call it, of the, of the under 10.584, we've got what looks to be a complete set of information here. I'd like to open it up to questions, comments, concerns around what's in, what's in front of us now.
Any, any questions from anybody on this in the room? Michael, anything from your side? Okay. Jeff or David? No, I, okay. I mean I, I appreciate the kind of continued tweaks and efforts to, to minimize the impact in the riverfront area and to, you know, mix up the plantings a bit back there to go through the exercise of the alternatives analysis. In my opinion, I think that's appropriate
for this, for this site. Any further questions, comments, any questions or comments from Abutters or the public on this project? Seeing what we see in front of us, this is a notice of intent. We would make a motion to close or we would make a motion and vote to close. Then we would issue an order of conditions. We would probably craft the conditions over the next, over the next weeks and then issue the order of conditions at our next meeting. Okay. So with that, what's the pleasure of the board? Someone wanna make a motion to close the public hearing on, on 24 Peterson Road. Yep. Okay. George made the motion to close the public hearing. Is there a second on that? Second. Thank you Jim.
Any further discussion, comments, questions? Hearing none those in the room. In favor of closing 24 Peterson Road. All in favor here, David? Yes. Jeff? Yes. Okay. Public hearings closed. So what we'll do, Peter, is we'll go and we'll draft orders of the order of conditions. You'll, those will be shared with you prior to our next meeting. So you can have a, have a whack at 'em and give feedback on 'em. And then we'll vote to issue the order of conditions at our next meeting and we'll be done with it. Any questions from your side? Any questions from, from you? You, Peter, you're good? Okay. Alright. I'm good. Great.
Thanks Peter. Appreciate your time and, and cooperation on this. And we will see you back here on September 3rd. Yep. Speaker 2: Peter, I should have the conditions to you guys early next week. Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you Leah. Great. Alright, thank you. Alright. Yep. Next item on the agenda is we are at the point where we will be talking about order of conditions, I believe for Speaker 2: Both order of conditions and stormwater permits. Speaker 1: Right? Stormwater permit and order of conditions for West Central 2 73 West Central. Again, this is a, you know, this is a, what I consider
to be a big project, not necessarily a super complicated project, but a big project and an important one for the community. So with that, Claire, why don't you fire it up and let's see, let's see what you have for us and conditions. You shared these with the applicant team? Speaker 2: Yes. And Nata King is on the call here this evening. He and I had a couple of back and forths, just hammering out some of the final details, but the most up versions of the permitting documents, I am gonna start with the stormwater permit and then work our way down to wetlands.
'cause I think stormwater is maybe the broader of the two in this regard. Version three is the most UpToDate version of that. If you look in the document title for the commission. And then for the special conditions for the wetlands permits, version two and Natty, feel free to chime in if I'm, I'm missing anything at all. Moving through standard administrative information. The public hearing has not been closed on this filing, so we will need to motion to close and also motion to issue this evening. We have our final revised documents dated 7 29. These are also the documents
that are referenced in the planning board decision that was voted on Wednesday last week, proving the project, our standard conditions not going to read through any of them until we get to here. Condition 14, the applicant was looking for some changes to this language to allow for a dewatering plan to be submitted in advance, knowing that they are likely going to encounter groundwater when excavating for the foundation. So I've revised this language to note that dewatering plans developed as part
of the Nip D'S permit application may be submitted to the conservation agent for review and approval prior to construction. If dewatering plans are not approved prior to the start of work, should any water be found during excavation for foundations or stormwater management systems, work shall stop immediately in a site visit with conservation staff shall be scheduled to review prior to any work proceeding. So that just gives them the ability to either submit the plan or deal with it as they approach construction. I imagine their preference will be dealing with it in advance. One other edit to the standard language requested by the applicant. They noted that not all of the species
that they're proposing as part of their landscaping plan are native species. There are some ornamental landscaping species proposed. So I just edited that language to note that all vegetation proposed to be planted on site must be per the approved planting plan, which the commission has reviewed. Standard inspection condition requirements are closeout requirements, noting an as-built plan and a written compliance statement provided by a professional engineer. Moving into our special conditions, our first one right off the bat is that the project shall comply with all conditions of planning board decision PB 26 3
throughout the duration of the project. Moving into prior to construction, any changes to the site development, including but not limited to changes of square footage of impervious area, reduction in constructed units, roadway layouts, landscaping proposed shall be submitted in writing to the conservation office prior to any field changes. Project shall submit the issued NIP D'S permit within 30 days of receipt by the applicant and or owner of record. No work may proceed until the issued NIP D'S permit has been received by the conservation office. The project shall submit a finalized stormwater pollution and prevention plan once a contractor has been selected. No work may proceed until the final SW has been received
by the conservation office business days and hours provided in the finalized swift shall conform with the town of Natick construction noise restrictions in section 24, article 50 at the Natick Town bylaws, an adequate stockpile of erosion control materials shall remain on site for emergency or routine replacement. And I guess natty this you probably, you probably don't need that. Yeah. This condition, I think actually contradicts the prior condition. Yeah, so I'm just gonna delete that one. The areas of construction access shall remain in stable condition at the close of each construction day. Any stockpiling of materials associated with the project shall be located
as shown on the approved plans and properly protected with erosion controls. Should any stockpiling remain in place for longer than 30 days, piles shall be covered with jute netting to ensure erosion from stockpiles is minimized. This condition is a really a belt and suspenders one. The reality is the final inspection schedule will be detailed in the sw, but this gives us enforcement authority if there were to ever be an issue or failure with the associated swip. Inspections shall be completed by the personnel providing the reports and completed by a qualified professional approved by the conservation agent. The applicant shall inform the conservation agent and
or the town engineer immediately, or is required under the final SW of any corrective actions required due to deficiencies or failures identified during inspection. Should any corrective actions be required on site upon completion or report detailing the deficiency slash failure, the corrective actions performed and any follow-up actions shall be provided within 24 hours of the corrective actions being completed. During any storm event greater than three inches over 24 hours inspections by the approved personnel shall occur every six hours during regular construction hours, while actively precipitating to ensure that all temporary site management features and stabilization remain in functioning condition.
Post-construction, stormwater management features designed to manage the final site under stabilized conditions are not to be connected until a final pavement is laid. Temporary stabilization may also be provided, but additional sediment controls may be required for the temp transition from temporary to final stabilized conditions. No permanent certificates of occupancy shall be approved by the conservation agent unless a stormwater COC has been issued or the request receives the approval of the conservation agent. Agent Speaker 1: With an an Speaker 2: Thank you Matt
And the applicant team did have a comment on this one, which is that the, they're just looking for requests on clarification to address time of year issues. IIE when the property may be ready for a certificate of occupancy. In this case, many certificates of occupancy, but landscaping can't be installed. We do have a waiver that has been approved by town council that allows for projects to receive certificates occupancy without us losing our enforcement capability when it comes to mitigation plantings. So I can strike that condition if the commission is comfortable
or we can do a little bit of wordsmithing of the language here to make it clearer when, and if any, Speaker 1: I mean if we have Speaker 2: Restrictions on occupancy would be placed Speaker 1: If we have the mechanism to issue a certificate of occupancy Yep. That maintains our, our enforcement capabilities. Yep. I'm fine with that. Okay. Speaker 2: Is the, so the commission will be okay with me striking that particular condition? Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 2: We also still don't, we don't lose our stormwater certificate of compliance authority as well. This is just in relation to the certificates of occupancy through the building department.
Speaker 5: I just put an or Speaker 1: I Exactly. I wouldn't strike it. Speaker 5: Or, or or is compliant with whatever that Speaker 2: Or, Speaker 5: You know, the attorney the Speaker 2: Town has complied with required or has provided waiver, waiver, Speaker 5: Waiver, whatever the Speaker 2: Required waivers to document mitigation, planting requirements following the issuance of a certificate. Yeah, exactly. Of occupancy. Speaker 1: That's Speaker 2: Good. Natty, are you guys okay with that change in the language? Does that address some of the concerns? Speaker 19: Yeah, I think that's fine.
I'd maybe take the word mitigation out from before planting. Yes, Speaker 2: We Speaker 19: Had talked about, but that is in line with the intent of our edit, so appreciate that. Speaker 1: Okay, that's good. Speaker 2: Prior to the first unit release slash certificate of occupancy, a final operation and maintenance plan for the site must be submitted for review and approval. This addressed a, a question that's actually in an earlier condition, which is it it in regard to the re recording of the operation and maintenance plan. It is has been the commission's standard practice that o
and m plans associated with major storm stormwater permit projects are recorded to ensure future property owners are fully aware of any requirements that are placed on them. So I I did note to the applicant that the commission would have to discuss if they're willing to remove that, the recording requirement of the operation and maintenance plan. What's Speaker 1: The concern about the recording of it Netty? Speaker 19: It's, it's not a particular concern outside of just that I hadn't typically encountered something like that. And I thought it, you know, being on file with the town would suffice with the intent
of the condition. But I, you know, it's not a big deal. Like Speaker 1: Yeah. Our PO we can record, as Claire said, our, our policy or our practice has been that they're recorded just to, so that it runs with the property and not with just the particular owner owner group at the time. So I'd prefer to keep it in there as is. Yeah. Speaker 2: Na unfortunately I think naty, we've been burned by a few too many property transfers and those o and m requirements sort of falling to the wayside that this is our, our way of sort of covering that, that is that issue. Speaker 19: Sure. Addie, are you all set with that, an extra document
to record but no change to kind of the overall Speaker 20: That that's correct. No, no problem. No problem on on our end. Right, Speaker 1: Thanks. Speaker 2: And then the final sets of conditions are in regard to the plantings, which is all trees to be installed on site shall be installed per the approved landscape plan. Any revisions to provost species are significant. Changes in planting locations shall be reviewed and approved by the conservation agent prior to installation. If any trees greater than six caliper inches outside the limit of work not approved for removal die or are demonstrably harmed within two years of the start
of construction as a direct and demonstrable result of construction activities, they shall be replaced at a ratio of two to one with native canopy saplings of roughly two caliper inches. All installed trees total 107 on site must survive for one year following installation. Installation date shall be determined by the date of inspection for the installed plantings or a dated invoice for the installation work and that all planting requirements shall be complied with or the applicant shall be subject to enforcement actions and daily fines. That is essentially the same language that's in our, the waiver. Speaker 19: If I may, Eddie, are you comfortable with 39 as written?
I had suggested some revisions that Claire accepted just to kind of define like what, what the harm to trees would Speaker 20: Be. Yeah, I think it captures it pretty well. We just wanted to make sure if, if our activities damage the trees, we, we own that, you know, that's on us. But certainly trees, you know, things Speaker 2: Happen. Trees are gonna die sometimes. Speaker 20: Exactly. So we just wanted to make sure it was, you know, directly attributable to especially the offsite trees. Sure. We would be responsible for it if, if we impacted it versus normal life of tree. Yep.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm, I'm fine with that. Great. Speaker 2: Those are all of our special conditions under the stormwater permit. If folks are comfortable, I can jump over to the perfect wetlands special conditions. Just gonna highlight that Speaker 1: You should be a little more to change. Straightforward. Speaker 2: Yes. In terms of above and beyond our standard conditions, there's not a whole lot in this one. Just noting, you know, approved project summary, approved plans and documents, findings of fact. This is the one change that the applicant team was looking for a revision to our standard template language. And I think Natty brought up a very good point
of the applicant does not even own the property yet. So within 30 days of issuance might be a ti too tight of a timeline for them to get this recorded at the registry of deeds once they have ownership of the property. So I, if the commission is comfortable, I can rework that language or we can just keep it to, prior to the commencement of work Speaker 1: I'm okay with prior to the commencement of work. I think that's a pragmatic way just to recognize the reality that they don't own the land yet. Speaker 2: Great. Speaker 1: And then, yeah, good.
Speaker 2: That resolves those comments continued moving through our standard conditions. Thank you to the applicant team for catching some of my typos that apparently have existed in this document for a while. Just noting one change to the pre-construction site visit over our standard, which is reviewing the tree protection for the two existing maples at that rear corner that are gonna be protected along the pavement edge. Continuing to scroll through condition 27 just adds in those storm water inspection. Again, that's belt and suspenders from the stormwater permit
conditions 28 and 30 are based off of the prior commission's discussions. Great. In regard to ensuring that the pavement matches what's shown on the approved plans and doesn't have any inadvertent encroachments back closer to the wetland resource area. Speaker 1: I call this the, the Jeff Richards clause. Yes. Speaker 2: And then prior to the incidence of a certificate of compliance, the applicant shall permanently mark the northern curb line as shown on sheet C3 of the approved plan set. That's the layout sheet to ensure no inadvertent encroachment into the
wetland resource or buffer zone. So that's just noting the 25 foot no disturb line still sits in the middle of the pavement in some locations. Yep. So this seemed like the most consistent location. Natty, I know you guys had a question about what types of markers would be expected. The markers that the commission offers to residential property owners are just like those three inch medallions like you see on catch basins that say do not dump. So I'm happy to share that image file with you guys if you guys just wanna reproduce those same
markers or you're welcome to develop markers that more match the aesthetic of the development. They just have to be reviewed by myself before they're installed. Speaker 19: Okay. Is that okay with you Eddie? Speaker 20: It it, it is. I'm sure we can find a design that works. Speaker 19: Yep. Speaker 2: Great. Along here. Prior to the issuance of certificate of compliance, the applicant challenged all signage to permanently mark the areas of snow storage shown on the approved plans. Alternative means of identifying snow storage areas may be employed subject to written approval from the conservation agent. I am recommending
that we strike our garage placard requirements. That's just fine. Condition 35. All proposed trees within wetland resource areas and buffer zones as shown on the approved plans must survive for one year following installation. Installation date shall be determined by the date of inspection for the installed plantings or dated invoice for installation work. We do have a little bit more jurisdiction over the larger landscaping within the buffer zone. So I also note that shrubs installed onsite within areas of wetland juror jurisdiction shall survive at a rate of 80% for one year following installation.
Good Standard certificate of compliance request package. I don't know if we necessarily need anything above and beyond on this particular project. Special conditions in perpetuity, noting that the markers and the snow storage signage must remain prominently visible in perpetuity. The operations and maintenance obligations for the installed stormwater management system shall remain in effect in perpetuity. There were some questions about the language in regards to how the order of conditions applies to successors and interest. I just used the same language that we used
for the five Auburn Street project, which I think is maybe more applicable for this type of mixed use, high density residential development, which just notes that the OOC shall apply to any success or an interest in successor in control or successor and interest to the property described in the notice of intent and accompanying plans. These obligations do not cease with the expiring of the OOC and do not cease with the issuance of a certificate of compliance. Any certificate of compliance shall contain a condition stating the same copies of this OOC shall be recorded in the middle of sex South Registry of deeds against the property address
in the recorded OOC shall not be removed from the registry even after the issuance of a certificate of compliance. The purpose and intent of this condition is to appraise any future property owners that certain specific conditions provided in this OOC shall apply to this property in perpetuity. And honestly, I may just make that our standard language moving forward. And then our last condition is just the standard, no additional disturbance within our, our local Speaker 1: Buffers. So in terms of looks fine to me. I I think we've covered everything in terms of process. We have. The planning board process is still open? No, the Speaker 2: Is it planning board voted to issue a decision on Wednesday last week.
7 29. Oh, okay. Speaker 1: Okay. Okay. Okay, good. Okay. Any questions folks? We did not, did we vote to close the, Speaker 2: We did not vote to close the hearing. Okay. So we do need to close and motion for both of these? Speaker 1: Yes. Okay. Any further? Any questions on this from the commission? I think we're all good. George? Speaker 13: There's something that I sort of remember historically that, I don't know if it was at Hunter's Hill or something like that. We had this one year survival of trees.
Speaker 1: It's in there. Speaker 13: And it turned out that literally one year plus Speaker 1: A day Speaker 13: We lost some trees. And then when investigated, it was actually a real screw up in the way that they were planted Speaker 1: Within In the cages still. Yeah. Speaker 13: Yeah. Speaker 2: That's our, our wetlands conditions pro prohibit that. So even if they were to plant, even if the year were to go, we would still have enforcement capability prior to the, Speaker 13: So get compliance. We could still nail them on that. Speaker 1: We, we occasionally learn from our mistakes if needed. Speaker 13: I remember that's the task provision.
I remember Kathy found those. Yeah. And she went through the Speaker 1: Roof. She, she went ballistic. Okay. So we've got conditions in place, so we need to, so would someone then make a motion to close the storm water permit process? Speaker 2: Yes. Close the stormwater permit. Public hearing, Speaker 1: Stormwater permit Public hearing for 2 73 West Central Street. Thank you, George. Is that second George made the motion here. David, can I take you as a second sir? Yes. Right. Okay. Is there any further discussion on closing the stormwater permit? Public meeting, hearing, hear, public hearing?
There's no further discussion on that. Those in favor? To close that, raise your hand, David. Yes. Jeff? Yes. Okay. Would someone then make a motion to issue wa issue the storm water permit order of conditions as as discussed motion issue? Thank you Jim. Seconded by George here in the room. Any further discussion on that? Those in the room? David? Yes. Jeff? Yes. Okay. Someone make a motion to issue to someone. Make a motion to close the public hearing for the notice of intent for for the notice
of intent under the Wells Protection Act for 2 73 West Central Street. George George made the motion to close the public hearing. Is that seconded? Seconded. Thank you David. Any further discussion on that? Those in favor in the room. David? Yes. Jeff? Yes. Last thing. Someone will make a motion to issue the order of conditions as discussed under the Wetlands Protection Act. Natick local wetlands bylaw 4 2 73 West Central Street. Motion to Issue. Thank you, Jim. Is that seconded? Speaker 13: Yes. Speaker 1: Thank you George. Any further discussion on that?
All is in the room. David? Yes. Jeff? Yes. Great. Natty and team, thank you very much for your cooperation and collaboration on this. Let us know if you have any questions. We'll get the paperwork to you. Yep. Otherwise we look forward to a smooth process and a great project. Speaker 19: Well, thank you all for your thoughtful comments along the way to improve the project. Appreciate that and your time. And thank you Claire for how responsive you've been for all my inquiries throughout the process. Speaker 1: Great. Alright gentlemen. Thank you very much. Alright, well let's move on.
So let's skip ahead and over the minutes. I'd like to go to the Winter Oaks tree removal request. Come on up sir. Thank you for, for your patience. Always. Alright, so what's going on? If you could just introduce yourself, welcome back. I know you've been here before. How do you know that? I think so. Speaker 21: Okay. It's been years. Speaker 1: Yeah. I, Speaker 2: Matt's been chair for 22 years. Speaker 1: It's been now Speaker 21: Been well, okay. Thank you so much Sna. My name is Dr. Ragga Ra. I have Reow my house, actually. I live loved Natick and I lived in Natick for 22 years and I went to Texas for a few years and came back
and I bought, bought my same house. Speaker 1: You bought the deal. Okay, cool. I Speaker 21: Paid half a million more. Speaker 1: I'm sure you Speaker 21: Did. So, learned my mistake. Anyway, so I love my house and I've been improving my house. I did a lot of improvements and all this stuff. My parents, my mother passed away. My dad also lives there and I'm, once I bought house again, I'm trying to do some improvements. The trees, if you see on the picture, are getting growing little bit angle. And during the winter storm I saw last year, this saw, just to joke, like I came, I call people, they say, oh, winter is very mild here. And I came last year and I saw the good winter.
So, So these, they swing very close to my roof and they're causing a danger. So I came to talk to Clara. Clara said, yeah, they are not, it's in the neighbors. So I cop to the neighbor, neighbor said, maybe it's conservational land. So I came back again and then she made a visit and she asked me to call the arborist. I called the arborist, hated return to that. And then also my insurance company recommended to me that I should remove them because they're danger to the roof and I wanna change my roof. So this is a whole sequence of events brought me here. And I'm very aware of the conservation.
I had actually planted a lot of trees when I bought the house, like all around the property. And I try to maintain my property variable. So these are the requests I have if I'm allowed to remove these four trees, which are dangerously close to my property. Speaker 1: So these, these trees are on your property? Speaker 21: No. At the boundary. Speaker 2: Yeah. So the Matt, you can see the plan here is the plan that shows the migration corridor that is identified here is part of the conservation restriction. Yes. Right. Exactly. Associated with this neighborhood development, the Winter Oaks
conservation restriction. The trees sit just beyond the property line and this stone wall within the conservation restriction area on the abutting property of five Jenison Speaker 1: Circle. Oh, I see. So it's, so, okay, so it's on your neighbor's property? It's my neighbor's, but, but the neighbor's, that portion of the neighbor's property is subject to a conservation restriction? Speaker 2: Yes. This is, if folks recall the larger neighborhood layout, this lot at five Jenison is a much larger, almost like angled parcel with the house sitting at the point furthest further away.
Yeah. From three jenison circle with this large vernal pool wetland area, right between the two houses. Speaker 21: And, and these are the pine trees, which like, you know, grow up, up, up. So these four are like Speaker 1: Getting, so it's four, it's four pine trees, Speaker 7: It's pines, right? Yes. White pine. Yes. Speaker 2: Four white. And the, the evaluation from the arborist. Let's take a look at this. The email is available. Speaker 13: I know what that looks like when they go over. Speaker 7: Are they to the east or to the west or what direction from the house are they Speaker 2: Just get it pulled up on the map and then we can just look at it Speaker 21: Facing the out is left. So probably west. Speaker 7: Mm. If I can That's bad type.
Speaker 2: So yes, here's the house. And you can actually see the pine trees in question right here. Speaker 1: It's either west or north, I mean, or it's north. Speaker 2: It's south actually. Wow. Speaker 1: How about this? Shut up. Jim's laughing at, Speaker 21: Yeah, so I'm, I'm holding my roof replacement everything to see if Tom come and help Speaker 1: Me. Oh, I see. Oh yeah, that's south. Of course, Jim. Speaker 2: And, and just as I noted in my staff notes, the commission is the holder of the cr which is why the doctors in front of us this evening, they are also on the abutting owner's property. And under Massachusetts law, they will also have to give their permission for the Speaker 21: Removal.
Yes. Once, if I get permission, I ask my neighbor to respectfully his choice. So out the bound by Speaker 2: And the cr Speaker 7: I'm sorry, has the neighbor approved or we haven't asked yet, or where does that stand? Hasn't Speaker 1: Asked yet. Okay. Speaker 21: I asked neighbor, but he said ask you guys have to give a permission then. Speaker 1: Right? And and then he's okay with it. Speaker 21: I hope so. Speaker 1: Okay. We'll find out. Speaker 21: I will be nice to him. Speaker 2: And the conservation restriction language is also in the Google Drive folder. So I just wanted to scroll down to Speaker 7: Who signed this? Speaker 2: The commission did a, Speaker 1: This is, this is, this is Winter Oaks. Winter Oaks is before. Is this kind Speaker 2: Mean Speaker 1: George negotiated this one?
Speaker 21: 2005, six? They were billed, I guess. Speaker 2: Yep. 2002 I think is when this agreement was signed. I think the guys Speaker 1: Just before I joined goes way back. It goes way Speaker 2: Back. But the language under which the commission would be approving this work is, is exceptions to prohibited uses. Number six, upon approval of the conservation commission or its designee, selective cutting, removing or otherwise destroying of trees, grasses, or other vegetation, dead or damaged trees and branches for purposes such as habitat maintenance, removal of invasive or poisonous plant species and protection of public health and safety.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean clear clearly within the terms of the cr we have the authority to allow this to happen. I mean, is it a public health and safety? Safety, public safety? That's, that's, that's the judgment call that we're being estimate. Okay. Speaker 13: Well if someone's in the house when the trees fall, Speaker 1: I guess I'm, I'm more, I'm more looking at the word public versus an individual resident. Correct. Speaker 2: What I will say is the term public health and safety emergency can or risk can apply to residential property. Though I understand the interpretation being, you know,
to public rights of way and ways of access. That, that's my only statement in that regard. Speaker 1: Helpful, thank you. Speaker 2: I I just am thinking of the emergency certification process where, you know, there are potential for impacts to residential property, private property to be the cause for, I'm not saying it is necessarily always the case. Speaker 1: I mean, if it was a, if it was a dead or dying or clearly diseased tree, you know. Yeah. But you know, I mean for me it's a question of degrees. You know, where are we? I mean, you know, there's a natural hesitation to Speaker 21: No, I understand totally.
You know, and I'm willing to plant four more trees. Five more trees. And I have done this a lot around the property. Yeah. And there is some poison ivy going on. But again, I'm not arborist, but arborist was brought into Speaker 1: Understood. Speaker 13: But these are three white pines, right? Four four. Speaker 1: Four four. Big white pines. Yeah. Speaker 13: What's the diameter? Speaker 2: The, let me just get it. You shared backup on the screen. It does note Speaker 21: 75 to 80 feet in height and Speaker 1: 75 to 80 feet tall. 30 Speaker 21: To 40 feet Speaker 2: Based on my site visit that they do vary. That the trees are different sizes.
I would say between 18 and and 36 inch trunk diameters between the four trees. Speaker 13: So you, you, you cut them in such a way that you have four potential Speaker 2: Snags, Speaker 13: No four potential carving spots. You know, you, you go down the road and you see this white, Speaker 2: The statues white Speaker 13: Pond, someone's taken and there's either an Indian chief or there's a, a Speaker 1: Clock, a chainsaw sculpture is what you're saying, George? Speaker 13: Yes. That's just one. Speaker 2: Or if you're, if you're on route 30 in Newton, they've got a Speaker 13: Marathon runner, you can argue that it's gonna damage there's any
Speaker 1: I'm gonna bring this back. Speaker 13: There's no problem about, can we see which, Speaker 1: I'm gonna reel this back. Speaker 2: Whatcha looking for Jim? Speaker 12: Just point out the four. 'cause it seems like there's Speaker 1: More than four there. Course. Look on one. 1, 2, 2. Speaker 2: Yeah. So it's 1, 2, 3, and then switch to the other. Photo four. So you can see these are the three that I pointed out in the last photo. And this is the fourth one closer to the Speaker 12: Street. Try try me again there. Speaker 2: One, Speaker 12: One Speaker 2: There. 2, 3, 4. Four. Okay. And in the other photo three, sorry, in this photo it's three, four, yeah. Three, two. And then one is this one
Speaker 1: Behind there behind the house. Speaker 21: And they're taking from my deck. So you can see there the angle there if you want. Speaker 12: And one of 'em has got like a four Speaker 1: Yeah. Speaker 2: Type situation going on. Yeah. The, this one has a split lever. Speaker 12: Okay. I, Speaker 7: You know, I I, I'd, I'd be interested in Mike's thought, but my experience with white pines is they, they're shallow rooted. They can come down in a wind storm, number one. Number two, when you have a cluster of trees, if you take one or two down, the others get weaker and are more likely to be harassed in a windstorm. But that's, I I don't have the expertise. It Mike.
Mike, what are your thoughts? Speaker 5: Well, I find it interesting that the arborist didn't mention that those, all those pines clearly have white pine decline. Probably eclipse ops along with other diseases that are a complex disease for white pines. So those crowns, if you look at those crowns carefully, you'll notice that the needles are either very thin, thin, very stunted. Yep. Crown of the trees are very thin. That's a, a very common, very common disease or disease complex that's been identified as just broadly as white pine decline.
You know, the, the argument I I, I'll just, I'll go out on a eastern white pine limb Speaker 2: Here. Speaker 5: I don't like the conversation about whether the trees should be cut or not. I think that's clear. The trees be cut. The, the issue that I'm having right now is the language in the sea. I wasn't here at that time. You weren't born yet. I I was probably not. Well, I probably was born. But as somebody who's grown up playing in those woods, and, and remember when there weren't any houses on Winter Street, Speaker 2: Mike, we could make an argument that there are risks to the public safety of trail users in winter woods.
Speaker 5: I mean, you can definitely make that argument. But understand the CRS purpose was to what? Speaker 2: Minimize the impact to these areas and protect the wildlife. Speaker 5: To protect the vernal pool migration. Yes. Corridor, migration corridor. Yeah, sure. So that migration corridor is about a couple of things. One is that you don't want compaction of that soil. Right? That's one of the major features of life zones around vernal pools. Right. Is about two things. One about avoiding all
soil compaction at all possible within 200 feet of that pool. And then the other piece is about maintaining adequate shade. Those are the two most important things Yep. About vernal pools and maintaining that habitat quality. So I have no problem cutting the trees down, but I'm not the one who came up with this wonderful cr language that inherently is counter to what the intended, what the intent of this cutting of the trees are. I, I I have no problem with the public safety thing.
If we want to, I just want to, to make it clear to this wonderful commission, is that if, if we're, if we're gonna have to make a decision about cutting these trees, which I fully support, it better be defendable under the language of this instrument, of this conservation instrument. Speaker 13: When was the instrument done? Actually, what's the date on it? Speaker 1: 2002. Speaker 2: 2002. July 18th is when it was accepted by you, the chairman. You Speaker 1: Signed it. You see that, that says George Pan. Speaker 13: So that's, so that, that's the problem.
That's when I think I had to take over all the controlled substances. Speaker 5: That's right. Okay. Speaker 13: So I I I just lost track of what was going on. Speaker 1: I I Speaker 5: Would, I would say that if we can, if we can hedge our bets, and I think that there's, there's a, a place for public safety and such as long as that's a, a place that we can defend that decision. But understand that this conservation restriction in, in terms of how I read it, it's about that vernal pool and it's about the ha maintaining the habitat quality to that pool.
Speaker 1: So I would, I would argue that the, the, the issue is under the condition, under how, under the, the, the, the words of the existing cr I think it's clear that we have the authority and the right to allow this to happen. We can certainly do that. Did you know, but to your point, Mike, you know, maybe we could have and should make sure in the future that any CRS really put a much finer point on what the intended outcome is of this here. So I'm not concerned about a precedent, I'm not con
because I think it's very defensible under this under, when we talk about public, public health and safety, it does say purposes of habitat maintenance in there, which I think starts to nudge in the direction you're talking about. I would suggest that we, if we choose to allow this under the term, you know, as the, as the holders of the cr if we choose to let this happen, that we do a replanting and to do, and Mike, I look to you and Claire to kind of define what you think would be appropriate, you know, to, you know,
Speaker 5: Yeah. And the equipment should be on matting or some other Speaker 1: Properly done making Speaker 5: Sure that there isn't, I'm not saying that soil compaction may not already be happening or has happened or may happen in this tree removal project, but we should at least make sure that it's minimized to it to whatever extent Speaker 1: I've got. I've got a suggestion. And that is that, I mean, it sounds like we're moving in direction where we can figure out the conditions under which this can happen and there would be very doable conditions, but very specific conditions and
Speaker 5: Time of year and, Speaker 1: And obviously and, and, and time of year and all that stuff. Okay. Certainly Speaker 2: Not what the February 1st through May 1st restriction. That would Speaker 1: Be smart. So, so just one last thing. I mean, yeah. One, one thing we could, we could do if we so chose would be to do this and would be to go out there and take a look at it and just take a, 'cause we haven't laid eyes on that vernal pool in quite some time. Speaker 2: Very true. Speaker 1: We could do that. And we could also take a walk through Winter Woods. Speaker 2: We can see the, the deer carcass that my intern discovered and sent me a picture of with no context Speaker 1: In Winter Woods.
Yeah. Nice. Wow. You know, if people were up for doing that, we could just go, go, go check it out and, and 'cause, 'cause Winter Woods is another area that I'd really, really, really would like for us to find a way to get access to that. Speaker 2: And I think maybe in the interim you can approach the neighbors at five Jenison noting that the commission is inclined to approve the removal, hear their response. I can work on drafting an approval document exactly. That the commission could approve at their next hearing, hopefully following the receipt of approval from the abutting property owners. Sure.
Speaker 21: I will. As I told him that if you don't like it, I won't do it. Yeah, Speaker 1: I appreciate that. But it's, but it sounds like, you know, there, there, there's room to negotiate. So there'll be conditions on the, if I'm reading the room right, there'll be conditions on the way that the trees are removed to make sure that the, the, the earth is kept intact and not compacted for the, to protect the resource that we intended to protect the vernal pool Speaker 2: And the remaining trees. Speaker 21: If you don't like, I'm okay if you want to train whatever because Speaker 1: I just wanna protect Speaker 21: My property. I hear you. I really like the whole, I mean, one of the reason I came back was that when I came back
and I looked at my lawn from my deck, the trees were calling me to hug. So there's so much left for them. And I have planted a lot of trees around and I try to beautify things and I see deers coming in. So I totally understand all the compassion there. But as I said, like if there is a common way somewhere I can protect my property and Yep. We can manage something. Speaker 1: So I think, I think you should approach your neighbor with some confidence Speaker 2: And I'm happy to provide you an email. Send summarizing tonight's discussion. Is there Speaker 13: Only one neighbor that is considered technically in a butter? Speaker 2: Yeah, so you can see on the, the, actually maybe not. 'cause I had the aerial up for
so long. Say there's more than Speaker 13: One neighbor talk to Speaker 21: Them all. Only one neighbor. Speaker 2: We are, we are the other neighbor. Oh, okay. We own the, the land abutting to the rear as part of winter woods. But the Speaker 5: Would be the applicant in this. Speaker 1: Does there have to be, is Speaker 2: There a formal application? Speaker 1: I don't think there is a formal there. No. Speaker 2: I think we would issue a memo to both the property owners of three and five. Genesis. There's Speaker 5: No, no, I, there's no, no nothing. Speaker 1: I don't believe so. 'cause there's no, well, Speaker 2: Well all of the equipment access would be in Cool. Speaker 21: From my property resource Speaker 1: Area. Oh Speaker 2: My though. I'm just curious if, so if the equipment access
so remains d remains within the lawn area here. Speaker 5: It's outside the, Speaker 2: It's outside of the, the buffer zones associated with the vernal pool. Okay. So we can, we can also include that in the language. Speaker 5: Yeah. Outside of what, 50, is it 50 feet? Speaker 2: This is a hundred foot. A hundred foot, yeah. And Speaker 5: I wish I knew the bylaw better, clearly. Speaker 21: But I'm, I'm so impressed. I was first time here I 23 years. I don't come here, but I would like to contribute. Look, I have my degree in AI and I also work foro and I worked on a project to map the water bodies in the United States and then Oh cool.
With our predictions. So I think I'm, I'm, I'm somewhere I have to come back and give to the town somewhere. I see. I Speaker 1: I think we need to talk. Yeah, it's all kinds of stuff we're interested Speaker 21: In. I have two need more volunteers, one in ai, one in cyber and I work for Raytheon and we had a project with Noah, national Ocean Graphic and MO latency. And we try to predict whether in five minutes now there a lot of ai they're using it. So Speaker 1: Maybe we sit down and get lunch sometime. I'd love to, Speaker 21: Absolutely. I'll happy to get back to the town. I'm so happy. Excellent. And then there is a, sorry side question. You saw that there is a dam, which was the, everybody was talking about the,
Speaker 1: The south south Speaker 2: Naville Speaker 1: A dam across the Charles. If Speaker 21: Anybody comes to my house, I take them. I say this is my Niagara fall, but I don't know this drink dried, so I I'm not keeping an there removing the dam or Speaker 1: What? The dam's gone. Speaker 2: So the concrete spillway with the waterfall has been removed to declassify the earth and berm structure as a dam. Okay. The entirety of the system was not in compliance with the office of dam safety regulation. So our options were cut down all the trees and add rip wrap embankment to reinforce the earth and berm or remove that concrete spillway. So there's a natural run
of the Charles River through that area. Speaker 21: I've made so many videos there. Ah, I'm, I'm in a song that on that was a beautiful spot. Speaker 2: Well we've been doing audio recordings and photos so that there's intended to be signage to recreate the history and acknowledge the prior presence of the waterfall. Speaker 21: Sure, sure. Thank you. Clara has been very kind. Great. Speaker 1: Super. So we'll be in touch. Thank you sir. And have the conversation with the neighbor. Claire will send you an Speaker 2: Email. I'll send you that follow, follow up information and I'm happy to join a meeting if that's helpful as well. Yeah, Speaker 21: That's fine. And then if he allows it, that's fine. Super. But I think you should visit that place.
It's very nice and we can do some improvements there. Speaker 1: We'll let you know. 'cause there's, 'cause we should take, it's been a little while since we've been out there, right sir. And there's, there's a lot of really cool stuff out there. Yes sir. Speaker 2: Get out and see the Pine Hill improvements that accept has done as well. Speaker 1: Exactly. Oh nice. Speaker 21: Yeah. Great. Any help I can do for Dom. Thank Speaker 2: You. Thank you so much. Appreciate Speaker 1: Your time. Thank you. Thank you Speaker 2: Sir. Matt, I don't know if we also want to jump quickly I one item forward under general business discussion general. 'cause I know we've got some, no actually to the Middlesex path update, but we have some of the abutters on the call and I know that they've been
waiting a decent, decent amount of time. Didn't realize that. So Speaker 1: Let's, let's invite them in and have this conversation. Speaker 2: So I provided the commission with an update at our last June meeting in regard to the bike area growth, the concerns and growing public safety issues with vehicle access from the right of ways across Middlesex path into the conservation area. I met out on site with Sergeant Ra and Brian Casey and r Goodine from the public works division to discuss what kind of access the town needs in that area, if any,
what the public safety concerns are from a policing perspective, as well as where confirming where the property boundaries are and whether or not because it's an unaccepted right of way, whether or not the town has any rights to put any infrastructure. Thankfully the property line for the commissions parcel, which the Middlesex path is on, is right at the edge of pavement. So Brian Casey is confident that the, Speaker 1: So we could put Cassons in or whatever was, Speaker 2: So we're putting in Jersey barriers, concrete jersey barriers as a temporary solution. Those should be in by end of day tomorrow. According to Brian Casey, I'm gonna send him a follow up message in the morning
while I look at the budgeting requirements of a more permitting permanent option for the area. The thing that makes the most sense from an aesthetic in a neighborhood perspective is likely some sort of guardrail at the end of the roadway that still allows pedestrian access onto it kind of sloped. Does a jersey, the area have, I would be concerned about something like boulders because it is quite a steep drop off. So I don't know if there's enough footing for a boulder to really sit and stay in a permanent way, in a way that is also fully visible from the right of way. 'cause I think the last thing I would want is
somebody thinking that they could drive in there and then all of a sudden they're totaled against a set of boulders. Speaker 1: That's not necessarily a No, that sounds like a good idea. I Speaker 2: I don't necessarily disagree. I think a guardrail is maybe just the safer option option all Speaker 1: Around. It's probably a little more humane. Speaker 2: And then actually the Sergeant Lucera offered a great suggestion of once we're have a permanent option in place doing some additional vegetation restoration along the slope to further yeah. Identify a, a narrow pedestrian access point versus the current rather wide degraded hillside. I
Speaker 1: Mean this is, but but what I mean what we're talking about is, is addressing the issue of where a vehicle was driven into the woods. Speaker 2: Yes. And we did actually receive, I don't think I uploaded it 'cause the file size was too large to go in our Google Drive folders, a ring video from one of the abutting neighbors. But I will send it around. Oh please do with, with a link for the commission access access Speaker 1: That shows the truck going in there. Speaker 2: It shows the Jeep leaving the property, the, the camera did not catch it on the way in but did catch it on the way out. So I can forward that around to the commission. And that's nothing Speaker 1: Actionable for the police, Speaker 2: Sadly
nothing actionable for the police. We did not catch any, but this is off of Parker court has been the primary issue with the vehicular access. So I'm getting it pulled up on the screen here right now. But you can see the property line sits right at that edge of the pavement. And once I turn on the aerials folks will be able to see there is a little set of concrete stairs as well. But this is the track that the vehicles have been taking across Middlesex path and then up into the bike area that I reviewed with the Speaker 1: Commission prior.
And is this, I mean has this been happening regularly, Speaker 2: At least in the last six months? It does seem like it has been a regular occurrence. That is when Morgan Griffiths, our transportation planner, was first contacted by Sal who's actually on the call. I spoke with one of the other abutters when I was out in the field with the other staff that I mentioned and, and she discussed how she was very concerned about, you know, her kids' safety, dog walking, all of that sort of stuff. Because unfortunately it does seem like most of this access is occurring in sort of dusk, twilight, evening hours.
Yeah. When maybe visibility is not as good in terms of the larger bike path area. Keolis has gone out and recovered their materials that were found on the property. No update yet on the fencing completion along the corridor. But I'm hoping to have that in the next couple of weeks from the MBTA slash QS and I will have a proposal for the commission at the next meeting. In terms of how to address the unauthorized land disturbance, I've not had any success. Speaker 1: All the digging for the bike Yeah.
Speaker 2: Activities. I haven't had any success making contact with the folks who are using that area. I was hoping that the high school students who are building the town forest bike paths might have a connection, but either they're, they're not willing to wrap, which I absolutely understand or they're just not involved with or engaged with the, the group of folks who are doing things at this property. I Speaker 13: Think these are ethanol. Speaker 2: There has definitely been reports keep made. Beautiful. The PAC Conway does quite a bit of cleanup in this area. They've got a couple of of trash cans there. Lot there has been, you know,
drinking reported there has been fires reported. And just 'cause I know that there are some abutters on the call today. The commission doesn't have any immediate enforcement authority. We can't go out to the parcel and confront these teenagers and, and give them a ticket. If you are seeing folks using the property after dusk, which is when all conservation parcels close for public access, please, please, please call the non-emergency police line to report it in working with Sergeant La Sarah, they are hopefully gonna be increasing their patrols out there, but the more reports to the non-emergency line
that they receive, the more patrols they will add to the area. So you're also more than welcome to send reports to me, but the most action can be taken when it's reported immediately to the non-emergency police line. Okay. I I wish I had a, a badge that I could go out and flash. Sadly, they won't give me one. Okay. Speaker 1: So Speaker 2: That's the public safety update from my end. Okay. Speaker 1: So we, so it sounds like, I mean, so Keolis is gonna be doing the fencing along their, the railroad track part of it and taking care of that. They've cleaned their stuff up, we're talking with DPW
and they're gonna take care of some temporary and permanent solution to block vehicular access at the end of Parker there. Is there any worry? Like I'm looking at Forest Street, I'm looking at Taylor, I'm looking at Randall Court would be a little bit harder. Speaker 2: Yeah. So Randall Court has driveways at the end of the roadway. Right, exactly. So it's not, not public right of way access, excuse me, the Taylor Avenue. There's a, a much more substantial grade change. Yeah. It doesn't dip down and then go back up. It's, it's just a straight hill in that location. So I wouldn't be as concerned about public
access off of Taylor Ave. I do think that Randall Court could be a potential concern, but again, this is a multi-family unit and this is their yard. So it would be pretty Speaker 1: Egregious. Very, Speaker 2: Very, it, it's not as easy as just jumping the pavement onto the trail corridor essentially. We have not received any reports from the other abutting streets. I'm in fairly regular contact with some of the Randall Court residents and haven't heard about any vehicular access from their point along the trail. But I'm also happy to follow up with those residents. Speaker 1: Jeff, you're done in that, that neck of the woods,
any concerns from your side? Speaker 10: Not, you know, 'cause I I, I don't hear anything like, you know, I mean, I hear motorcycles at night on 1 35. Right. But I, I don't hear any activity over there. Okay. And I mean, Parker's right around the corner here. I mean, I've always looked at Parker's being like very quiet area. This, this was, this was really a surprise to me that this was happening. Speaker 2: Fair likely to the residents as well. Speaker 1: Yeah, really. Speaker 10: I mean, 'cause it's a small street, right?
Yeah. And so to like, take people down that street, you know, that's, it's an attention grabber, right? Because if you, if you don't live on that street, you don't belong on that street. And so that's why it really kind of surprised me. But I, I don't hear any residual noise coming out of there. I I hear more of the train whistles and framing at night and I do coming anything out of there. Speaker 2: I I will note that the, I think that part of the concern is the proximity to the houses, to the roadway. It's a very narrow street. The developments are on
Speaker 1: On Parker. Speaker 2: On Parker. The houses are quite close. So it, there really is, there's no sidewalks or anything like that. So it's when folks are out and walking on the street, they're walking in the street and it, it definitely is a, a significant concern. Not only, I think for us as an abutting landowner, but also for the, the police department as well. Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean there's no, no, the folks on Parker don't have to justify their concerns to any extent. I mean, cars are driving down the end of the street and launching themselves into conservation land. There's the concern is well noted and well placed. And David Speaker 2: Beatty also has his hand raised.
Speaker 1: Yeah. David, please. Speaker 8: Yeah. Thanks. IIII didn't catch the whole conversation 'cause I wandered off, but I came back and I heard talk about the, what's known as the bike jumps Speaker 1: In, in, in the off of Middlesex path. Speaker 8: Yeah, yeah, yeah. And I'm, I, as I said, I'm a father of many kids here in Nick and my youngest is a extreme fan of the bike jumps and spent a lot of time there. I will say remarkably, it's an incredibly caring community of older folks teaching younger folks how to adventure and,
and, and, you know, learn skills. And he ne he, he's never come back with any, any stories about anything that was not super positive. And, you know, he rides up from south net up there to to, to jump with his friends and it's actually, it's an asset to the community. We need to figure out how to make sure it's healthy and safe, obviously. But don't dismiss it as like punk kid stuff. It's actually a really wholesome, healthy sports-minded group of folks that
have, they're almost raising the next generation of, of young adults. So, and Speaker 2: David, Speaker 8: This me, this, me as a dad, I mean, I was surprised when he, when reports I've heard Yeah. And they, they take care of each other. Speaker 2: So, and David, if your son or any of the members of the group are, are interested in engaging with us, the, the commission went through and established a precedent for approving bike infrastructure on conservation commission land. I would, but there is, okay, there is, you know, a public hearing process and conditions that apply to that. I think the concern now is that this use has been growing
for so long without any regulation and is now resulted in some pretty substantial public safety concerns. There have also been reports of fires being lit on the property and obviously under our drought conditions, that's a real concern. So please let them know we're not, you know, the scary bad guys necessarily, but there are processes and, and conditions that have to be placed on these types of things. So I would love to engage with folks about that. Speaker 8: Thank you for that invitation. I, I'm just, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm being a promoter because I think it's actually a great asset. So thanks. Speaker 1: Yeah, thanks for that perspective, Dave.
That's, that's great. And let's, let's have the conversation, let's keep talking about this and Speaker 2: One of the residents Speaker 1: Yeah, for sure. Speaker 2: Has her hands raised. Speaker 1: Hey Patricia, please. Speaker 22: Hi, good evening. My name's Patricia O'Brien. I'm at 17 Parker Court and David, I support you. I love seeing these kids. They're 10 to 14-year-old kids coming down the street and bikes trash talking each other about their accomplishments of the day. They're a lot of fun. And their parents who drop them off and pick them up usually park in front of my house, often from outside, will ask me if it's okay that they're stopped there, they're respectful. The concern I have is one, I I thank you
for putting the concrete barriers up tomorrow is that there's no delineation of that street. You know, it just, it just drops off and where it drops off, there's a footpath and people are walking along there. So when the car went over the edge, it was shocking and it was very intentional. And I also am concerned about kids who are coming down the street on their bikes and shooting off the pavement and landing onto the bike path. There's no way you can visualize it. I, I fully support a controlled environment up there,
you know, being monitored. As I say, I really enjoy seeing the kids and I would hate to see that go away. But I, I am concerned about public safety of walkers on that pathway and on the street as, as people are zipping down, whether they're on bikes or in cars. Speaker 1: I'd like to, I mean, if we go do, if we go walk at winter woods, I think it might be worth us just going and taking a stroll down there as well. We could just do a couple of, a couple of little, you know, walkabouts down there and just, Speaker 2: I mean, we can just pick a day and, you know, do a conservation parcel tour if Speaker 1: We want. Yeah, we could. And just to go take a look at this
'cause I need to, I, you know, I've been down Middlesex path a thousand times, you know, you know, the bike area a thousand times, all that stuff. I can't visualize what the, what the end of Parker Speaker 2: Looks like. Oh, here I can pull up the street Speaker 1: View, you know, know and, and just kind of what's really at the end and the drop off. But it, you know, I think all these concerns are completely legit. I think Patricia, in your mind, I mean if, if there is a jersey barrier placed at the end of Parker Court, and Claire you were, that is there the other day is, are are we introducing a new danger by doing this?
I mean, like, we were joking around a car going there. Speaker 2: So the jersey barriers would be placed right here along the edge of pavement, essentially in line with this stone retaining wall. Okay. In a manner that doesn't restrict any of the vehicle access to the driveways and obviously the, the fire hydrant at the end of the road. Yep. There is about eight inches of dirt right past the edge of the pavement, but then Patricia is quite right. It, it drops off. Speaker 1: So it goes down very substantially. Yeah. But then does it go back up again to Middlesex path? Speaker 2: Yes, it goes, no, it goes down to Middlesex path and then back up on the other side into the bike area.
I can pull up the cont cont where Speaker 1: I got, yeah, I, I gotta, I gotta, I gotta go out there and take a look at it. 'cause I, I always thought that in most of those roads that it was, it was up to Middlesex path. Yeah. Speaker 2: So here's the contour. But that's, so yeah, you can see that in, in this area here. It drops down to the low point of the path and then goes back up probably 10 feet. Speaker 1: Oh wow. I got Speaker 2: To the bike Speaker 1: Area. I, I gotta, I gotta get back out there and just, just remember. So it doesn't then, then it doesn't look like, you know,
so the Jersey barriers aren't, you know, there's no danger to kids. Like I was thinking kids would be launching themselves off of Middlesex path down to Parker court. Speaker 2: No, Speaker 1: Thankfully. And hitting the barrier and kind of wiping out on the barrier would not be a Speaker 22: Good going, not thankfully, I do think I, I do think the, if the barriers are there, 'cause there have been cones up orange cones that the kids move. But there it's great because they're reflective so you can, cars coming down can see them. I, I do think if the Jersey barriers are there, it will force the kids to find another entry point because they can't just kind of roll their bikes down. Well, what if
Speaker 1: It was, what if it was two Jersey barriers with a, with a 18 inch gap between them? So a vehicle can't get in there, but a kid could ride a bike through there. Speaker 22: Yeah, Speaker 2: I think that is the intent is to ensure that pedestrian access is not blocked along the street corridor. And we do actually have some signage that'll be available. It says, you know, no vehicular access that we can also place on the Jersey barriers. But again, I think that is, I I only attend the Jersey barriers to be a temporary solution. I think ideally we would see a more formalized wooden or metal guardrail that allows for pedestrian
and bicycle access, but has a clear and robust Speaker 1: It's anti vehicle, Speaker 2: Robust anti vehicle capability. Speaker 1: Okay. So, but Patricia, what I'm hearing from you though is that, you know, similar to David, I mean you're, you're okay with the kids being out there riding bikes and, and and doing stuff. Speaker 22: I, I am. I think I am, but I think my neighbor Sal, who is also on the call, may feel differently, has a different opinion of Speaker 1: Me. Okay. Fair. Excellent. Hey Sal, do you wanna, do you wanna chime in on this? Speaker 2: You're muted, Sal. I just sent you a request to unmute. Oh, still muted.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Can't hear yourself. Speaker 23: Okay, there Speaker 1: You go. Got it. Excellent. Welcome. Speaker 23: Welcome. Thank you. Speaker 1: So what do you think about this? What, you know, you, you've been listening. Speaker 23: Here's, here's what I, I think about this. I don't disagree with what Pat indicated about the youngsters. We have no problem with the youngsters riding their bikes and performing some athletic situations. The problem, what we have though, the problem that we have is that there's a has Pat Conway.
Yep. Noted. And Pat Conway, of course is a former school teacher. We know Pat very well wants a volunteer organization called Keep Up Natick. Beautiful. Yeah, we know Pat well. Good man. And, and, and yes he is. And Pat will tell you as he told Claire that there's a bad group. Let me repeat that. There is a bad group, a subset to be sure. The youngsters that I see, I know by some of them by name. I compliment them in where they wear helmets.
They wish me a happy Father's Day. No problem. It's the bad group that I am concerned about. It's the bad group that steal, lemme repeat that again. Steals equipment from the railroad and creates these massive tent structures, which Pat continually has to go and clear out. Now Pat has indicated, I think to Claire, and you've seen pictures of these structures.
Oh yeah. 'cause I think Pat has provided them to Claire, who I think in turn has sent it to you. Speaker 2: Sal. I also made a site visit myself and gathered additional photos that have been shared with the commission, Speaker 23: By all means. But, and in any event he said, look, I can't keep up with this. And so we have, we have again, a subset, subset bad group. Okay. Stealing use of alcohol. Yeah. I have information that is drug use. Okay. Now, I don't think it's a very healthy climate.
I don't think it's a very healthy climate to have this activity, nefarious activity being created approximate to our community, specifically Parker court beyond. And, and I don't think Pat disagrees with it from that standpoint. The, and there's no, I mean there's no dispute about what I've indicated. We have to separate rape the
children by and large find. It's this other group. This group. So many we're talking about, not young people. We're talking about people coming in with trucks, Jeeps, there was a reference to motorcycles earlier in the discussion. One of our neighbors actually saw a group coming down there through the bike path in their motorcycles. No, it's, it's not a healthy climate. I, I don't believe. And what, what is compelling to me, what is compelling to me as well, is the fact that
this, and I haven't been back there in a while, but I have been back. There, is this structures, these hill structures quarterly constructed are dangerous To the point where some years ago, one of the children actually got hurt. You see? And what they do with the, and what they sometimes do with these vehicles, they transport furniture. Like I, this has all been, you can talk to Pat about this by all means. And I think Pat will well be that as a mess.
And so it's not necessarily from my standpoint only. And then when the furniture, I guess went out by the elements and whatever, they burn it sometime ago there was a fire created by one of the fires that, for the furniture. So I'm suggesting respectfully separating the reference to a group of children, you know, or, you know, a a an asset, you know,
a reference to an asset, interesting term asset. I'm suggesting to you folks to separate that reference to the bad group. Not my term, but Pat's term. Okay. And I'm suggesting that when you look at that and, and realize that you, you realize that it's not necessarily as good an asset as what we want. The problem here is sure the police agree.
I talk from people as well, and I agree with what Pat said, by and large, if I explained to them, look, you can't park down here. There's no parking thing up here, sign. And you're blocking traffic and it's a narrow street and it's, you, you, you, you're causing havoc in terms of envi, emergency vehicles, ambulance, fire, Trash, whatever. By and large they're fine. They're fine with, okay. Although one mother said our son was kind of pushed around
by the older boys. Now we are talking about older boys coming down with your pickup trucks and, and whatever. And it's wide range. It's beyond native. They're coming from all over. Wow. Okay. Am I an alarmist? Well, you're gonna have to make your own determination, but I pat you see, you allude to is a good guy. Talk to him. Oh yeah, we will talk to him. We will. And he's, and, and, and, and he made that reference. So then the problem comes where you say, well how about the police? Okay, when you call the police
and they're great, there's reluctance. I, I always do generally go down and talk to the people, you know, my god, you know, and I have no problem with kids enjoying themselves and whatever. Although it's hazardous. It's hazardous. So the police said, well, tell us when they're there. But it's hard, you know, when this vehicle, these vehicles coming out, well, we don't know when, you know, fortunately Pat was as, as created as an creative as she is. And she had these device where she can capture these things.
The problem is lack of scrutiny In this area. Claire will tell you the lack of scrutiny prevents police. You're gonna have police patrol. I doubt that they're gonna come up there. I mean, there's the scarcity, the police as it is through all this major construction. So I think the problem is a little more, how can I say that from the conversation I heard, and forgive me if I'm a little irritated. It, it's, it's serious. It's serious.
Not only from the standpoint of the community and danger in Harris ha hazardous to our children, but it's also dangerous to the kids using the area. And one of the kids got hurt. I lay I am with this and forgive me, and I appreciate, believe me, I appreciate your efforts and I appreciate Claire's efforts. And I've been our president who expresses sincere appreciation for your help and has, has written a, a, a long letter to Claire, which hopefully maybe she'll share with you. I'm sure she'll will. Okay.
He felt skepticism, severe skepticism as to rectifying some of the issues that I've just alluded to because of the, I mean, you're going down the hill and up this mountain, you know, it's, and that's why there's certain gravitation of some of the quote bad group who do some of these nefarious things, whether it be theft, alcohol, drugs, whatever. You know, it's a problem. Speaker 1: Got it. So Speaker 23: Problem about somebody getting hurt, you know? Yeah. When I was, one last thing,
and I apologize for my ity. I was in government in a small Quaker community in New Jersey. We didn't have bike problems bicycle, we had skateboard problems. Speaker 1: Hmm. Speaker 23: And the skate. And we had a very more town has a nice town, you know, nice main street, blah, blah, blah. They was tearing up the steps of our churches walls, you know, with the skateboards what the town did. And I was in, as I said, I, well I was a select, you call him a selectman, I was a councilman.
We created a bike par, a park, and an open area in a park. And we actually got insurance and it was subject to scrutiny for police. Now, I don't mean to presume on you, I'm not suggesting that if you might determine that's not relevant, but to suggest that you're gonna have an area that def fire scrutiny and you know, if the, you say, well you gonna have police, what's gonna happen is the police are gonna, there's gonna be calls that, well who's gonna control this thing at night? I mean, really, I I, I don't see it.
So the problem is more, more all I'm saying is it's more than just obstructing traffic. Yeah. Any group of people that exercise these nefarious activities should not be working in our community. That's up to you. Thank you so much for listening to me and I apologize for being so averse. Thank Speaker 1: You Mr. Lesi. Yeah, thank you Mr. Lesi. Appreciate your comments. And you know, we are not making any decisions right now. We are not, you know, we're understanding the problem. We've been, you know, for the 20 something years that I've been on, the conservation commission bike use in
this area has been a challenge. It comes and goes. And some years it's, you know, and clearly we're at a peak of people using this in this way. You know, our job is to try to find a solution for this. And your input is very valuable, as is Pat's, as is, you know, the members of this commission as is Pat's, pat Conway's. You know, we'll be talking to a lot of people, the public safety folks, all of that. And, you know, we're gonna be focused on trying to find, figure out what the right solution is, is for now. And we'll, we'll come back to you and ask you questions and let you know how that goes and, and,
and welcome your feedback throughout. Speaker 23: Thank you. Thank you so much. And please, I, I, I urge you, I've known Pat for many years as well and I've talked to him. Please talk to him. Yeah, Speaker 1: Without a doubt. He's, I mean, Speaker 23: What else I, can I say? I mean, it's just not, are you gonna have another meeting on the third? Speaker 1: We have another meeting on September 3rd. I don't know if this will be discussed then, but we will be having behind the scenes conversations and then any decisions that are made around this will be discussed in a public meeting. Like this one, I just don't know if it's gonna
happen on September 3rd. Speaker 2: Sal, I have you on my contact list and so you'll get a copy of the agenda anytime this discussion is on. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 23: Okay. Alright. I I, I just think that with all this, this activity that could work, which I characterize as nefarious, I'm simply trying to sort of be more selective as to how to approach this strategically now with the young children to be sure it's good that they're ex you know, healthy exercising. You, you know, it's that big crew.
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, you've made that point. Speaker 23: Anybody that can steal, anybody can use drugs. Anybody can drink, anybody can start fires in a forest and are, and they're unable to do that by, by virtue of the fact that there's an absence of scrutiny because of it's not open is not something that, it's something respectfully appreciate your, your dealing with. And I certainly appreciate your, your time and attention and I apologize to again for being so talkative.
Thank you so much. That is Speaker 1: All, all, all good Mr. Lessi. So why don't we, you know, we're not making any decisions right now. Why don't we table this for right now. But that doesn't mean that there won't be ongoing conversations. No. There Speaker 2: Will certainly be continuing Speaker 1: Conversations with, you know, with Pat Conaway, with public safety, with Abutters, with the police. I mean it's really, you know, we gotta talk to a lot of people about this. We will be on it Sal and we will keep you posted around that and keep, thank Speaker 23: You so, so much. Keep Speaker 1: Your thinking about it. So thank you very much for joining us. Thank you much. Cool. Alright. Thank you. So let's move on on the agenda. It's, it's getting up there time-wise, we've got,
so we talked about Middlesex path. Claire, why don't you give us a quick update on zero Pleasant Street. Speaker 2: Yeah. And then the commission doesn't necessarily need to take any action tonight because the applicant requested a continuation for the planning board hearing that was scheduled for last week. Okay. So the planning board hasn't even started their discussions on the process yet. But in the general business folder are the waivers requests list, the stormwater report and the site plans that have been provided so far for a new, technically a five lot but only four house subdivision
that's being proposed at the zero Pleasant Street parcel that I think most of us are very familiar with. Which Pleasant Street? This is the south, south, south Pleasant Street. This is the Christian Antonio cluster development property that we Oh boy. With the, an rad that went through the peer review longstanding history on this particular parcel. As folks can see in my notes, currently, the submitted materials do not show any ability for the project to comply with wetland's regulations. So that's surprising. Yes. So I, I will be drafting up a comment letter
that we'll we'll read similar to the notes that are presented to the commission. So if the commission has any specific feedback that can send me an email singularly with any notes that they might have. The comment letter will obviously be uploaded to OpenGov when it's finished. But I do not believe this body will be meeting again prior to the next planning board hearing. So I just wanted to make sure the commission could see my current notes on the materials that have been provided, have the opportunity to provide any additional comments. Again, those materials are in the folder for you to review, but primary concerns are the wetland crossing
and the ability for it to meet, or the current proposed crossing, not meeting stream crossing standards as well as no evidence of wetlands replication on the site for the proposed fill. Speaker 1: So the statement that the project cannot meet it, it's the project as it's currently described, can't meet wetlands, the wetlands regulations. I mean that doesn't mean that there couldn't be modifications to it that could meet correct to Speaker 2: The, the currently provided project materials do not show any compliance with weapons regulations. There you go. That
Speaker 1: That's fair. Yes. Speaker 2: And so I, I look forward to hopefully seeing some revised materials. Speaker 1: Has this been communicated very clearly to the planning board? 'cause I don't want the planning board to show up. Speaker 2: So like I said, this will be going in a comment letter that I'm gonna be providing to the planning board prior to their next hearing. Speaker 1: Okay, good. Let me know. It'll be read in the minutes. I hope, let, let me know if you know, maybe you, me and Amanda sitting down and talking about this just to really drive this point home because this is a very challenging site from a wetlands perspective. Absolutely it is. And you know, and,
and we need to be in the loop throughout so that we're not handed. So the applicant doesn't go through a whole long design process just Speaker 2: To get to us Speaker 1: And just to get to us and have a torpedo it. Speaker 5: We've instructed the applicant Speaker 1: Several times. Several, yes. Speaker 5: In many different gentle. Speaker 2: What I will note is that this is different applicant. Speaker 1: Who is the applicant on this? Speaker 2: Nick? Nick Arthur is, oh, this is Nick. So what I'll notice that the fifth lot that's being created, which is the lot that has frontage on Warren Road, the sort of long part of the L Yeah. That is proposed to be retained by Christian Antonio
following the sale of the property. If permits are approved, Speaker 13: You mean he is gonna build his own house there like he did. Speaker 2: I there are no plans there currently proposed for that fifth lot. Nick is only proposing developments for the four lots that in theory if this whole shebang goes, it still has Speaker 5: The vernal pool. Is this the property that still has the vernal, Speaker 1: Has the veal pool in the corner. Speaker 2: And so as Matt, I think to your point the second statement of my notes is that I would highly recommend a parallel permitting process Absolutely. Between the two bodies. I think we, we saw with 2 16, 2 18 South Main Street
and some other projects that completing the planning board process before any sort of permits are filed with the commission maybe has not gone as well in the past. So I'm hoping that that Terry will also take that to heart though I don't know if she's technically still the chair anymore. I think their year might have turned over, but either way. So yes, any notes commission please send to me individually with no other commission members ccd so that I can make edits and get this submitted to the planning board before their next hearing later this month. And that is all I really have on zero Pleasant Street to save us.
Okay. An hour of going through the plan set. Speaker 1: Yeah, we don't need to at this point. Yeah. Town Forest beavers, Speaker 2: No additional breaches have occurred since the last meeting. We've obviously had some pretty hefty rainstorms. The beavers have also not been rebuilding quite as substantially. I don't know if that's because of the weather patterns that we've been seeing or if Speaker 1: Deep depression. Deep Speaker 2: Depression, they, they've moved to a different lodge for the summer. They're, they're, Speaker 13: They can't, they can't get more Speaker 2: Reverse iver. So I am continuing to do weekly site visits with the abutters when schedules align by myself when they don't align.
But we're continuing to observe that area out there. I I will know, I was out there in the area this week with the consultants for the drainage master plan that Public Works is working on because that area has a lot of potential flood storage as we move through the pick pond, town forest system, they really wanna be sure that the infrastructure out there is facilitating appropriate storage within those systems. So Speaker 13: Do you see the pick row pond statement, you know about the walkway? Speaker 2: Which one? George? We can get into that in a minute. We'll get into that in a minute. Speaker 13: The one with the, a broken down car is the first
shot in it on, on the internet. Oh, I I there's is Natick site? Speaker 2: Yes, it's probably the Natick report maybe. Speaker 1: Oh is that on, is that on the Natick MySpace site? It could be Speaker 2: If we wanna do minutes. That's part of my other updates. Updates Speaker 13: Flipped over car there and it, it sounded like, you know, what the hell are they doing? Pit roll pond. Speaker 2: I've, I've seen quite a bit of the chatter online regarding that. Yeah, of course. Particular project. Speaker 1: Alright. And then we, Speaker 2: It's just jumping back to minutes and then my other updates and then we are done. Speaker 1: Okay. Minutes December 18th.
Jeff have you had a chance to review those? Speaker 10: I did. I made one, one grammatical change to Speaker 2: It. Thank you Jeff. Speaker 1: Okay, thanks Jeff. Till I make a motion to approve the minutes from December 18th please. So move. Thank you George. Is that seconded? Second. Thank you Jeff. Any further discussion? Those in favor in the room Jeff? Yes. David? Yes. Okay then it's approved. Speaker 2: Just very quick, other updates. Spillway removal is progressing really, really well. There's been a lot of progress made in the last week. The hall road is now sort of level with the remaining spillway concrete. They do anticipate that the saw cutting to,
to fully separate it from the infrastructure that will remain is gonna occur sometime next week. But currently we're, we're pretty confident that we are not gonna have any issues meeting our, our in water work restriction periods. One that, sorry, moving to the other pond. Picker pond floating boardwalk. The floating boardwalk components have been ordered and are expected to be delivered sometime before the end of the month. So we are really rocking and rolling with that project. I did have a group of residents reach out with an interest in preserving some of the vegetation
that's gonna have to be disturbed as part of that project. I have the contact information for t abuts who are willing to receive a text from me, you know, prior to any of the construction disturbance come out with, you know, wheelbarrows and, and shovels and remove some of the blueberry bushes for replanting in the good, good traffic circles that the commission owns up within the Oakdale neighborhood. I did let them know that I'm not sure the species will thoroughly survive in the, the very upland sun drenched soils, but I'm willing to, the vegetation's already gonna be disturbed so it's no real loss.
Speaker 13: The local rabbits will love it. Speaker 2: Un unfortunately they really will. And lastly, just something that came up a little earlier. We've been seeing a lot of riverfront area projects recently and a concept that was brought up was potentially adding riverfront area to the resource areas protected under our local bylaw, which would allow us to put regulations in place that would require alternatives analysis for any project in riverfront area regardless of 10.584 and 10.585. And I just wanted to do a brief poll of folks in the room if there was an interest in that.
If we wanna get it done really fast, we could throw together a warrant article for fall town meeting that closes next week on Thursday. Or we can submit something for the SPRINGTOWN meeting. The warrant for that would close in in Speaker 1: January. And so and so this warrant article and what, what exactly would it say Speaker 2: The warrant article would read very similarly to the warrant article that we proposed when we added the replication. The tree replacement requirement. Yeah. So it would read something along the lines of proposes to amend Article 79, the Wetlands Protection Act bylaw
to include riverfront or honestly we don't even have to get that specific, the warrant article itself can be very vague. It's the motion language right that gets developed afterwards. That has to be more specific. It Speaker 1: Would be just to make it consistent with state law basically. I mean is is really kind of what it is. I mean it pulls it above Speaker 2: And the eye, the bylaw change would be consistent with state regulations. It's the regulation update. 'cause the bylaw changes have to be approved by town meeting the regulations under that bylaw. We have the authority to approve only through a public hearing process. Speaker 1: So why don't we, I I I'd suggest I don't think we need
to have a fire drill warrant article for this fall. Okay, sure. You know, let, let's get some, let's go, let's maybe Speaker 2: A, a little bit more research and Speaker 1: I think a little more research and to get and and then we can be thoughtful and have it ready for spring. Okay. I appreciate that. I would suggest that Speaker 12: But it, it's actually so above and beyond what number five there at Speaker 2: 10 35. It'll just, because currently in our local bylaw, the only jurisdictional areas that we identify are the local internal buffers and the vernal pool buffers. Because we essentially, a lot of communities have local bylaws
that just repeat the Wetlands Protection Act. Ours speci has specific additions. So this would just be us adding in that language in the bylaw to note that riverfront area is also protected under our local jurisdiction. That would have to be approved by town meeting. And then we could work on regulations that go above and beyond the state requirements. And those would go in the regulations under the bylaw. Speaker 12: Yeah, I think we, yeah, we we really gotta talk that through. I think, Speaker 1: I think we gotta talk that through. I mean I think it makes a lot of sense. No, Speaker 2: And and the reality is I've been meaning to get a regulation update on since we added the tree
replacement stuff previously. So this would align and, and maybe just do a larger holistic review and overhaul. But Speaker 12: We, if we had had that at Elliot Street there, Speaker 2: It would be, it would've been a different review process. Yeah, exactly. Speaker 1: Exactly, exactly how Speaker 12: It would've Speaker 2: Done Hindsight, hindsight's 2020, but it says, well that's, maybe think about how we can apply it to future projects. Especially as we see more and more of these messy redevelopment projects. Speaker 12: But people I'm saying seem to struggle with these that that alternative analysis is, but it was good leverage.
Speaker 1: No, it's absolutely good Speaker 12: Leverage. It was really good leverage. We, we got a lot out of that Speaker 2: One. I think I, Speaker 1: And it's, it's the law. You know, when it's 5 8 4 when it's under 5, 8, 4, you have to have, and Speaker 2: That's it for me on my end. If we wanna do a, be Speaker 1: Much bigger of an issue as we get more, more range. Speaker 2: Well and I also think that following spillway removal, there's gonna be a lot of properties along Elliot Street that are gonna be looking at different limitations of riverfront area and might be looking to do redevelopment in now what is 200 to 100 that was previously inner riparian.
So I do think that this is a good thing for us to be discussing at this point. A hundred Speaker 1: Percent. Okay. Any other things? Hearing none. So we'll make a motion. Oh, one last thing. Are we going to go walk at Winter Woods? Speaker 2: I think it's because it's not related to a public hearing and we don't have to post site visits. Speaker 1: Yeah, it's not Speaker 2: A site. I can send out some available dates via Doodle poll and the commission can respond. Speaker 1: Let's do a doodle poll. Doodle doodle poll. Alright, so I'll make a motion to adjourn. Thank you, George. Seconded. Oh, it's not seconded. We gotta keep going. Seconded. Thank you David. Somebody any further discussion?
All in favor of adjourning David? Yes, Jeff? Yes. Yes. Thank you guys. Appreciate your time, appreciate you Speaker 2: And thank you David for Speaker 1: Joining us and thank you David Beatty. Yeah.