Speaker 1: Relax that, which means I gotta go up Speaker 2: To your all. Alright folks, welcome this. This is the, this is the NATA Conservation Commission. Today is May 22nd. Happy, warm, beautiful spring day out there. A nice nor'easter blows through. We got a relatively short agenda tonight that we'll just just crank through. So the first item on the agenda I've got is the continuation of the two 16 to two 18 South Main Street. We have received, you know, we asked for a peer review from a third party consultant on the stormwater on, on various aspects of the project.
Got a preliminary email of preliminary feedback just today. We haven't had a chance to review it in detail. I don't believe the a, you know, the applicant's probably read it. I see Anthony on the call here. What I'd suggest is that we, you know, agree that, we'll, we will just continue this to June five, which is our next meeting. Maybe we can just walk through at a high level and just, you know, talk about some of the, some of the initial findings from BSC, who's the consultant. But again, we're not gonna spend a whole lot of time on this here this evening, just 'cause we need some time to digest it. And really more importantly, we will get a full report in
the next Claire, what's, what's the timeline for getting the full, detailed report from? Speaker 3: Yeah, so according to Dominic BSC group, we should have the full report from them early next week. So the intention is to meet with BSC group and the applicant team next week or early the week following for then a full presentation of the BSC report at the June 5th meeting. Great. Speaker 2: So, so with all that, you know, what I'd suggest is, again, is that let's just go through at a, at a high level, let's just go through just some of the bullet points from that
and I'm happy to kind of do some a, a quick, a quick summary of that just so we can kind of see where we're at at this point in time. This, this, this is in the form of an email that's in the folder there from today and it's from Dominic Rinaldi from the BSC group. So he sends through a couple of, of, some, some bullet points there. And again, I don't want to get into kind of it, great detail on each of them. We need to review this and really it's, you know, but more efficient use of time if we just, we know wait for the full report. Basically, you know, point number one, the submitted erosion
and demolition control plan has been, been prepared for the site as though everything's gonna happen all at once. Site fully cleared, blasted simultaneously. And the, the initial, initial top, you know, high level feedback from BSC is to explore whether a staged approach rather than clearing the entire site, if a staged approach may be more, may be more appropriate there. The construction period, pollution prevention and erosion and sedimentation control plan is thorough and generally appropriate for the proposed work.
However, similar to the site plans, it's written generally as if the site will be fully cleared and blasted simultaneously. It does also does not include any information regarding blasting ledge removal as there appears to be a significant amount of ledge removal required at plan detailing how this work will be performed without impacting downstream resources should be provided. A question around the need for the third row road. If you look at the plan, there's a kind of a tennis racket shaped road with a, a road going down the middle of it as well, or lollipop I think they were calling it. But the road on the, on the southern side of this site
doesn't have any front doors of homes there. And there's really just a question as to whether that's even even needed there. And I think that'll, that'll be a multidimensional conversation 'cause public safety may have had some input on that. We should just find that out. Speaker 4: Just, just quickly, I'm sorry, your chair. There are doors on that road, so it, it is kind of like a front of the house on that road, so, Speaker 2: So, so, okay doors. Speaker 4: I don't want, we don't have to get into it tonight, but just, I just got it. Okay. It's kind, you would like not have a roadway or a doorway coming out to a road. So it's just kind of the planning board
and I spent a year kind of making that look like a Speaker 2: Fair. Okay. Yeah, all good. Speaker 4: If you don't want me to comment, I won't, it's just, I didn't mean to jump in. Yeah, Speaker 2: Yeah, no, no, that's fine. I don't, I don't mind points a correction, Anthony. That's, that, that's totally fine. Point four project has been designed to be fairly level across the, the entire width of the development. Despite there being a significant existing grade change in this direction, would the applicant consider stepping the development so that it just, you know, so less blasting would be required. Okay. We, we can talk about that at the most, you know, at the next meeting, landscape plans
provided appear to show limits of clearing that are not accurate based on grading plans. We should just check that and, and take a look at that. Proposed landscape plans show new tree plantings along the north side of the site and areas where significant ledge cuts are likely to occur. Is the project intent to place sufficient soils over the remove ledge to allow these plantings to take root or will the ledge remain exposed in these areas? There was a question around, sorry, my screen just shut off for a second. The draft SW is generally complete and appropriate for IDES compliance. We agree with the selected design points for stormwater runoff, pre and post-development runoff calculations include areas
of Woods Fair and the post-development calculations include an additional area of woods grass combination Fair. Just want some clarification on that. We, we request that time of concentration flow paths be added to the watershed plans to a follow to allow full evaluation of the times of concentration used in runoff calcs. Underground infiltration system is modeled with an outlet pipe, however no outlet pipe is shown in the plans. There are two test pits in the vicinity, the undergone infiltration system. However, as there is significant existing grade change in that area, we recommend an additional test pit be performed within the proposed limits of the system to ensure sufficient depth alleged to make sure the system works
by our retention basin is modeled with infiltration, but no test pits have been performed in the area of this basin. Therefore, therefore it cannot be determined if sufficient depth of the legend or seasonal high ground water is provided. And then we request that drainage pipe sizes be added to the drainage plan. So still getting into the weeds, as he says, as a quote from him. And so that, those are just kind of the bullet points at this point in time. And so what I'd suggest is that we continue this toward June 5th meeting. Let's have, you know, let's read the full report from BSC at that point and then we can get into this in detail on our, at our June 5th meeting.
So Anthony, any any questions or additional comments, you know, don't worry about addressing the specific points raised. We'll have plenty of time to go through those, but any, would it be acceptable for you for us just to go ahead and continue this until our June 5th meeting? Speaker 4: Yeah, that's, that's a great idea and as, as Claire said, I think it's a good idea to meet with all of us with BSC and, and kind of go through them all and I think it's a lot of more detailed stuff that we can definitely provide, so. Speaker 2: Great, thank you. Any questions or comments from the commission on this guys here? Alright, would someone make a motion then to continue two 16 to two 18 South Main Street? This is both the the under the Wettens Protection Act
as well as the native stormwater bylaw to continue that to June 5th. Thank you Jeff. Is that seconded? Second. Thank you Michael, any further discussion on that? All is in the room, Chris? Yes. Excellent. Alright, thanks. So we're continued to June five. We will, we'll get the full plans next week, our full review next week and go over it from there. Anthony, thank you for your time. Appreciate you jumping on. Thank you. Thank you guys. Speaker 4: You too. Yeah. Bye. Speaker 2: Alright, next item on the agenda. I think that's actually it for public hearing issues. We've got minutes to review from February 6th. Any comments or edits to those?
Speaker 5: There was a, the Lake titrate one just had an XXX after the DEP file number, correct? Speaker 3: Oh yes. I think that was issued post agenda but prior to issuance, so I'll get that corrected. Speaker 2: Okay, great. Any other edits to that? Hearing none. Someone make a motion to approve the minutes from February 6th. Good, thank you Jeff. Is that seconded? Second. Thank you Michael. Any further discussion? That was in the room, Chris? Yes. Excellent. Done. Alright, those are all the public hearings for this evening general business discussion. So we've got a a little bit of time. There's, there's a few interesting updates to talk about.
Claire, could you walk us through the sub subbury aqueduct feasibility study final report? Speaker 3: Of course. So I am not gonna go through the full report provided by conservation work. So it's a pretty detailed document, but a lot of it is deed references and parcel references. So I think the most effective use of our time is gonna be walking through on GIS, the potential routes that Bob O'Connor from Conservation Works explored and is recommending that the town potentially explore further. So I'm just gonna get the map up here on my screen. So there are maps
provided by conservation works in the file folder. I'm gonna be going along on the towns GIS viewer to get a little bit more zoomed in detail, see the wetlands layers and things like that. So starting at the eastern town line with Wellesley, the town does have and is currently maintaining a UCT access between the end of Brook Street and the end of Leach Lane. Beyond Leach Lane. Technically there is a portion of the Sudbury Aqueduct parcel, but there is fencing associated with one of the Honeywell CR properties that blocks access.
Bob and I both agreed that there isn't necessarily a huge priority for gaining access to that final section of trail as there is no connection in Wellesley to build into. So the information about that parcel has been noted and the potential access needs, but we haven't prioritized that as something to be explored further along in the process. Moving from east to west along the Aqueduct corridor, when we reach the end of Brook Street, we reach the first of our large gaps in public access. This is the first location
where the aqueduct goes under the hill. So we lose the actual physical land parcel and it becomes easement access from MWRA. So in looking at ways to connect the trail across Union Street, we looked at a number of different options. The first of which, which appears to be the best option, is to connect up to the existing Womba trail section where it dead ends. At the edge of the Algonquin Homeowners Association property, there is technically a walked trail corridor
that traverses this section between the trail end and the private driveway that comes off of Brook Street. However, there is no public access there and in theory folks are trespassing if they're using that section Speaker 2: Trail, but, but there is evidence of historic use or, and Speaker 3: There's very clearly a trail that is walked on a regular enough basis, either by humans or animals that it maintains clarity in the undergrowth. Okay. So in looking at this potential connection, we would be looking at two different private
property owners who we would be looking to gain potential access from. The first would be the private property owner that owns this large parcel that encompasses the private driveway that comes off of Brook Street. There is already easement access there for a number of the other properties whose driveways come off of there, but no public walking access. So there is a potential to sort of piggyback off of an existing easement. And then we reach a large parcel of Honeywell CR Land for the 42 Leach lane parcel. This is a property that is protected under a conservation restriction currently
based on the conservation restriction language that was found by Bob O'Connor. There isn't necessarily anything prohibiting public access, but there isn't also anything allowing public access. So that would need to be a discussion held with the CR owner. We are the cr either we are the CR holder, there's two parcels right next to each other, and we are the CR holder of one. The trustees is the holder of the other, a discussion with the CR holder as well to potentially discuss an amendment to that cr. Speaker 2: And that's something where maybe a conversation with Tom Honeywell? Yes, would be, would be. I mean he'd be the point of contact, I think. Yep.
Speaker 3: And then at that point we are connected up fully. The Tawa Bay Trail gets you all the way out to Algonquin. There are sidewalks along Algonquin that we could use to our advantage to connect down to Union Street. Once we get to Union Street, we hit another gap. Obviously there are two potential paths, both of which I see having a lot of value that Bob explored. There are a number of other options that Bob explored. I'm really just talking about the ones that make the most sense for us to move forward with potentially pursuing. The first is to discuss
with the church at 1 23 Union Street, a potential access agreement or conservation restriction that would bring us along the back edge of their parcel. Speaker 2: The church up the hill on, up, up on the hill there. Speaker 3: Yep. I think it's a Lutheran church if I'm Speaker 2: Remembering correct. Yeah. I correctly, yeah, I dunno much about that church or how active, how active the congregation is. Speaker 3: I I I do not have much information about it either. Kind Speaker 2: Of tucked away in the back. Speaker 3: Yeah. And it does lead back to then two undeveloped properties that are also undevelopable, at least in their current state. Neither of them have sufficient frontage to be developed.
And specifically the parcel that I have highlighted right now was a part of a larger planning board decision for the development of this home that is now 1 58 a Woodland Street. I remember that. Yes. So a potential that owners of these lots may be open to conservation restrictions or conservation easements that could allow public access through those undeveloped parcels, which does bring us out to the end of Libby Road, which is while not sidewalk, a very quiet roadway that we could then direct people down to Scarsdale Road, where we then connect
with the Eisenmenger Trail as it goes around the Davis Brook neighborhood. And Speaker 2: Then we're on the Sudbury Aqueduct Speaker 3: And then we're down back onto the Sudbury Aqueduct. So a little bit of a roundabout route versus what could be a direct through under the hillside. But we're definitely looking to rely on existing trail corridors as much as possible for this. That's interesting. The second option, which is the slightly less exciting and natural option is we figure out a way to get a crosswalk on Union Street here at this location. And we send folks up to Arrow Path to connect into the EIS
and manger off of the end of Arrow Path and then down that same route again. It's, you know, a lot more sidewalk connection than I think would be the a hundred percent preference, but is absolutely a doable connection. One other alternate connection that I do just wanna bring up, this was one that came up later in our discussions with Conservation Works, is potentially discussing with St. Benedict's School trying to, because the Taco Wabe trail also connects into War noco, we could make use of this proximity and work with St. Benedict's School to see if they would be open
to a trail connection along the far edge of their parcel. That would then also again connect into the Eisen Manger Trail and down to the Sudbury Aqueduct. Speaker 2: But in terms of the overall connectivity, I mean just the, you know, the, the premise of the whole project Yep. Is that there's, you know, from the, from the Native community Organic Farm or from, you know, from Cottage Street even, you know, you can jump on the Sudbury Aqueduct and then this would, you know, they could just go in reverse, take this up, the Eisen Manger trail, one of these routes go down, kind of, you know, behind the, you know, that
that subdivision Yep. On Algonquin and then dump out onto, you know, head out onto Brook Street. Yep. And then that's kind of it though, at that point, right? Speaker 3: Yeah. So the end of it is at Leach Lane. So there is access along the Sudbury auc, it's the raised berm at that point at the end of Brook Street. But Leach Lane would sort of be the end of it. I think the one potential positive of that is that mast, DOT has been making an effort to install sidewalks along Elliot Street. So there is more sidewalk connectivity.
So once you get to Leach Lane and then down onto Elliot Street, the sidewalks along Route 16 in Wellesley were just completed this past summer. So then folks in theory have a potential connection up to the Elm Bank horticultural society or the other conservation areas that are down in this corner of town. Yeah. Speaker 2: I mean it would certainly be an improvement. Yes. No, no doubt about it. And I think it, you know, so it's really will just be a question of kind of cost complexity, you know? Speaker 3: Absolutely. And all that stuff. One thing I'm jumping a little bit out of order here, but one thing that I will say that is highly recommended
by Bob in his report is that there are a number of crs that he noted in his research that are not Speaker 2: Particularly on the Honeywell properties Speaker 3: Complete. They do not have the secretary's signature on them whenever they were getting put in place, that last step was never completed. So I have actually already added to the town's community project funding request list around $50,000 to essentially receive legal assistance in tying up those loose ends on our conservation restrictions. Especially as we are looking at potentially getting that extension on our open space and recreation plan, trying to get these things buttoned up
as part of that sort of extension process. So that way when we're going in 2030 to update the plan, all of these conservation restrictions are, are complete and clear in terms of who is owning them, who is monitoring them, and what the public access rights are on them. Speaker 2: So the, these incomplete crs, are these mostly related to the Honeywell properties? Speaker 3: Quite a variety actually, including the South Natick Hills conservation restriction. Really? Yes. So it, it is not just one set, it is a, a bit across the board, unfortunately.
I think that there was a lot of turnover at EEA during a certain period of time. And a lot of these things may have just gotten lost in the shuffle of staff turnover. Speaker 2: Is there, you know, and this is a bigger conversation about CRS in general, but you know, with all of the efforts to, to digitize community, develop the, the community and economic development department and all of the stuff that we deal with, is there talk or is there any opportunity for us to do that with our CR stash? 'cause there's a num you know, we've got a lot, you know, a good number of crs here in town that, that could just kind
of catch stuff like this. Or at least kind of keep us up to date with, you know, things like this. Yeah, I think it could be an interesting, you know, it could give us automated reminders if a CR inspection, if it's something that the town is the holder. Speaker 3: Yeah, that's absolutely, I, I mean we have, you know, basic Excel databases about our crs, but I think that there's absolutely enough automation and, you know, calculation options available in Excel and Google Sheets that we could very easily create more of a database app rather than just a blank Excel sheet that, Speaker 2: Like a great, great project for a, for a pi a,
a motivated intern for a summer. Speaker 3: Yes, Nick, I might need to look more towards the GIS interns for the level of technical, the, the folks who come my way tend to be a little bit more plant focused. Great. Speaker 2: That's fair. Speaker 3: Okay. Picking back up. We are at Memorial School, the community organic farm. We are on the Sudbury Aqueduct. We have complete unbroken connectivity all the way through to Cottage Street. Once we reach Cottage Street, we do hit another gap. Technically, again, the Aqueduct parcel continues along
that Western side of Cottage Street, but it hits a wetland fairly rapidly of quite a large wetland and very, again, rapidly hits the retaining Wall Hill. That is Hopewell Farm Drive. And so we did explore whether or not it would be feasible to continue the connection along that path. But because of the wetland crossing needed and the fact that there is such a substantial grade change that we would need to be addressing, it was determined to be a little bit less doable. Especially when if you go about 15 feet up the road,
you hit the trail head for the wayside Graystone trail, which takes you all the way up to Rockland Straight, which is farther than we would be able to get along the aqueduct parcel if we were continuing along the alignment. So, Speaker 2: So going up to Rockland and then walking down Rockland and then maybe rejoining it. Speaker 3: Yes. So I will say that from Rockland Street to the Townline is absolutely the hardest point of connection that we are facing here. It is Bob's recommendation that we utilize the existing trail network along the Graystone development to our advantage.
And then there, once we reach this point, a couple of different options that he and I discussed and explored. The first is trying to arrange something with the South Natick Hills development. They do have this access off of Allison Way that is emergency vehicle access only. So could be potentially also opened up to pedestrian access to connect into their existing trail system that runs along the parcel. Bob and I walked out to this area and, and stared at it for quite some time thinking about ways to make this connection.
The easiest way to make this connection off of Morgan Drive is to utilize the utility corridor that's out there. But again, we do hit a fairly large wetland crossing as soon as we hit the town townline. So while this access is maybe the shortest that we need to be dealing with in terms of number of private property owners and existing infrastructure that we could take advantage of, there are a lot of issues and a lot of permitting constraints that we see potentially utilizing that connection. The other connections that we looked at
and explored were in fact coming down Rockland Street to Everett Street and along the frontage of Everett Street, there is potentially the width for the addition of a sidewalk. There are also a number of parcels that are rather undeveloped that we could potentially look to work with landowners on to receive access. There is a small set of DCR owned parcels at the end of Wild Meadow Lane, and there is one singular landowner who then owns the remainder
of the frontage along Everett Street there. So there was a discussion Speaker 2: For the Townline Speaker 3: Until the townline. Yes. So there, there has been some discussion about can we get folks to Wild Meadow and then jump them off the street a little bit to go along this sort of more naturalized frontage. The only issue there is that we do once again hit a rather large wetland crossing that we're then trying to deal with. Speaker 2: So the question I would then ask also is at what point does the subbury aqueduct then pick back up again as a viable trail? You know, you know, how how big is the gap Yep.
That we'd need to close. Speaker 3: And so the last thing that Bob and I did was exactly that, Matt, we came at it from the other side. So we entered in from the Route 27 entrance in Sherburne and walked along the aqueduct as, and let me try to zoom in a little bit more. So this is more visible. So walking in along Route 27, there is a, a clear raised berm, very easy access, quite wide. There's clearly regular vehicle access by MWRA out there. The power line easement also crosses.
So there's access for that as well. And what's interesting is that there is an existing homeowner who maintains a right of way across the aqueduct easement. So this is a landowner that owns the land on the Everett Street side of things as well as north of the aqueduct alignment. So there was a question of whether or not we can utilize that essentially Upland area to come down the aqueduct, go down to Everett Street, and then connect folks back around.
The other option is this Aqueduct corridor comes right up to that private landowner who owns the frontage along Everett Street. So I'll turn the aerials off so we can see the lot lines again. So we've now reached that owner who owns that frontage on Everett Street. So this break in the wetland blobs is the aqueduct parcel. So in looking at the wetlands crossings that would be necessary, it does seem like trying to determine a way to make this connection along the frontage
of Everett Street, connecting up into Rockland Street may be the most doable from a a permitting perspective and a cost perspective, considering the wetlands crossings that we're looking at are, are upwards of 200 feet in most locations. So we would be looking at, at Boardwalk infrastructure to create regular accessible access to those areas. And that is, that's cool. That is the full alignment. I was about to say, I would definitely, Bob did a really, and the full conservation works teams did a great job on the report. I would definitely encourage folks to read it. If there's any questions, Bob has said he's more than welcome to, or he's more than happy
to answer any follow up questions, provide any additional information that, that we might need. So if there are any questions that come up in reviews, please don't hesitate to reach out. But we are hoping that, especially with sherburne completing their eight license in the last couple of years, that we can work with their staff to try to prioritize this connection at the Sherburne townline because this is really sort of that pinch point that we Speaker 2: Hit. That's it's the last Yep. You know, I mean that, that, that little bit around Union Street, which seems feasible to me
Speaker 3: Roundabout, but definitely Speaker 2: Feasible. There's something that could be done there. And then, you know, the only thing I don't love is just kind of it stopping at Leach Lane, but the sidewalk is kind of a, you know, the sidewalks in Elliot is kind of a compelling workaround on that, but it's this Sherburne Hopewell Farms Yep. Kind of that whole end of it, which is really, which is tough. And then if, if, if we're able to to connect into Sherburne, how far does it go? How far, how far into sherburn are we talking? So, and, and is it a, is it, is it a currently used trail? Yeah. So sherburn the whole way,
Speaker 3: I don't know if it's currently used. So currently the AUC alignment ends at the SAS Montrece golf course. So this is the back edge of the golf course over here. So part of what we, and this might not be notice SAS montre. Yeah. Okay. So that is where the sort of, you can see how the visible alignment doesn't really pick up again on the other side of the golf course. I do believe at that point the hill rises up again and the pipe goes underground. So there's no longer that raised berm access like there is Yeah. To the east of the golf course.
Speaker 2: Yeah. But be able to go from the golf, you know, go from the golf course. Oh, Speaker 3: It's a, a huge recreational connectivity corridor. Absolutely. To be able to get folks essentially from this golf course to the Elm Bank horticultural society would be a huge benefit. Benefit what I could see. Yeah. Speaker 2: Cool. Next steps. So we're gonna look into just nailing down some of the crs. That's kind of an administrative thing. Yep. We'll review this. Yep. And then maybe what we do is, you know, maybe talking to the open space advisory committee, talking to, Speaker 3: They've received a similar run through of this, this alignment. And I think that potentially also leaning on Sudbury Valley
trustees has, has offered to again, serve as that sort of like middleman private property reach out connection. So if there are potentially properties where we will need private property access, that we don't already have an existing relationship like we do with the Honeywells, it may be worthwhile to bring them into the conversations as well as a sort of mediator of those discussions. That's Speaker 2: Cool. That's good. Excellent. All right. Great. Thank you. Good, good update on that. Alright, so Sudbury aqueduct. Beavers.
Speaker 3: Beavers. So I, I was driving around several times today checking on water levels because I was quite nervous that with the rain coming down, I would be getting a call about Route nine being flooded. We did end up going for the emergency trapping approval through Board of Health based on the rain, not this past weekend, but the weekend prior. The water levels were high enough that with the rain and the upcoming forecast, both myself and the water and sewer division felt it was appropriate to, to initiate that emergency request. The request was granted, the
emergency permit was issued on May 13th and the traps were set in Town Forest on the 14th. I did get a voicemail from the Trapper on Thursday the 15th when I was out of office. I tried to give him a call back and have left him a couple of voicemails. I'm gonna try him again tomorrow. We do not have any successful trapping as of yet. I did in the voicemail. The trapper left me, he did not place any kill traps. They're the, the restraint traps because his concern about off-leash dogs in town forest either getting into a trap potentially, or trying to interact with a dead beaver in a trap.
It just, he felt it most appropriate to avoid those in this particular location. The one thing, and Matt and I chatted a little bit about this before the meeting started, is whether or not we want to put any signs up in Town Forest regarding the presence of the traps. All of the town staff is aware, the police department, the public works division, animal control, were all made aware of the fact that the traps were being placed. So in theory, if the public is calling the town, everybody who would be answering their questions is aware. The question is whether or not we wanna put any signage in the field, letting folks know about the presence of the traps.
Speaker 2: Is there any, where exactly are the traps located? Speaker 3: I don't have an exact map, but they're located in that stretch of Lower Jennings little Jennings pond between the sort of original dam location and the Oak Street. Speaker 2: Are they like, like right next to the trail that comes in from Oak Street? Speaker 3: Either right. Next to or slightly off of. Speaker 2: Yeah. Right. Okay. I'm just wondering, I mean, because if people see them and are wondering what's going on, I mean, you know, is it, is it in our best, I mean, is it, is it best to have signage up and just saying, here's what's going on? Yep. What do you guys think? Speaker 6: I would go, yeah, Speaker 7: No, I think that, I mean, if they're,
if it's people can actually see a trapped animal, I think that they might actually assist. I don't know. Speaker 2: It's entirely possible. Michael. Speaker 6: I, I would probably go a little bit bigger with the outreach. Speaker 2: Okay. And so, signage or more the, Speaker 3: The neighborhood is aware. I've been working with the neighbors on Connecticut to spread knowledge to those neighbors there as well as the big Jennings Pond group. But we have not done any like Facebook posts Speaker 6: Paid or volunteer to be maybe nearby to the, the gate.
You know, I, I'm just thinking of for Chris's point, if there's a live animal in a trap, Speaker 2: It could be traumatic Speaker 6: Folks could do a variety of things. One, they could get injured and or, you know, or you know, you know, I don't know if this just needs to be blasted out through just kind of better channels just to kind of get everybody locked in and, and understand that, you know, here's the process. This is the technique that's being utilized. It's a non kill trap
and beaver still will die. However, Speaker 2: You know, humanely Speaker 6: Yes. It's just, you know, because of the high risk and high, you know, high use of these areas, a can of bear trap, which is the common trap as the, as the expert is expressed, is that there's a high risk that another non-target species could get impacted. Speaker 2: Meaning water muskrat or a raccoon or a, Speaker 6: Or a dog. Speaker 2: Or a dog. If with an off leash dog,
Speaker 6: Off leash dog. I mean it, the canna beer trap is a very small, and it, I won't go into the gory details, but it, it collapses the chest cavity of the animal of the beaver. That's, I thought Speaker 2: These were no kill traps though. Well, no, Speaker 3: The ones that are out there, but the ones that are most commonly used are a kill trap. Use Speaker 6: The can of bear trap. And what happens is the beaver swims through this opening, it triggers a mechanism to then collapse on both sides of the animal's body. It Speaker 2: Kills it suffocates, it kills it Speaker 6: Kills it immediately. But if there was a dog in there like messing around like in the water, like a lab or something like that,
and got a little close to the trap, it could trigger the trap. And there could be, you'd hate to have an incident. Yes, Speaker 2: A hundred percent. However, but the, but the traps that are there now are non killed. It's not the, it's not the traps that will collapse like that. Correct. I mean, I'm, I'm not opposed to as much information as, as is appropriate. Speaker 6: I don't know those traps with food to, Speaker 3: I'm not sure the specific methodology that this trapper is using. I'm sorry, I'm
Speaker 6: Not familiar with that trap. Speaker 2: Yeah. I think it's clear that more information is better than less information. Yep. Absolutely. So do you, do you have a draft of the, of the signage or anything like that? Or could you send that around? Speaker 3: I can absolutely. I don't have anything on me tonight, but I can get something around to the commission tomorrow and get it installed up in town Forest tomorrow as well. Speaker 2: What, what I would suggest is that we get, we get signs out there. I I would suggest that the sign has, you know, if you have questions or if you see a trapped animal Yeah. Speaker 3: Call, not only my contact, I'll put Pete Cunningham's, who's the animal control officer's contact. 'cause I think he would be the most resourced person
to potentially deal with an animal. Speaker 6: And I would try to put up, I would put up a physical barrier. I would Speaker 2: Put up around the trap. I would Speaker 6: Around the substantially off of the, the trap, the trail side on the Yes, Chris on the trail side orange snow fencing or something. Yep. And just say exactly what's happening. Do not cross this area because you're putting, you know, without knowing this trap, I, I have n never seen this trap used and I'm not a B expert. Speaker 2: Totally hear you. Speaker 6: If it's baited,
it's gonna attract. Yeah. Speaker 2: I mean, should we be going out to the, that everyone's famous, you know, favorite source of news Facebook and be putting posts out there and like just really inviting this and saying, Hey, what I was Speaker 3: Just to let you know was, is I actually think the Natick report might even be a better option. I think it will maybe get more visibility than a Facebook post will to a certain extent. Obviously I'll share the Natick report post on Facebook, but I think I'll reach out to Bob about getting something in the Natick report. If you, if folks think that's appropriate Speaker 6: And if it's not too much money, if the, the company can pay somebody a livable wage for,
you know, the period of time that, you know, the, the traps are there. You're not gonna capture the six o'clock, eight o'clock dog walker or the 4:00 AM 5:00 AM dog walker. But if you, if you station somebody there between the height of the hour, say 10 to two Speaker 2: To answer questions, to Speaker 6: Answer questions, just make, you know, maybe at least for the first couple of days. Just so folks are just locked in about Speaker 8: And how many beavers are we trying to trap there? Do we know? I have Speaker 6: Idea. We have no idea. Yeah, I guess we're gonna find out. So Speaker 8: We're gonna just keep trapping until, Speaker 3: Well, we're just trapping in that specific area.
We're not looking to expand or anything like that. That stuff there. Like more Speaker 8: We get one, are we gonna put it back, get another one, put it back? Or like how many we just, if we get one beaver trapped, will that be it? Or will we No, just keep trapping. Speaker 3: I was about to say that I is something that I've been leaning on Beaver solutions to provide guidance on. They, the trapper that they've hired is Pat Musto. He's a, a third party trapper that they work with. The, the communication that I've been a part of, you know, pat has set the traps. He's been engaging with some
of the residents answering questions when he's out there. I have been working with the neighbors along Connecticut to answer questions that they have and, and communicate what's going on with them. But, but at this point there hasn't been a concerted fully public facing effort. So what I can definitely do is get a barrier installed tomorrow. If the signage gets approved, I can get that installed tomorrow, if not Saturday. Yeah. Speaker 2: Send, send the signage around as soon as you have it. Speaker 3: I'll Yeah, I'll send it first thing tomorrow morning around, Speaker 2: Maybe Speaker 6: It's not, again, I, I'm just speaking from an experience of oh, Speaker 2: A Speaker 6: Specific trail, a specific trap. So I, I'm not familiar with this trap and maybe there's no risk of anybody besides the beaver, but
Speaker 3: I think the notice is helpful regardless. Speaker 2: Yeah. I mean, honestly I'm with a non kill trap. I'm less concerned about a dog getting in there. I am concerned about if someone's walking by and they see a beaver or a raccoon or whatever in the trap, you know, there, there could be some, an outcry and, you know, but they could get bit trying Speaker 7: To release it too. I Speaker 2: Mean that's, or if, you know, and if God forbid they tried to release it. Yeah. You know, so I think, I think getting, you know, signage, I would put some snow fencing up
or, you know, at appropriate distance just to indicates to people that, that they're not intended to be inside there. Yep. And then a Natick reports thing. And then we can, we can, we can share that. I, I think with, you know, honestly with an appropriate post, I mean Natick talks, natick this, Natick that, you know, is a lot of people check those things out. They get shared. Yep. A lot of comments. And I think it, you know, just having a broad based communication plan in place, just so there's more information rather than less. I mean, you know, I don't, I don't want, you know, we're not trying to do this on the down low.
We're trying to do it quickly. Yes. But we're not trying to do this on the down low, you know, and I, I steps like that I think will prevent people from feeling like we're trying to do this on the down low. I mean, we have an emergency permit for good reason, water levels, property damage, the, the, the sewage pumping station, all that stuff that's highly defensible in my mind. Yep. Let's get the information out there. Yeah, Speaker 3: Absolutely. I will get it. Most of it, as much of it done tomorrow as I can. And if not, I'll get the rest of it done on Saturday. Yeah. Speaker 2: I'm, I'm happy to craft some posts and stuff like that for the various nooks
and crannies of the interwebs that Yeah. Speaker 3: I mean you can even take the, the signage language and just essentially put it into the Facebook post as well. I mean, because I think, obviously I don't know if Bob will be able to get anything published until early. Well Speaker 2: That's the other thing is that, I mean, you know, Bob's great and he, and he does a, you know, does a great job with, but he's a, he's, he's one and you know, a fair number of people read it. But I think, you know, let's just go broad. Okay. Broad spectrum on this. Speaker 3: So what I'll do is I'll send signage language as well as a draft Facebook post and that way it can all be reviewed at once. Great. And then I can get it all pushed out. Speaker 2: Great. Yeah. Yeah. Let's do that. And then I can, I can spend some time tomorrow morning mid,
you know, or midday just kind of cranking it out on various groups that I, I loiter in. Yep. Speaker 3: And I did just, it's sort of adjacent to the managing of the high water levels. I did have a call with Arthur Rusko from MAs DT confirming that they'll be out in mid to late June this year. Oh, great. To do another cleaning of that box Speaker 2: Culvert. That's great. That's great. Because I mean, I think that this, this will help The beaver trapping will help Speaker 3: The immediate high water levels and then Speaker 2: The in, in little Jennings Yes. You know, but the Piri pond area, which is just getting worse and worse. I mean that's just, you know, Speaker 3: Unfortunately it's definitely being compounded by the,
the water not just being able to get through into the void that used to be Town Forest. Because now that's also Speaker 2: Full of water blown through, you know, that's not gonna help others. Speaker 3: That's why I've been, I mean Speaker 6: Would this be covered in like a FEMA application for emergent, like Speaker 2: That recent re thing? FEMA doesn't exist anymore. Yeah, I was Speaker 6: Gonna say who's FEMA doesn't exist man. Speaker 2: Okay. So, so let's just, you know, let's run with this. Yep. And then, and again, go from there. Speaker 3: We do note beavers in our hazard mitigation plan. Yes. That's the point. There you go. I don't know if there's necessarily any funding we'd be able to get for this specific issue,
but I think things like water level monitors and others Okay. That's part of the reason why we included it and I asked for it to be included specifically. Cool. Speaker 2: Thank you. Alright. Kill deer at Arlington Circle Open space. You guys know the, you know Arlington Circle over in the Oakdale neighborhood. You know, it's the Conservation Commission actually owns it own, owns two of those circles in there. All three of them. All three of 'em. We, yep. So we have kill deer there. Yes. So one of them has kill deer, which is trying to attack people and murder dogs and all of that. Not really, but they're very territorial ground nesting birds. Speaker 3: Yes. So Pete Cunningham had did reach out to Mass Wildlife about their recommendations in terms
of signage and things like that. And Mass Wildlife did just recommend that we leave them be to do their own thing. There've been several posts going around in the neighborhood. Facebook. Speaker 2: That is totally what I saw, Speaker 3: Letting folks know that they're there. But the recommendation has been that we don't need to install any signage because their nesting period is so short and we don't mow the circle. So as long as folks in the neighborhood are aware, there's no need for any immediate action. I did just wanna make the commission aware 'cause it has been popping up in some of the, the Facebook groups Speaker 2: And I was, I was, I was telling Claire, I I was driving around yesterday or today
and I saw one of these by the side of the road somewhere and it said, you know, that it looks like a shorebird but it's a ground nesting cool thing. It's, that's exactly what I saw somewhere. I'm trying to dredge up exactly where I saw it, but yeah. That's cool. Good. And where is Oakdale? Speaker 3: It's Speaker 2: The Oakdale is it across the street from Mike's house back, back towards pick pond? That, that whole little, that whole, you know, that's the area that we're gonna connect to. The greatest Speaker 6: Neighborhood in Natick. Come on Speaker 2: Now. Yeah, exactly. We're heaven's sakes. That's, that's and that's where our lovely agent hangs out. Speaker 3: And, and Doug, we got Doug right down the street too, too. Speaker 2: Doug's Doug's right across from Oakdale. That's right.
Doug can't afford Oakdale. Yes. Hot, hot Speaker 6: Spot. Oh, the Peterson Road area Speaker 2: Or no other side? Other side of Pine Street. Of Oak Speaker 3: Street. Right behind the East School. Speaker 6: Okay. Speaker 3: So yeah, I just wanted make the commission aware of that Picker pond. Connector bridge. I'm working on finalizing my RDA application for chapter 91. I set the public works folks to it. I know, I know. I set the public works folks to finding any historic documents that we could find about the pond that included scales and things like that for measurements. And so I'm working on finalizing that application
to go in as soon as we can. And then it's a waiting game, unfortunately. But I have secured the extension from the grant program, so we're not at risk of losing any of our funding at least through September of next year. Could Speaker 6: D did DEP ever clarify how in, in creation they're utilizing a 1914 map? So determine, Speaker 3: They said because they had the 1914 map, we had to go through the determination process in order for all of the data to be evaluated to make a final determination about the pond's natural
state of storage. Speaker 2: Okay. Yep. Speaker 3: Mike's face is how I felt when I got this. Speaker 2: It is a little head exploding. Yep. Speaker 3: It really is. Because it's not, it is not on the great pond list. Come Speaker 7: To the conclusion, does DEP hate made it somebody doesn't like us. Yeah, Speaker 2: Exactly. Correct. So, so Claire, sorry, what, so what is the next step for this? Speaker 3: So the next step is we have to wait until we finish the determination process to determine whether or not the pond is a great pond or not. And this Speaker 2: Is DEP doing this? Yes. Speaker 3: The, the waterways division, I will say not the wetlands divisions. This is chapter 91.
That is this process because if it's a great pond then our structure will require a chapter 91 license. If it's not a great pond, it just requires the local con com process. Speaker 2: You know what's, what's embarrassing is that we, five years ago had a conversation with the planning board about this, the trails out there. Yep. And the connector concept. And the question was explicitly asked, is Piri Pond a great pond? Speaker 3: And it is not on the state list. Speaker 2: The answer and the answer was Speaker 7: Not on any of the list. Speaker 3: It's not on the list. My measurements in GISI did every measurement I could, excluding the internal BVW,
including the internal BVW and my measurements never went above 9.74 acres. Okay. Speaker 2: So, so it wasn't 9.9 and you forgot to, you know, add the little cove here. Speaker 3: It's, and it's, if you, if you exclude all the internal BVW, it's more like 8.75 acres. So Speaker 2: It's, and there's a good bit of internal BVW there. Yeah. So Speaker 3: Legit, it's, it's definitely at a point where I'm like really racking my brain a little bit to try to see and I'm, I've been trying to look for that 1914 map that they mentioned and I can't find a record of it anywhere. I have asked them for it, but they're not
very likely to give it to me. Speaker 2: It's, it's saved on Goatskin Scrolls in the basement of, you know, beacon Hill Yeah. Speaker 7: Or something. It's probably, it's probably in that What is the, the map room in near State Street? Boston Public Library? No, no, no. There's actually Speaker 3: No Chris. I know what you're talking about. It's right at the state used school statehouse, isn't it school? Yeah. Speaker 7: Yeah. And you huge ledgers and they, they go back. That's awesome. Speaker 2: Alright. Speaker 3: Well's just hundred Speaker 2: Of years. Let's, let's just sit back and you know, my Speaker 3: Notice of intent is essentially ready to go
whenever I'm allowed to submit it. Okay. Speaker 2: Alright. Last thing. Community economic development. Other updates. Claire, anything else? Speaker 3: Just a couple of quick other updates. The ground penetrating radar work at the Constitu aqua is gonna be continuing next week. I was actually just out last night flagging stone bounds for Feldman. We're also gonna be working with some of the volunteers to do some ve, it's not really vegetation clearing, it's mostly just fallen leaf and branch clearing in the areas where they're gonna be doing the GPR so that they can make direct contact with the ground. We're just trying to cut down the time that Feldman is in the field so that we don't go over our allotted hours
that we have scoped. Speaker 2: 'cause we had scraped that away from other hours. Speaker 3: We did. We scraped it. We did. But thankfully the initial GPR work is promising that we will have limited crossings of the actual aqueduct in the work that we're hoping to do. Which is what we were hoping to find out. So they'll be out again Thursday, Friday next week doing some a weather dependent. They, they were supposed to be out today but obviously it was not an ideal day for this kind of work. Sissies. Speaker 2: Yeah, no I'm kidding. Speaker 3: Island Bridge. I did get my, the last doodle poll response that I was waiting for and we are likely gonna be June 14th.
Great. I'll be sending around an email about that tomorrow if folks are available to join Chris. I know, I'm sorry you're not able to join that day. Other quick updates, hazard mitigation plan is fully adopted, sweet and approved. It's now up on the website. So we are approved through 2030 with our hazard mitigation plan, which is great. MVP 2.0 is gonna be kicking off soon. Folks might have heard whispers about this because Natick was in the first round of communities to participate in the MVP program and adopt their community resilience plan. The program is requiring us to go through what's being,
we're called the MVP 2.0 process because the program standards have changed so much since that initial round, especially specifically when it comes to equity and environmental justice communities. So Jillian and I, along with Jay and in the town administration's office are gonna be leading that process. So there'll be community events that I'll be inviting you all to over the course of the next year. The nice thing about the MVP 2.0 program is that we get $50,000 of money for a seed project. So part of those meetings
and those community events will be determining and prioritizing a seed project to use that money for, which we're really excited about running through a bunch of other things in my brain to make sure that I'm not missing anything really crazy important. Oh the town did submit a DER culvert replacement grant application for the Everett Street Indian Brook culvert. That goes actually right in the area we were just talking about right under Everett Street. The, the temporary repair is doing really well but it is just that it's, it's a temporary repair.
So we are very confident that that'll be a pretty competitive application given the, we had already assessed that corridor under the non title Aquatic Crossing standards. I'm missing an A in there somewhere. N double A double C standards. And there's actually that, that culvert scores quite highly for connectivity improvements if it was upgraded to the stream crossing standards. So we think it's a pretty competitive application. Great. Great. And those are all the updates that I have
Speaker 2: Only, oh, Speaker 3: No appeal on the damn order of conditions. That was the other one. Oh great. Speaker 2: Yes. Ah, super. Great, great, great. Next meeting is scheduled for June 5th. Turns out I've gotta be in Europe. We could hold it on June 5th, Jeff, if you're around willing to chair we, we could also shift it to June 12th if, if the commission wanted to do that. Any preference if, I mean, if that, that should work for me. Yeah, I mean if the commission was willing to shift it to June 12th and Claire if that worked, Speaker 3: The only downside is that then we have Open Space Advisory Committee
Speaker 2: On June 12th. Yes. Speaker 3: 'cause they're the Thursday in between us. Skip Speaker 2: That. Speaker 3: I mean I can skip it. No problem. But did they also have this room? So I'll just maybe check with Martin quickly and then we can finalize over email if, Speaker 2: If we could do that just because we've got 2 16, 2 18 South Main Street and that's kind of a absolutely significant hearing and I'd like to just have as much continuity as possible if people were willing to do that. Yep. Speaker 3: I will note, because we did continue 2 16, 2 18 to June 5th, I'll also need Anthony to agree to that a hundred Speaker 2: Percent. Yeah. Check with Anthony. I should have mentioned that earlier today, but I've gotta be over in Europe that Thursday the fifth.
But if people are willing to do that, just just let us know. If Anthony's agreeable to that, that would be great. And I would, I would be grateful. We'll to owe you all a, an evening at seven bottle or something to have Speaker 3: The, the happy hour. Appetizers are pretty decently priced. I went there for the first time a couple weeks ago. Speaker 2: Alright, anything else? No. All right. That's it. So I'll make a motion to adjourn then. So, so moved. I'll take Chris's movement and Jeff's second on that. Any further discussion? Those in favor, Chris. Excellent.
Thank you guys. Appreciate your time. Goodnight everyone.