So I sent >> recording in progress. >> Give everyone a second to connect. Hello everyone. This is Chuck Terrone, writings conservation administrator. This meeting will be conducted in person and remote format consistent with chapter 2 of the acts of 2023 which
further extend certain provisions of CO 19 measures regarding remote participation in public meetings until June 30th, 2027. Please note that not all items listed may in fact be discussed and other items not listed may be brought up for
discussion to the extent permitted by law. This agenda includes those matters which can reasonably be anticipated uh to be discussed at tonight's meeting. Please note that this meeting is being recorded. All material is available on
the conservation division page. Brian Bo, our commission chair, will facilitate this meeting. Please note that there will be a public comment period at the end of each hearing. Each vote taken during tonight's meeting will be conducted by roll call. We'll begin
by roll call attendance. Brian, can you please review the agenda and take the roll call attendance? >> Sure. First review, uh, we'll be starting with a notice of intent, uh, for Zero East Cohabil Street, moving on
to a continuation of a notice of intent hearing 885 Main Street, followed by a continuation of 695 Pearl Street. That's an abbreviated notice of resource area delineation. Then a continuation of a notice tent for
57 Longwood Road. Uh continuation of public hearing for 692 Pearl Street. That's request for determination of applicability. And then the last hearing is a continuation of public hearing on a request for determination of
applicability for the Pineville Conservation Area off Warren. We'll then move on with old new business. some discussion items and minutes for approval. So now the roll call vote and this will
be the order that we uh vote in. Walter >> Walter Talbot, commissioner present. >> Tim >> Michelle member present. >> Rick Rio, member present. >> Martha >> Martha Moore, vice chair present. >> Ryan Bro, chair present. All right, so
the first hearing is zero east of Haveril Street. uh who's going to present. >> Mr. Chairman, with your indulgence, I would just like to introduce the team that we have here this evening for this project. Sure. >> We are grateful to be here for the
conservation commission for the recal, the writing center for active living and the pickle ball projects. These are two projects being presented together because they have the same architect and design team. Uh tonight we have with us staff members. our town engineer, Ryan Persal is here and Jenna Wood, the
community services director, who is technically on vacation, is also joined us on Zoom. Um, we have members from the design team, BH+A, are here. We have uh the wetland scientist, as you know, Greg Hawkmouth. Um, is that good? Did I get that?
>> Hawkmouth. >> Hogmouth. Yep. >> I was going with a Berlin accent. >> And we have members from Activity House here in the room as well. So, I'm going to turn it over to Who am I turning it over to? Right. Greg, >> it's all you. Greg's here. Thank you, Greg.
>> Thank you. >> Good evening, everyone. For the record, Greg Hawkmouth from Epsilon Associates here presenting the applicant for the notice of intent filed for uh Zero East of Habil Street. This is the property located just south
of Burbank. >> Do you want the presentation going? >> Sure, that'd be great. the the property is located just south of Burbank Arena which you can see in the image there. um town owned piece and
the project includes the construction of a community center building, pickle ball courts, lighting, ADA accessible walkways, paved parking lot, stone dust ADA accessible pathway as well as u improvements to the existing roadway,
installation of utilities, storm water management and landscaping improvements. Uh we had a site visit this past Monday where we were able to meet with the commission members, walk the site, get a good look at the existing site conditions. Um there are bordering
vegetated wetlands on site that parallel what appears to be uh toe of slope that is more than likely the result of just years of uh earth moving activities, stockpiling. There's lots of pipes,
storm water uh structures and stuff out here. It's my understanding to be a contractor's storage yard. Uh so the idea is to create recal uh which is the reading center for active living. And if we can go to the next slide, uh
this is just a couple images. The one on the left shows you driving into the property. You can see Burbank Arena in the foreground and back left. Uh the middle image uh shows you a view looks like it was taken last fall looking into
probably the central portion of the site and that image on the right is there's a there's an existing cut flat area just south of Burbank Arena where you can see there's a stock pile of looks like some some gravel there. Go to the next slide
and we'll go to the next one here. Okay, this is good. This shows the Burbank Ice Arena on top. Everything we're going to be talking about is on the bottom. Uh the wetland line is that green line that you see at the bottom of the the page
and there's some dashed uh orange and yellow lines that parallel that line. The lower dashed line is the 20 25 foot zone of u natural vegetation or no disturb zone. the uh 35 foot no build
zone is a line just just off that and the idea was to try to uh comply with the state and local local regulations since this is deemed new construction. U so the building is entirely outside of
the no build zone. The parking lot and pickupball courts are entirely outside the no build zone. I think the only activity we have in the no build zone is a small section of paved walkway uh plan left uh top left of the proposed
building that I'll be able to show when we get to the to the the site plan. But that white uh box that you see in the bottom left, that would be the community center. Um, and inside the community center, I know the commission's not too concerned with with what's inside of it,
but I did want to mention a few of the u amenities. It's proposed to be two stories, roughly 28,650 square ft. There'll be a gymnasium, a fitness room, multi-purpose rooms, and
other community spaces. Uh there'll be a new senior hub with amenities such as a gym with an overhead walking track, a cafe area, lounge, card game room, and program and fitness rooms. Uh the courts themselves, the pickle ball
courts that you see in the top right, those would be on a tension uh post tension concrete um which is estimated to last 20 to 30 years. Um the pathway that we're proposing at the bottom of the plan, I
just want to talk about that briefly. That's going to be changing. Uh we're going to be uh revising the plan to try to pull that outside the 25 foot no disturb zone as much as possible. Um and also proposing two um entryways to a future path that
may happen out in the wetland resource area which isn't part of this project. So, I don't want to talk too much about the path and its its proximity to the wetlands. I think it's going to be more productive to focus on that once we have a revised plan and we can show the commission where we want to where we
want to put it. I mean, if we do have to encroach into the 25 ft no disturb zone why we have to encroach and we're just not there yet. Uh, in the in between the pickle ball courts and the building, you can see a large gray area. That's a a proposed parking lot. I believe there's
90 plus spaces plus or minus. There's going to be some EV parking, some handicap accessible parking. And this site is uh was I think there was six sites that were considered and this one was selected mainly because of the overflow parking potential in the
Burbank Ice Arena. It's parking lot already there. It just kind of makes sense. Um, so the project's been designed to comply with the D storm water management standards as well as the town of Reading storm water bylaw. Um, as the commission
members side during the site visit, there's lots of piles out here, so there's going to be a lot of earth moving activities. Uh, vegetation will be kept where it makes sense, but for the most part, the area is going to have to be cleared just because of the piles that are out there.
And we saw some large those piles have been there for a while. There were some large trees growing out of those piles. So, efforts will be made to protect trees where we can, but um the commission should know that a lot of the vegetation here is going to have to go.
But there's also a robust landscape plan that's included in the plan set. And I think once you have a chance to take a close look at that plan, you'll see there's a lot of uh a lot of improvements here. There's going to be a lot of mature trees, a lot of uh ground
cover, shrubs, and just about all of it, if not all of it, is native. >> And there's two seed mixes that are spec. There's a native wetland seed mix, and there's a native upland seed mix. Um, let me see.
The wetland itself, I I mentioned it's it's it's pretty abrupt wetland edge, pretty obvious wetland edge. It just parallels that that toe of fill. Um it does creep up in some spots but not too far. Um
storm I talked about the storm water management. There's going to be erosion sedimentation controls during the construction of the project. Uh that may change. So I don't want to spend too much time talking about the location that you're going to see on the erosion control plan because once we move the
pathway that erosion control line's going to also change. We our notice of intent um describes the need for a nifty's permit out here. We are going to have over an acre of land disturbance. So there is a storm water um pollution prevention plan. I believe
we provided the commission with a draft copy of that. So there will be uh routine inspections during the life of the project, monitoring requirement in accordance with the NIPT's program, EPA requirements. Uh we did include some dewatering
protocols in our narrative, although we don't think there's going to be the need for dewatering out here. If there is, we do have a protocol in our notice of intent. Uh spill prevention and containment, uh that will be on site at all times. Stockpiles and staging, any
stock piles will be surrounded by erosion controls. And we did request a variance in our notice of intent application for some of the activities in the notice disturb zone. Uh we do fully expect to still
need a variance for the two sections of trail that we're going to have to bring to the wetland edge, but we're hoping when we come back to the commission, we'll be able to get the rest of that trail completely outside the no disturb zone. Uh if we can go to the next slide.
So this is the phasing plan. Um FA uh construction access will be off Range Road. Range Road provides access to the range that's currently out there, part of the the gun club. Um phase one, construction entrance and
staging you can see there. Phase two would be uh to the bottom left of the screen. And again, that erosion control line that you see here is going to be tweaked a bit. Uh most of it will be, if not all of it, will be outside the no disturb zone.
Next slide, please. Snow storage. That's always a hot topic for projects like this. Um, the good news is we do have some space here to store snow. A lot of times you see a small little blob that's got a leader
going to it as snow stockpile air and everybody knows it's not going to work. These are large areas. These will work just fine. Um, next slide please. So there's uh there's going to be transformer pad, generator pad, uh
dumpster enclosure. I know we we talked a little bit on during the site visit about where where's the dumpster going and it wasn't clear in the plan because it's very busy. Uh but there's a lot going on on the plan. Uh but you can see that little D kind of in the central portion of the parking lot. That's where the dumpster would be proposed outside
the buffer zone. Next slide, please. fire truck access. See, we've got it on both sides of the building. Then there'll be a I imagine that red line is just the fire loop. Yeah.
Okay, next slide. So, we'd have to zoom in pretty tight here to be able to be able to see this, but again, it's going to be it's going to be changing. We're going to be pulling a lot of that work outside the no disturb zone. So, I don't want to focus too too much on this. Um, but this
is the site preparation and erosion control um erosion control plan. Next slide. This is the layout materials. You can see the parking lot is in the central portion.
I do want to point out there's going to be a small uh turf area that would be on the front plan plan north of the proposed building that won't I I know we recently did some a project with this commission where we proposed some work
at Austin Prep and we talked a little bit about the synthetic turf. This would be synthetic turf here but it wouldn't have tire crumb rubber or any type of infill that would be harmful. Um, and I don't think there's any type of under drain as part of this, is
there, Steve? >> Um, there might be. Yeah, just to get it out of there, get some water out of there, but >> but no point source into the wetland. >> Yeah, good. But I did want to point that out. And uh, we'd be willing to accept
the same condition that we did for Austin Prep about any type if there is infill, it has to be organic, but there's no infill proposed here. Um to the top right you can see the pickle ball courts and again that pathway that you see at the bottom is
going to be changing. Uh next slide >> Greg that um that area that's has turf >> is that outside of our jurisdiction? >> No it's it's in the buffer zone. It's in the buffer zone. >> Where is that again?
>> So it's in the front left of the building. You can see there's kind of a trapezoid type shape there. It looks a little bit like a rectangle. Yeah. >> Yeah. Originally, it was shown as a patio. >> Okay. So, it's right here.
>> Uh, nope. Other side. >> Right here. >> Yep. Exactly. >> And the purpose for that surface >> multi-use space for uh after school programs,
outdoor games. It's pretty shaded, so kind of a a tough place to grow grass, and they figured it would be a better use than papers. >> Okay,
next slide. So, this is the I just do that. Sorry. >> Yeah, this is the grading plan. Um, you know, we've got a site that's full of stock piles, so we have to do a lot of grading out here. Um, it's generally going to be flat post construction. Then you can see there's
some contours around the back sloping down sloping down towards the wetland. We do have a couple outfalls that extend one from the parking lot, one on the top right of the plan. That's part of the drainage design. We had to daylight
those pipes. And what you probably saw when we were on on site is there's really not a lot of opportunity to daylight there without cutting into that hill. So we had to get it close to that slope. Um so we do have an outfall in the no disturb zone in the bottom
central portion of the project. However, the one in the top right is uh a little little further away. Um but at that point the sto the water's clean. It's been treated. It's gone through the storm water management
system. Next slide. So, this is the landscape plan. And the sheet after this has a legend that will tell you uh what each label means, but there's uh coniferous trees
going in. There's deciduous trees going in. And as I mentioned, uh, everything on that list, based on what I saw, appears to be native species, including the seed mixes that are spec. There's an upland seed mix and a wetland seed mix.
The wetland seed mix was proposed below the proposed path that you see on this plan, and the upland seed mix is proposed on the uh, plan north side of the proposed path. >> Point clarification. So earlier when you were talking, you said just about all
the plantings is native >> and you just said you think it all is. >> I think they all there was an elm on there that I didn't recognize. >> It's native. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Okay.
Uh next slide. And these are just some images of what it would look like. Oh, I do want to point out too that the lighting here, it's all dark sky compliant. I know that was a hot topic on the last project that we discussed with the commission. So, I
did confirm that. Um, this just shows you some images of what the parking lot will look like, pickle ball courts, some of the lighting. Next slide. And this is the phototric plan if folks wanted to see
where the u light zeros out. How do you read that? Good question. I'm I'm not sure I'm the best person to explain it, but it's my understanding where you see the 0.0 there's no light. >> Okay. >> And as the numbers increase, it's
brighter. >> What's the brightest? >> Even point Z5, it it's dark. So there there are a couple spots where it's 0.1
at the wetland 2. It's still extremely dark. We've worked with the lighting sports lighting work and it's the best that they can do short of going with more poles and lower poles
which is actually going to spread light further um just to keep it from that edge. Um I think it's important to say that this lighting plan doesn't take into consideration the trees and the shrubs that are going to be planted,
>> right? They can't fac Yeah, they don't factor that. >> So the more you save, the more immediate um darkening of this area you'll get. But there's a lot of trees and shrubs being planted also
>> and the existing trees Next slide. This is just a even harder to read, >> right? Phototric plan. >> This one's even better. >> This is like zero cut off. >> But I like this one because you can see the interior of the building
>> on the left and what's inside. >> Didn't help us very much. >> No. No. But I didn't point out either at the beginning of the discussion. Um, so we're not within a a zone A or zone AE flood plane out here. Uh, it's not an
ACC area. It's not mapped as estimated a priority habitat. And there's no map certified or potential vernal pools by natural heritage. That doesn't mean there's not turtles in the wetland and other important critters, but I did want to point that out and get that on the
record. Next slide. So, so that was like a benchtop survey and from your own flagging, you didn't notice any areas that you would be concerned about for vernal pools, potential vernal pools or turtle
habitat? >> No, I did not. I didn't notice anything. But again, I just walked that wetland edge. The only time I walked into the wetland was during the site visit to try to get an idea of how much organics there were. Um, but on our site, there was a confined basin depression that was
dry. It didn't hold water. I think we looked at that during the site visit. I think it was just high enough other two feet. It might be a different discussion. But I think eventually this borders on um let's see there's a perennial stream out near the gun range.
Get the name of it here. Reading rifle range. So the wetland itself is known as Salt Cedar Swamp. Folks knew that. And it borders on Bare Meadow Brook, which is a perennial stream way into the site, but the 200 foot perennial area falls well
short of this project. We did look at that. Uh any more slides? Yeah, we've got some more pictures here. You can see the what the exterior would look like. Some shots of the interior as
well. Next slide. That's it. So hopefully you can see efforts were made to stay out of the no build zone with the exception of that one little chunk
of asphalt path on the top left of the building. We accomplished that. Um I think when we come back to the commission at the next meeting, you'll see that just about all of the path with the exception of those two nubs going to the wetland edge are going to be outside
the no disturb. We'd be more than happy to answer any questions the commission might have. >> The one thing that jumped out at me right away on page two was referring to that trail, which you don't want to talk about, but I do as being ADA compliant.
How can a stone dust trail be ADA compliant? >> Anyone want to take that? >> Yes. Um, so as long as it meets uh as long as it's smooth and there's no stone over
half an inch, then it's ADA compliant. And as long as we have we maintain a transverse grade of one and a half% and it stay is ADA compliant. We did that at MLET. >> I wanted you to mention that that's the same service except this is ADA compliant over at Mlette Morgan.
>> Okay. Can you uh Well, we know you're Ryan so that's fine with that. Brian Persville, town engineer. >> Sorry. >> Is the trail more than 200 foot long? >> Yes. >> Are there gonna be passing zones? >> Uh, it will be wide enough for Yeah, we
can have passing zones in there. We can look at it if we need to. >> Yeah. To you mean to get two wheelchairs past? >> Thank you. >> Yeah. I I assume we don't uh so I guess
how wide is it and you know because you may not need >> so but a minimum it would be ADA compliant um so we would probably be somewhere around 5T at a minimum in areas where we have uh passing by we could probably incorporate areas where you can sit down or something like that
and that would be where two chairs could pass by fine so that would get wider at that point. Thank you. >> Any other questions, comments from the commission? Uh the trails committee be involved with
something like that >> with what the uh the ADA trail? Well, this trail is being proposed by the the project proponent. So, the town would have this in uh as part of their bid document. So, this trail is being
created. Uh there's there's another trail out there that uh we're asking, you know, we're hearing that we're going to get to um spurs and then in the future with a permit another trail can
be created out out there which would be deeper into the wetland area also ADA compliant. >> Anything else? Do you want to go first? >> I had a couple things. >> Sure. >> The uh area that trapezoid that used to
be some kind of permeable pavers is now impermeable. Is that taken into account? >> Which area in particular? Talk about the turf. >> Turf. >> The turf. >> That would be permeable, not impermeable. >> Okay.
And then snow storage for cleaning the uh pickle ball courts. >> Uh pickle ball courts will have the same restriction in the winter that we do on all other courts. So there will be no play on them. >> Oh. >> So we will not remove snow. It damages the surface.
>> This is going to be a totally non sequator. At the meeting back in January, I'd asked about raised courts, which you can play during the winter, but I don't know if anybody ever looked into that. >> Raised raised meaning >> raised courts.
>> Um, these are not raised courts. These are post-tension concrete courts that sit on a slab that are on braid. >> Yeah. >> Um, >> but no, did anybody look into raised courts so you could play in the winter? >> No, we kept this very budget friendly. So raised courts would have ex, you
know, made that cost go up. How much? >> More than what the project was willing to support. So >> is that was there a figure given to that? >> No, I don't think we had it. No, but you mean you're talking a whole another
infrastructure to raise those courts up more concrete, everything. I I don't know the answer to asking. >> The other I mean, just to touch upon that, even if they're raised, you you really would not want to shovel them, do anything like that because it it really does damage the the surfacing material,
the paint surfacing. >> The reason I brought it up is I've witnessed several raised quartz at places. >> Yeah. Not this is not being proposed on the project. >> Okay, fair enough. Thank you. They they can still play in the winter time as
long as it's not no snow or ice on it because the shoveling of it will damage it. >> Yeah. So, no removal of snow on the on the course. That That's probably a better thing to say. >> Which is becoming the norm. We're not going to have any snow. So,
that's an >> offer. Sorry. I went through the first 100 pages of the plan. Um, in page SP 101, it talks about um, tree
removal over 12 inch DBH, but normally we ask for 6 in DBH. Is there a reason why it's only looking at 12inch trees? Uh Steve, you can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the density of the tree cover that's out there, the the cost of the survey would have been
extremely high to collect all the trees. So there was I think we got the general area and so most of the canopy is grabbed, >> right? >> But if we were to add everything in that cost of that survey was going to be astronomical and it would have taken it
would have added weeks onto the the survey to wrap up just to be honest clarification. So the cost So that you mean it would cost more to do the survey and mark the tree? >> The effort in order to grab the trees in this area.
>> What do you mean by grab in this case? >> To to to to get them on a survey to you to shoot them, >> but you're still going to plan on removing. >> Correct. if they're within the the area of clear where we have the clear area. >> But the part that I was looking at
talked about negotiating which trees stay and which trees leave and was only looking at 12 in. So we're down in the 25 35 kind of range. So I'm wondering if um well let me move on. There were eight
trees that were marked in that edge that were planning to remain and protected with um boards around the trunk and then a drip line fence. If there are trees that are between 6 and 12 in in that
same area, could they be saved as well? even if they weren't plotted on the plot because of the cost of plant plotting all the trees. When you're actually looking in that area and figuring out what goes and what stays, can we try to rescue as many trees as we can?
>> Yeah, I the intent is that we're going to keep as many trees that we can on site. >> Okay. >> We prefer to do that anyway than to have to bring in plantings. So, we'll make sure that we keep all those trees. Uh when you're getting up to that edge line, again, we're establishing more of
a canopy line. Then we are grabbing the um the 12 in to 6 in, anything like that. But anything in that area that we're establishing, that canopy line really isn't going to be touched, per se. Um the only sections that's going to be cleared would be the areas in which
we have to work and disturb. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So that that actually points to the fact of why we're really trying to pull that that walkway even out of that 25 foot so that we don't even have to touch those trees. >> Okay. >> So So let me just
>> clarification. So outside of the pathway, are you uh confident with the 35 foot as a limit of work? >> I think there at this point we're going to rework this plan. I think at this point we can confidently say we can stay
out of the 25. The 35 we may be close to or in. >> Sure. So halfway >> with the new plan, can we get a limit of work on that also? >> Yes. So to to Greg's point, that's that's why we're not really focusing on that. >> Sure. >> Don't focus on the limit of work. Focus
on what we're really doing there. And that might just shift based on where we're going. >> So I think it would be important for the commission to understand how many trees are coming down. So, we might need like a rough estimate of those 6 inch DBH, something like that. >> Yeah, we can we can probably do >> within the 25.
>> If you're not working within the 25, we don't need you to count trees. But if you're wherever you plan on removing within the limit of work, which would be extended out because of grading, those are the trees we need to know about. So
anything that would come down or so as I understand it there's no evaluation that's happened yet that will happen after the project's approved. So I'm not counting those trees but anywhere where you would grade um and have to remove those trees that would we
need some sort of count in that area. >> So within the buffer zone check >> within the definitely would be the buffer zone but outside of the limit of work. So the limit of work towards the buffer zone is untouched because it's the limit of work except for those two
spurs >> 20 the are you referring to the 25 foot notice to the wetlands. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> But also the limit of work to the wetland. So wherever the limit of work >> understood >> should be even if it was at the 35 what you're saying is there's no work behind
that line because that's >> the limit of work is the limit. Correct. >> Yeah. We're going to certainly have to reestablish that limit work line as we adjust that walkway. >> Yeah, we can look into that. >> While we're on the tree count point, >> there's a note on there. The first plan
said 33 trees. Now it says 27. You might remove that because it's not accurate. That's for the larger site, but you're going to end up with some larger number of trees. So having 27 doesn't really help any. >> Do you know where that number? Is it just an estimate? >> What are you referring to? No, it was
the count was correct, but um because I counted the ones that were marked for removal, but I'm saying given the conversation about looking at trees smaller than 12 in, that 27 is meaningless because it's going to be some larger number. So, it's no point
leaving misleading information on the plan. So just to be clear, we're counting trees from our limit of work out to the buffer zone >> that are proposed to be remove. >> Got it. >> Yes.
>> 6 inch in diameter and higher and greater. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Ready for my next? >> Sure. >> Go for it. >> Okay. on SP 102, it talks about um how the soil stockpile will be protected and
it shows uh um mulch sock or something like that on the downhill side. Um when I went to the MACC training, they were recommending putting the mulch sock all the way around and putting a tarp over the top
to protect it from erosion by rain. Is that something that's feasible or is this soil soil stockpile going to be so big you couldn't fit a tarp over it? >> Could be. >> It could be, but we would typically have them put erosion control around the entire
>> it would go around the whole stock pile to the point of the tarp. >> If it's a smaller, more manageable pile and we know we have some really inclement weather coming. that would be the responsibility of the contractor into their swift to make sure that they're following that in accordance with what they filed for their nippies.
>> Okay. >> Um sometimes they will put a tarp on it if it's manageable to do so. >> Yeah. I'm I'm glad to hear you're going to put the soil the erosion control all the way around the soil stockpile because given that the wetland is on
many sides, I would be concerned about not circling it. Okay. Um, you've got a couple of islands in the middle of the parking lot. Those are not marked as having any trees planted in them. And I think it would be good to put a tree in
each of those islands. Just people like to park under the tree. >> Correct me if I'm wrong, but our underground detention basin is right under those islands, right? So, it's one reason. The other reason is blocking the light. One's outside of them is Ford.
>> One's outside. That one's Billy and it's one, but that one's just touching that. So, that doesn't really mean >> Okay. So, it's not under our jurisdiction. >> We're trying to keep the light fixtures low to keep the spill low. So, putting a tree is going to
>> prevent spread of that light out to the further corners of the >> those islands, I think, might be like 9 ft wide. They're basically the width of a >> parking space, but it's really not >> that's in there >> ideal >> area.
>> Okay. I just >> think of street trees that die. >> Yeah. Well, I just think of parking lots I go to and in hot summer weather. >> No, I >> every tree has a car parked under it and every non-tree has as few cars as
possible. Um, so yeah, you know, and I was glad to see that you are planning to put trees around the outer perimeter of the parking lot. So there will be some shaded spots out there. >> The only dilemma is the Coltech system is in the middle of the parking lot. >> Yeah.
>> And Coltech requires a one foot per one inch DBH distance from every tree >> or some kind of barrier. >> Yeah. >> Well, decide that here in your plan. You can think about it and see if >> No, I'm just saying. Right. >> We'll take it under consideration if we
could fit trees in there or not. >> We'll take a look at >> Yeah. I mean, I I noticed that the um the edges are marked to have trees, but so fine about the other one. >> Do you know how many trees we're planting off top here? >> It's a lot. Planting a lot of trees. >> Yeah, I saw that. >> Happy to plant more
>> further down. Um okay. And um uh the other option for a shady parking lot that um is not trees is um solar carports like they have at the stone
zoo. And um is this being planned in such a way that it could be later retrofitted with solar park car ports if uh RMLD wanted to do a project there? not in the middle of the parking. Um, if you want to go to the grading and
drainage plant just for a second, you can see how large the system is. >> Can you help me up down? >> Uh, go back. Yeah, keep going. >> Right there. >> You can see that gray square in the middle of the that is the that is the
infiltration system. Um, to the extent of the crush stone, correct? So, the answer would probably no, not in the middle. Maybe at the edge. Um, there could be potential for canopy on the north side of that. Um, >> okay.
>> You'd only you have to sink, you know, footings and foundations in there. You wouldn't be able to do that in the drainage field. >> Okay. So, the only place you could put a solar carport would be not on top of the drainage field. >> Correct.
>> Yeah. Okay. Um L302, the list of trees includes red pines. We've been cutting dead red pines in the town forest because they are not good for this climate. So I hate to see you
planting three or four red pines here that we're just going to have to cut down when they die. So I'd like to have you swap out the red pine for something that we haven't been having to cut. Um, >> I think that was on the commission's list.
>> It might be on our list. >> It is. >> I I I do not deny that, but that list was made before the town forest has spent thousands and thousands of dollars cutting down red pines. >> We're h we're happy to swap them out. >> Um, and um,
there were a couple of trees on your list that look like they're not true natives. The elm was one, but other than that, you are planning to make those all true natives. And I understand you say the elm is a true native. It's called Jefferson Elm or something like that. >> American elm, Princeton. I think that
was on the commission's list, too. >> Happy to change them. >> That's fine. Trying to make sure that we're aligned with what >> suggested list was. >> Okay. But sometimes people put in a red maple and it turns
out to be autumn glory red maple. And we're looking for true species native red maples, not hybrid autumn glory red maples, just for example. So um yeah. So just, you know, when you're hiring the
landscaper, make sure they understand that we're looking not for varietal species, variations on the species, but the actual native species. Does that make sense? >> No cultivars. >> No cultivars. There you go. That's the
word I was looking for. Okay. Um, you already answered about dark sky compliant. You already answered about why the pickle ball court has more spillover. That's all my notes for now. >> I have a few questions. Um, first is
there's a two notes on there. One talks about proposed property line and one talks about proposed parcel A. What are those? >> Where's that? Um, >> you expect me to point you in the right
direction? >> It could be a hold over from Yeah, th those notes may be referencing um the lay the potential uh layout for a range road and the and what will become
the lot the subdivided lot potentially below that. So maybe not relevant to this discussion but >> yeah it was wonderful >> relevant to CPDC and >> okay >> for the discussions about the layout >> on the uh site prepper site prep and erosion control plan item 13
well actually item 12 first uh that's where it's talking about um the tree warden will review the trees. So two points, one uh it should be the conservation administrator. That's his jurisdiction, not the tree warden. And
the second is reviewed for what? So uh size and species and health of trees. Um we can certainly put amend that and have Chuck in there. The not outside of your jurisdiction, we still probably want to have the tree water and review >> protection, >> tree protection, tree planting, things
like that. A lot of times we find um the tree planting in particular, depending on who the landscaper is, has to be watched because cages are left on trees as they're planted. >> Yeah. >> Just as long as it's in the jurisdiction. >> Yeah, absolutely.
>> It can be his headache. >> That's fine by that. We like spreading the headache. >> Okay. Um see, just clarification. >> So, Brian, can you just stop? I'm a little bit confused. I thought Brian was talking about
um reviewing the trees prior to removal for health and then add them to the list and then towards the end it sounded like wow someone's reviewing planted trees >> for next steps like remove the gate eggs and put on tree
>> similar to what we did for Mlesomes Morgan Chuck I think um you were involved with removals and around with the plantings as well So you're fine with that. Um this would be reviewing removals,
removing reviewing tree protection for the trees that are within the jurisdiction would be under your control and then outside would be >> yeah the town has a tree policy and it this what Brian's asking is to align
more with the town's tree policy which is what me and Mike use to kind of make sure we're all on the same page with things. But um >> yeah, the note actually says all tree removals and tree protection within the 35 foot buffer zone to be reviewed in
the field um tree warden and landscape architect prior to >> you can you can add conservation administrator onto that as well. We'll make that correct. >> See um it mentions concrete being
pulverized. What concrete are you going to pulverize? Range road. Pumin is concrete. So pavement. >> Okay. So range road. I was wondering if it was the sisterns or whatever. >> Ah, some of them are big enough where they probably might break them up to
remove them, but they can probably pluck most of those out. >> Okay. Um, question. There's note in there about educational signage. What's the educational signage? education whatever whatever we can work with Chuck on the educational signage
for any of the areas near the spurs or the edge of the wetlands where where walkway is >> we will include >> yeah similar to what we've done on other projects >> great >> um >> right >> let's see the uh fire truck access road
>> thing >> that wasn't an access road that was fire hoses the two rectangles are where >> so there's not a road back there That's going to be a question that they can get full access. >> I thought that's what I remembered the
last time and wonder if it changed. >> That was a big discussion. >> That was going to be on a question I had too. >> I got one. >> Um, so that turf area, what we've been doing is asking what your recycling plan is for that. It's going to last a long
time, but we'd like to know that you have some idea in mind of how to remove it when that becomes necessary. I'm just gonna throw it on the wetland. >> Oh, that's good. But but now our wetlands, right? >> It's close enough. >> It's my understanding that the the
manufacturers have to take it back now. Is that >> Yeah, that's the key. >> Yeah, true. >> There's facilities now. >> There's one in Rockland. >> Yeah, that just opened up which was which was great. >> Good to know. So the the conservation commission would have a condition on
that um to come back to the conservation commission uh at that point because most turf lasts 10 years and so we just want to make sure that you're up to date uh with new technology, maybe some new
regulations or whatnot. So it's not going to be considered maintenance. you would need a new permit to uh replace the the turf uh the end not the infill but um I guess it's called the turf >> just for turf that replace yeah just I
think we do that on our projects anyway when we replace turf that's in your >> good to check in >> so my last question which is a little bit more curiosity which is why it's last um if I look at the area where you cross from the pickle ball courts over to the Burbank parking area which people
will be using. Right. According to the lighting chart, it looks pretty dark over there. Is that intentional? Am I reading the chart wrong? >> We're I think we're currently working with RMLD on their actual road lights. Okay. >> On the utility pole lights.
>> Fair enough. It just I mean it looks like it's it's one or some really low number and >> wouldn't bother me. I can dodge cars, but >> there may be I think there's a utility pole close to the area. So there are utility bulbs with lights, but none of the photometrics account for it.
>> Thank you, Chuck. Do you have anything? >> Yeah, I was just looking at my list. Um, yeah. I also wanted to understand the the firetruck access, but it's what's back there. We're looking at a path and which seems to be crossing the 35 foot
zone. It's on the screen right now. It looks like there's something that looks like a path in back of the building. This side here, >> that would be the walking path. What is that? What is that made out of? That also >> it's an exit path from the building and for fire >> and it's made out of crushed stone.
>> That's asphalt. >> Asphalt. >> There's only a small section of that that falls within the 35. >> Mhm. >> And it's up towards the top left of the building on the on the plan. >> Is that going to be one of your variances? It seems like >> Yeah, it's like the top that's right
adjacent to the turf area, right? I think. >> Yeah. And it, you know, we could make it gravel, but it just wouldn't make sense because that would need to be maintained and that would eventually end up in the wetland. So to me, a small section of asphalt, even though it's in the 35,
makes sense for all the right reasons. >> It just counts in the structure. So >> yeah. >> Yeah. Do you anticipate any maintenance? Looks like one side you have the building, the other side is forested, left alone. Are you anticipating any maintenance in that area
>> on the tree >> on the path >> on the left hand side of the building? >> Yeah. >> So, that's where we're going to about halfway down the building. That's where we're going to veer off a little bit for that future access path to the boardwalk. There's a gentle slope down
there that we identified during the site visit. Uh but you'll see that on a a future worksheet that we're going to send over you. >> So, do you have an operation and maintenance plan? Are these sections going to be highlighted or at least
discussed about maintenance on the wetland side of paths and how wide a mowing strip you may maintain? I mean, I'm sure people don't want to walk, but it's probably going to be fragmite like covering the path. So,
>> you mean like an um like a clear zone on >> something like that or just saying once a year you'll just make sure that that path is is clear and you'll monitor it. I I don't know what's out there. Actually, I didn't see a lot of
invasives. Maybe I wasn't looking. >> There's not a lot of invasives out here. Um in fact, I didn't see any frag. >> I did see some glossy buckthornne, which is pretty amazing, right? For a former contractor storage, >> they buried it all. Yeah. >> No notweed.
>> No, no. And and that side of the building in particular was heavy with some small evergreens, mainly eastern white pine, but it may be more appropriate to have a condition that talks about maintenance. You know, prior to any maintenance activities,
conservation administrators shall be notified and a plan be presented or we can come up with a note. So yeah, I'm not sure. You know, town project things happen more often when they're
needed rather than on a plan. So I'd rather have a plan so we can refer to it to say when this comes up, this is what is supposed to be done because I don't think anyone's going out there, I don't know, every six months and
making sure it's clear. But when they end up having to do some work, it might be nice to understand what that plan would do. So there's no invasives there now. Um seems to me that, you know, an operation
maint for all these areas that are supposed to remain untouched would be, you know, a good idea. Uh including what happens in the springtime with the snow storage areas. Is that cleaned up? We're gonna get this
sediment out of there, any of the sand and and whatnot, right? The leaves out. >> But I think we can address most of that in our on&m plan for the storm water, right? At least in the parking lot area for the snow storage. Um, including is
is that still a rain garden to some extent in that triangle? >> No, >> because on this plan in that snow storage area is is right here. Yeah. And there's trees there. uh we can work on a on an O andM plan for that. We also have to discuss uh how
who maintains this area too. We haven't had that discussion yet. Um so that'll help shape the O and M plan and what we do, >> right? So, we would not pushing you to making those decisions, but the you know, I think the commissioner would want to know or
review the over and plan and then I would just draw your attention to you're planting trees in a spot that's going to have snow storage and it might be better to do something like they did at Artist, you know, in that area or just maybe some shrubs or a shallow rain garden
>> that has grasses in it or something like that. >> Southern side of that. Is it in the parking lot or is it adjacent to >> doesn't look like it's >> it's adjacent to >> We wouldn't be putting a snow storage area and burying brand new trees. We generally don't do that.
>> We'll take a look. >> Yeah, we'll take a look too. >> We'll take a look on how that lines up with our planting plan and then we'll also um start to draft that on and m plan on on what that looks like for cleanup after.
We are um if I may uh we're working on an O and M plan now um but we >> Jane can you introduce yourself? >> I can I can Jane Wellman assistant town manager um we're working on the on and plan now um for the whole building and
policies and all that and it's a pretty comprehensive document. It's going to take quite a bit of time. It does does the commission need to see that or can the commission give us what they want to see in it and we put that in? We can bring you a draft. We're not planning on
having the full on and m plan. >> So, it's closer to open, but >> outside. >> You're doing all of it at once. >> We're doing all kinds of things. Yes. We have a consultant helping us mainly on the on the programming side, the inside of the building. So, it can be a
separate plan. >> Not really new. Uh, you know, we're not like rewriting anything here. All these snow storage maintenance is kind of boilerplate. Grab it off some other project and modify it a little bit. >> Maybe you could help me with that. >> I was hoping Greg would do it. I think
Epsilon has a lot of this stuff available. But uh but yeah, we certainly have some for from other projects and uh could pass those along that acceptable to the conservation commission for snow storage. Like I said, I I mean, >> well, and also
>> artist has like a gravel area where the snow melts and they just churn it up every I this is, you know, this is it's close to and I get that and I'm Brian's giving me the eyebrows, but >> it's also how is it done correctly?
>> I think yeah, my question was really more a function of timing. When does the commission want to see that visav the permitting process because I don't want to slow up the permitting process. So this one here, if you decided to not plant the trees, it would be important for the conservation commission to understand because trees are going to be
part of our decision. Um, so there's some parts of it we would need to we would need to know about. So maybe the draft works for us. >> So maybe bringing that back with the pathway uh remodel would be a good time and we can address it then some draft
information. Yeah, I mean we have we have worked with draft submitted comments and then through something pending an update that could >> Yeah, >> the flexibility. >> That's great. That's we appreciate that. >> I mean and in full disclosure, we
haven't even gotten to the point whether this is going to be on our removal if snow removal if which would make >> one of those areas non-existent. >> Okay. So snow removal means you're taking it
off site or you're going to contract it out. >> Snow it would Well, we have private contractors that do snow removal for the town. >> The town would be responsible. >> Um yes, correct. >> Do you think guardrails are needed to
maintain where not to throw or push the snow? Um potentially potentially I um we have we've had a couple issues in the past with with that Chuck. I think you and I have had that issue before. So we'll take a look maybe
in some areas where we feel like that is a possibility that might happen. We might put a barrier up there. >> Well, the other concern is just if you're driving a plumber around at 3 in the morning, that lower left corner is going to look pretty enticing. So just so it's exactly clearly written. That'd
be some areas that we look at >> where not to. >> And that'll probably be marked anyways because it's going to be fire access there. >> Good point. >> So that'll have to be marked. >> Yes, Joe. >> Yeah. Um, so there's a lot of cement
work here. Can you put on the plan where you're going to do put uh where you going to have your cement wash out station? >> It's on there. >> Yeah, >> the one before. One before. >> Okay. It's on there. Um there was a
comment made at the site visit that um there's a lot of dead vegetation, there's a lot of dead trees and slash on the ground. Some of that is important habitat. Uh so when we're out there looking at things, this may be where we want to
decide what's going to stay, what's going to go just to make sure we maintain some of that habitat and that uh decay process remains out there. So, I think that's really important.
Commission would uh probably put that on my shoulders, but they certainly couldn't show up, too. But that would be another sitewalk. >> Yeah, that's fine. We can less clearing and grubbing is fine.
>> Gotcha. Not trying to rush you. I'm just truly just asking my eyebrows. Uh yeah, I mean just a note on the turf field. I was
you know this is low maintenance is um what are we looking at for um like lawnmowing activity? Are you trying to eliminate all that kind of work around here? >> Pretty minimal. No, I know that
>> I think in general um maybe some maintenance around the pickle ball court areas. Uh we try to keep maintenance as low as we can now and try to establish some sort of >> natural meadow areas and things like
that. Clovers and things >> pretty shady over there. Yeah, >> if you look at the direction of the sun between the twotory building and those tall pines in the top left of the building, that's not going to see a lot of sun at all. I think you'd struggle to get grass to grow. >> So, you're talking about in back of the
uh pickle ball court area? >> No, the where the turf's going. >> Okay. So, I was kind of setting you guys up for back of the pickle ball court area. So, >> I think yeah, we'll have to have some sort of uh I don't know what that might look like. I don't know how often it's going to happen. So, I know we
originally discussed having access out there in case there's a tree that needs to come down and the, you know, but that doesn't prevent us from having a meadow like a meadow area, you know, might prevent us from having shrubs.
>> I think it's important that we have some sort of buffer there that's that's not a high meadow. I mean, we do have balls or anything like that. We don't want them to go directly into the meadow without being able to get them. So, I think we need to have a buffer at least. >> Is there access off the back? Is that
what's >> there access to walk around to grab them? And we're still having discussions on how high the the fencing will be, but um that's where we're potentially looking to >> So, if it's not a meadow, you're going to be mowing, right? And do you want to mow? That's what So, that's the whole question.
>> We generally do not We generally, like I said, like to keep the maintenance down. So, >> yeah, I'd like to see no mowing. I mean, for sure. Or is there something that you can I mean I'm not asking for tonight but maybe mowing's not needed out there and we can have like one spot that
>> synthetic dirt. >> Well, we might be pulling the pathway back closer there and so we we have to look at that area anyway. >> So no not synthetic turret. >> I don't Yeah. >> Yeah. You're going to have to mow at
least at least once a year it's going to be full of buckthornne. >> Uh, >> no. I get that. That's what we do over at Bear Meadow. It's that mowing once a year, but it's not every week and the leaf blowers aren't out there every week. And
>> I think it would be better to design it that way. So, >> generally, especially around the core areas, you won't you're not really going to find canopies or trees close to those core. We don't really want leaf litter to be on them because we don't they first of all they stain the the core surface and second of all it's just not
something that we really want to have to maintain with leaf blowers and all that. We'll talk with the park. >> Sounds like it's a some sort of meadow something. >> We'll talk we'll talk with the parks division and when we move the the walkway we'll take a look at it. >> Yeah. And you do have the same thing up
front. Uh, like this might be a little different because, you know, we're talking about an entryway, you know, might stay manicured. Um, >> so you had something at Imagination Station that was filled with
grasses and whatnot. Um, you know, that's the new parking area by Coolage. I still call it Imagination Station. I do. Whatever it's really called, I have no idea. But, uh, yeah, he did some, uh, tall grasses and whatnot. Maybe that would eliminate the mowing
here. And then, you know, I'm not trying to take jobs away from whoever does the mowing. I'm just saying that this is an opportunity because these spots are so small that be >> not needed and I think they would save >> We're not a lot. >> We're not opposed. I think we try to add
that stuff in when we can. >> All right. That's all I have. And I I have a list and I'll send that to Ryan tomorrow about our questions. Okay, we have one more question from Walther and then we'll go to the thoughts. >> On page 84 of your submitt, it's an
electrical diagram, I think it's called, and it shows an electrical box on the building, an electrical box over by the pickle ball courts, and it's kind of like a curved line. So, to me, that's not a tension line
between two points. It's buried, but it looks like it's going right through the cult system. it. Um, that conduit won't be going through the cold system. We'll take a look. We'll revise that if we have to, but um
we're working on only having one transformer on the project. Save uh money. >> Correct. Yeah, I think we've confirmed that we can. >> Yeah. So, we we'll take a look. That's noted. I'll take a look to see if it goes through.
And I guess the most important thing for my definition of the world is on page 22, section 4.6, you reference all the bad actors you're going to get rid of in the water system. There's no mention of oil or grease.
>> You mean for storm water? >> Yeah, >> we'll add that in. So that's that's just a blurb from the uh project narrative, but I'm sure it's in the storm water report. Yeah. >> Well, the col won't do the oil grease. You need a pre filter for it,
>> but I didn't see that on the diagram either. >> We've got a storm water export spurred here. Hey, >> McDonald. We have uh two water quality units um at each entrance to the subsurface chambers as a part of the
recal system. I spoke with uh Tyler Bush over at ColTech yesterday and I told him what the situation was and he says ColTech I don't want to put words in his mouth. I'll paraphrase strongly recommends a
prefilter because it's good practice. >> We have two filters uh before the water gets into that system that are separate from the >> cult separators not filters but separators. >> Yes. Correct. >> Water quality units. Yes. Okay. So, oil will end up one place, water will end up
one another place. Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Do you need any additional information on that >> to make? >> I didn't see them on the diagram. So, >> is there a diagram? >> They're on the drainage plant. They're listed as water quality unit.
>> They're on this >> what are they called? >> A water quality unit. >> That's a good term. specific brand that we're specking >> up. >> The uh the water quality units that we're showing currently are contact
units. Um I think we still need to dive a little deeper into which contact unit we are going to recommend the contractors to use and then they can always u come with an approved equal. >> Okay. >> Okay. Does this go to CPDC and are they
doing this to a water permit? >> I believe Oh, that's an interesting I would I would say yes. Um >> so if they're reviewing this also then they'll do the stall water only when they're not reviewing that. >> Well, you really tested me on the bylaw. Uh >> we're reviewing it.
I want to say when when it comes in front of conservation, you review the storm water or if it goes in front of conservation I and CBDC CPDC gets it. >> No, it's your review and because of the size of the project, they he requested
it >> the storm water. >> Yeah, >> correct. So that does come in front of the the commission >> conservation commission will be handing out the storm water permit. I always get those confused because we depending on who goes in front of goes in front of that commission.
>> Okay. >> So that means there's more work for you, Walter. >> Of course. I think >> so. Is there a detail? I know that you haven't picked. So might be on the plan. I'm just gonna ask you to send it to me so I can make sure Walter has that
information to review and anything else you think is appropriate with your treatment train. >> Thank you. >> So wondering why you were here. >> So correct me, but we're using an Atlas Noah 14, right? >> So that's in line with what we
>> and we did submit, I think, two copies of the storm water report. >> Yeah. >> And a full copy of the SWIP if anybody wanted to see that. And I can give you that paper copy if you stick around for your best tonight. >> Enticing you. Yeah. Okay.
>> All right. Okay. We're ready for comments from the public. Uh when I call on you, please come to the podium and introduce yourself. You have any comments and Chuck will keep an eye on the Zoom. Any questions from the room?
That was easy. Anything online, Chuck, that you can say? >> Um, so you want to do the announcement or do you want me to just tell raise raise hand function? Let me do that. If anyone online wants to ask a question, could you just uh go down to the reaction buttons and use the raise hand
function and we'll be able to see you? No, I don't see anyone here with um any questions. >> Okay. So then um we need a continuence. So first question is um to what date do
you want to continue? How much time do you think you need? >> What's your next available one you have? >> Is August 13th? And you have to give it to us basically 56. That' be the 27th
if I do my math right. >> Would that material be due? >> Uh basically the Thursday before >> the 20th. Do you want to go to the September 1st September? Can we go back to
>> Why don't we pick a date and then if if you have to move it, let >> the Let's do the second August. >> 27. Yeah. The first one's due to We need to change it. We'll let you know. But yeah. >> Okay. Can I have a motion to continue this to August 27th?
>> I'll move to continue this hearing to August 27th. >> Walter Talbot seconds that motion. Walter Talbot approves that motion. to Michelle in favor in favor. >> Martha Moore in favor. >> Ryan Bow in favor. Okay.
>> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> All right. We'll give them a chance to clear the room. Then we'll move on to our next hearing >> which is 885 Main Street.
This going on up or down anybody online you need to let in next It's too gender. >> Come on in. Get a feel. Okay, everybody. There's a sign there. You can if you wanted close
to >> may not make it back, but make it. >> So, if you're here for 885, we'll get started in a second. Just waiting for >> you didn't you didn't put the sign on it. >> They see the sign where people sign in
>> on the left >> right where the the attendance sheet is. That sign hanging on the Yes. That goes on >> the door. Walter watch >> these are uploaded but
for business. Yeah. >> Okay. So, I'll read the blurb. Continue the public hearing on a notice of intent filed by Primrose School Franchising Company pursuant to Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 131,
Section 40, the Wetland Protection Act, and Northern Writing Wetland Protection bylaw. Section 7.1. The applicant proposes construction of a two-story child care facility and associated structures consisting of a paved parking lot, walkways, retaining wall, playyard,
and storm water infrastructure. Portions of the work are within the 100 foot buffer zone to a bordering vegetated wetland. The application and plans can be viewed during regular business hours at the town hall conservation office 16 low street ready mass and on the
conservation division page under the project by year assessor's map 28 lot 133 D file number 270-0796. Okay. Um do you want to go ahead? you want to introduce yourself and go ahead with
your presentation? Of >> course. Uh, good evening. Josh Klein, Stonefield Engineering and Design. Um, I'm a partner team lead and professional engineer with Stonefield. We're 120 Washington Street, Salem, Mass. Um,
we're um, glad to be kind of back in front of the commission. We've been working really hard over the last several months since we were last here. Um, so I'd like to kind of go through some of the changes. Uh we did submit in kind of early July right before the fourth kind of a a host of materials
kind of both addressing traffic peer review which obviously isn't why we're here tonight but storm water peer review which is why we have Janet here from Horsely Whitten. Um as well as we did go through the meeting minutes from the last meeting and we pulled out kind of anytime there was something that um a
physical item was requested of us or additional information we tried to pull out those individual items. um and provide either a response or a supporting document. So, I'll run through those as well. Um
so, some of the big changes when we were last here, um it was kind of before we had a chance to respond to public safety comments, fire and police. Um as part of their review, we added some additional parking spaces. We provided a loop within the parking area so that a fire
truck can kind of safely turn around. Um, we've worked with the traffic peer reviewer to ensure all traffic peer review questions have been addressed. There's no further kind of comments on that end. Um, and then we've reubmitted addressing the storm water review.
Horsesley Whitten the peer reviewer came back with four comments. One of them being kind of more of a plan change. Since that came back, we've kind of been working with them um kind of to discussing the best solution. And I just would kind of say it's it's not a question of if we can address the
address the one comment remaining. Um sorry, the one kind of engineering comment remaining. It was more of just what do we think the best way to do it. Um and I'll talk a little bit about that later. But it's definitely something our intent was to kind of meet with the commission tonight. we met with CBDC
last week is kind of capture all of the remaining kind of comments into one clean submission that will go out next week to both this commission, the peerreview um in CPDC. Um some of the other kind of highlights on the changes um so the building was shifted towards
Main Street. Um the the play area was consolidated as it's shown on the right hand side of the building. Um the lighting since we were last here we have confirmed all the lighting is dark sky approved or dark sky compliant lighting. The light poles have been reduced in height. There's no light spillage within
the wetland area. The landscaping has been updated. It's an allnative plant selection. Um for the landscaping u we submitted kind of a turfformational packet. Um last time we were here there was some kind of questions about the product that we're using. Um you know have have they done any testing? So we
provided that supporting documentation. Um as well we prepared an updated operations and maintenance manual to kind of discuss trash maintenance of the turf as well as salt management on site. Um we provided a response regarding kind of our our storm water management updates how we you know we meet the mass
D requirements um and meet the storm water um requirements for the project. We discussed snow management in our resubmission. No snow will be stored within the 100 foot jurisdictional boundary. All snow will be hauled from the site. U we do have from GDDR associates um here Andrew who I'll let
him speak to it. We submitted a vernal pool evaluation that was a request at the last meeting. Uh and then one of the items that was requested from the commission was just an impervious coverage summary which we included and it's it's also kind of highlighted into our report. So that's kind of the the
big picture. Um but I think kind of the key items that remain is the project is in full compliance with the town bylaw. There's no disturbance within 25 ft. There's no structures within 35 feet. We meet the tree uh removal requirements.
We meet the mass D storm water regulations. We're working out kind of um the only remaining kind of real technical item um is kind of how we're handling storm water from the drainage kind of the point of interest to the south of the site. And what we're kind
of doing is we're going to propose a small infiltration system in the parking area so that any water that kind of today comes from the neighbor onto our site, we're just going to collect it and infiltrate it on our site to ensure that there's no adverse impact to kind of any neighbors to the south, to the north, or
to the wetland um area. Um and so that's really, you know, kind of the the gist of gist of it. Um we can have you know Andrew kind of go through some of the wetland items and then we're obviously here to you know answer any questions kind of you know talk about any of the
the changes but um there's definitely been a lot of progress that's happened over the last several months. >> Thank you. Uh for the commission's record my name is Andrew Debo a wetland scientist with Goddard Consulting. I was one who originally had flagged the wetlands out here and I was with you all at the first meeting discussing some of
the wetland related items. So the updates on our on our end um at the last meeting we had had some discussion centered around um evaluating the wetlands on this site in case there were a potential vernal pool that had come from um some questions from some of our our neighbors from the commission. Um
what's important to note is offsite to um the northeast there was a potential vernal pool mapped far interior of the wetland system not on our site and then to the southeast there was a certified vernal pool. So this wetland system on our site is sort of a BBW that's in between these areas. it's not mapped as a vernal pool. We had no um indication
that it would be, but it was a request and a conversation to take a look and see if it was. So, what we did was we sent staff, wildlife biologists out there on April 30th of this year, which is that's important because the the peak breeding season that we have in a case like this, um most of the actual egg laying, if you have wood frogs, spotted
salamanders, it occurs from about mid-March to mid April. So, that end of April inspection time is when if there was eggs laid early, they would just be starting to hatch. You would see the larae within the pool. Eggs that are laid late are still within the pool. So, it's sort of that prime time to take a look at everything. And what our wildlife biologist found is that this
area, it really only ponds to depths of about 1 to three inches, which is significantly below the threshold for verbal activity. There was a few very, very small holes that maybe held about six or seven inches of water with with nothing going on in them, and they showed signs that they would infiltrate and dry pretty quickly. So, the report essentially concluded that there was no
burnpool activity within our site. Um, and so that way this this would not be considered a burn going forward, but it was important to get that that documentation. The other addition that we made from a wetland's perspective and this came from a comment from Mass E was um there is a a map certified vernal pool about 100 feet off site to the
southeast of our parcel. So it's it's not on our on our plot of land here. We didn't delineate it because it's on private property not as part of our site. So we didn't include it in our original plans. Mass DP just wanted all um surrounding resource areas to be accounted for. And so what we did is just added that 100 foot buffer zone from that pool um using the approximate
online data to the plans just to show that there is no work within that area at all. And then the other important thing that that does highlight is just from a habitat connectivity standpoint that off-site certified um vernal pool. So when it's certified, it's off-site. It has nothing to do with our project, but it is known to be a habitat for it
could be what frogs could be spotted salamanders, but the general um movement of those species is somewhere within a few hundred feet to to a half mile at most from those vernal pools. And so what we like to see is connectivity left between um the offsite vernal pools on
both sides and our wetland system which um is one of those things that the the writing bylaw works to address. So of course from the state standards we have no performance standards for work within these areas. Um but the the writing bylaw has the 25 foot no disturb zone and what that helps us do is from these
areas when we don't encroach into them we leave connectivity between all the habitats. And so what I'm speaking to here is essentially there's a certified rental pool offsite in this area. There's a potential vernal pool mapped offsite in this area. Neither are impacted by our project, but our wetlands come up through the remainder of the site. And so what this design
does kind of where we stopped our limited development where the 25 foot disturb comes. There is unobstructed sort of undeveloped access from all of the habitats through the rear of the site. So that was the other important thing to see. So I believe that's all we have from a new submitt for wetland related
information but if there are any other questions on that I'm more than happy to address them. Great. >> Thank you. And first of all I want to say thank you for all the updates and everything. So helpful >> any questions from the commission.
>> I'm curious about you're going to treat water from the neighbors. >> I've not seen that before. So get call on Janet and have her also
>> she's online. Sorry about ask your question then we'll come back to that. >> Yeah. So, >> um, yeah, I don't know. I haven't Maybe we're answering it. Maybe not. But, >> okay. So, let's put that aside then.
And, um, I I misstepped. Uh, we need to get a report from what's Janice's last name? >> Jana Bernardo. >> No, that's right. Janet Bernardo, who's uh in in Zoom world. >> Hi. Can you hear me? All right. >> Yep, we can. Thank you. >> Hi. Um, for the record, my name is Janet
Bernardo. I'm a professional civil engineer with the Horsely Whitten group. Horsely Whitten was asked to do a peer review of the stormwater design for this uh for this site and this development. We provided the conservation commission with two letters. One dated June 10th
and the second letter was dated July 8th. Uh, one of our initial concerns, the applicant, you know, there's an existing building on the site with an existing driveway, and the applicant is removing that and building another building with a larger parking lot. Um
and they are proposing a large subsurface chamber system underneath that parking lot and managing the roof runoff and the parking lot runoff which um is is great for storm water management but we were concerned that
they weren't really looking at what was going towards the abutters and we couldn't quite figure out um initially how the contours were looking because they just didn't you know hadn't included the contours of the abuing properties and couldn't tell if the water was coming on the property or
going off the property. Um so they reubmitted their stormwater catchment areas so that we could review that and we felt u more comfortable that they were not increasing any flow towards any
of the abutters with the exception of um I think it's 881 which is I guess on this image um souththeast corner um and What was happening on this
particular project property is there's a low point that crosses between the two properties between 881 and 8.84 885 sorry. Um and they were putting up they were changing the grades and basically
putting up a wall. So there was a small portion of that low point that remained on 881 and and our concern was it would pool there and there was no way for it to get out if water started to pond in that one
area where because so much of the existing site is flat, maybe the water would pull for a little bit and then kind of continue to run off towards the wetland. But we were concerned that this one section um would pond. And so that's
one of the questions and the discussions that we're having is exactly how to manage that. It's just a it's kind of a small low point. It's not doesn't take a large portion of the uh a butter's property, but it is maybe half of the butter's property that would be kind of
flowing in one direction. And um we didn't want it to be all of a sudden causing a an issue on that property because of the grading that's changed on the proposed development. But once we
kind of work that area out, um the applicant has responded to the majority of our comments. We had a few um minor areas that they could adjust with confirming some consistency with the um
the calculations to match the plans. Um there's a few small items that I'm expecting that they can resolve relatively easily and I'm happy to answer any questions. Walter, right? This is your question.
>> Oh, sorry. Um, yeah. I I guess in my experience, I've never heard of treating somebody else's water. >> Well, you don't want to leave it if it's coming onto your site already. Um,
you you can't then cause a problem on the abuing property. It's one of the requirements. >> So, it's unique, right? you have a today you have a house that you know their site drains to our property. Um so what we're doing is we're ensuring that we're
sending less water less runoff to theirs but what we want to ensure ensure is that you know today they have water that goes onto our property and we're not allowing it. And so you know I think what we want to do is work on ensuring that that now doesn't pond or have a
negative impact to them. So, um, the original submission actually included a a pipe that piped that water through the site. Um, and kind of what we are kind of finalizing is whether we're going to do kind of like a stone trench so that water that water that kind of comes down the side of their property can go into
the stone trench and be infiltrated or maybe just kind of a small um, you know, system within the parking lot that picks it up. So it it'll be you know ultimately I I think an improvement to that area and it'll just ensure that you know there's no chance you know that there would be any adverse impact you
know now or in the future for that owner that we're we're going to be actually managing and treating you know half of the water on their site. >> I don't have the diagram in front of me so bear with me. If I remember correctly, you had a cold tech system further up in the
right next pretty much right >> great memory kind of right in the you know before the parking lot was kind of a T-shape but correct there's a underground chamber system kind of in the parking space >> now you have one down further closer to main street >> it would be yeah something you know small either in these parking spaces or
like I said kind of even like a a infiltration trench along the property line we're talking about a really small amount of water kind of what comes down the side of the problem. >> Okay. So, it's not a full coltetech system. It's basically a retention. >> It could be and that's what we're going to kind of finalize is whether it's a
whether it's, you know, five colttech chambers or we're using EDS in this in this case or if it's just a you know three foot wide two foot deep stone trench with a pipe in it along our property line that allows the water to infiltrate. >> I have a major problem with parking
lots. They're always oily and greasy. are you doing anything for oil and grease removal? >> So none of that system is it would be taking their driveway but it doesn't take the parking lot. Um and it will have a kind of it'll have to meet the pre-treatment requirements. Everything
we do has to do it. Um so this our current kind of plan um we have to meet pre-treatment. So um we have a combination I just want to make sure with the latest we did make a few tweaks. Um we have a we have hood and sump deep
hood and sumps um as well as the isolator row within the system for pre-treatment. So um you know again hood and sumps you know help from that capacity when we start talking about things like that. Then we have the isolator row which provides additional treatment as well.
>> Yeah that's pretty good for suspended solids and things like that. But I'm talking about like oil and grease which don't obviously mix. >> Yeah. I mean hood a hood and sump application. I mean that's having the hood and sump right floatables, oil, grease, things like that would float
within a hood and hood and sump. >> Um you know what we've you know we have operations and maintenance plan manuals in place to ensure that the parking area is kind of being wellmaintained. Um we have no issue if you know the commission would want to see a a condition that if you know there's a spill in place that
it has to be handled right away that you know we can ensure that staff's trained on how to handle that or have appropriate phone numbers available. that's typically in all commercial businesses. Um, but you know, again, we're I think the hood and sump having that is a is a good precaution there.
>> There a difference between the hood and sump and an oil and grease separator. >> The the how it manages is very similar. The properties of it are very similar, right? So, you know, the oil water separator does it through chambers where
a a hood and sump application um you know does it through kind of a single hood. So, um, how it separates floatables is the same in an oil water separator as in a hood and sump. It's just a little bit different of a design. >> So, when the system a hood and sump,
which one works better, uh, when it's overwhelmed by a severe storm? >> I think a severe storm would can overwhelm any anything. So, you know, an oil water separator would be overwhelmed just as well as a hood itself would be overwhelmed. I mean they're they're not designed you know oil water separators
are not designed for high flows and you know and that's why so you know we we do a lot of work with mass with mass DP we do a lot of gas station work I mean you know this isn't you know considered a a high pluton loaded property so you know it doesn't have the same kind of you know technology that's in um put into
place but that's why we use things like hood and sumps and why we have enhanced pre-treatment you know is to kind of address those concerns >> so what is Janet Janet Do do you want to weigh in on this conversation? Um, >> I think if you're if the commission is
particularly concerned because of the vernal pool and the wetland system in the in the area, a proprietary separator, a water quality unit of some sort um could be could be added to like there's proposed
um manhole D101 that is right before the isolator row. And instead of a manhole structure, the applicant, you know, could add a type of water quality unit, a storm separator or >> I think a h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h
h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h separator, not a filter system. I think, you know, we would find that acceptable. Um, but that would be the only thing I'd want to clarify. A hydrodnamic separator, not a filtered system. Yeah, I I don't need like a jellyfish
type of a system, but a hydraulic separator would be, you know, that kind of spins the sediment and lets it drop to the bottom and kind of get stuck there and the oils kind of say in the middle through a cylinder. Um, and they're easier to pull out if there's a,
you know, the the back truck comes along and pulls out the oils and sediments. Um it they do seem, you know, they're better than just the catch basin and having it in in the train. So you have your catch basin, then you have your water quality unit before it goes into
the subsurface chamber system. It um could, you know, they could maybe eliminate the isolator row if they choose to or they could keep it and it would be an extra protection as well. >> Yeah, we'd have we'd have no issue with
that. It's a maintenance item. So, just make sure that's part of the maintenance plan. Of >> course. Yeah. No, it's a very popular solution. >> Uh, can I just piggy back on that? So, you mentioned that you maybe uh one of
the options was to put in a trench along the property 881. Is it 881 Main Street? >> I was wondering if you know what soil types you have there. Was there a test pit? uh can we ensure infiltration uh throughout that system?
So that's my question. >> Yeah, we definitely can. We have a test pit right around where the 11 is. U we did I think at least three if not four. U very consistent uh with but that with that one being closed, we're very confident with the soil data. >> Okay. And that also will be added to the
operation and maintenance plan. >> Correct. And Yep. Exactly. >> It looks like there people >> Sorry. Yeah, got distracted. Yep. I don't have a any more question. I was just thinking because he was talking
about it. >> Okay. Um I'm just sort of comparing the original plans to the new plans. Um you've added parking spaces which I gather means you've added more imperous
parking lot surface >> correct >> um how are you um accounting for that storm water wise >> so is in um all the submissions that Janet's office or horseley went and reviewed included the latest layout. So
they actually never reviewed um the first version that you saw but the updated storm water management report accounted for it. So the the storm water basin within the parking area handles that area. >> So is it got more Coltech chambers? >> Um there were a few chambers added to it. Yes.
>> Okay. And in your original plan you had a couple of trees that you were saving with tree protection fences. Um and it looks like maybe they are now inside the parking lot. Um, so are you saving any
trees >> within >> within the limit of work? >> Um, we so we did update the demolition and tree removal plan. We are saving trees within the limit of work. Um, and we meet the tree replacement bylaw. So
we kind of highlighted so on C3 you see the X's. Um, and then we included kind of the tree replacement requirements. And then on the landscaping plan C10, what we've done is everything in red that's circle that highlights a proposed
replacement tree um being kind of counted towards those replacement requirements. So all of those um are not only within the 100 foot buffer. We did try to put kind of majority of that plantings within that 35 to 25 foot area to kind of restore that the area between
the 25 foot no touch and the 35 foot no structure. We try to concentrate as much of the plantings in there both to provide kind of a screening element but also to kind of increase the native vegetation in that area. >> Okay. So you are cutting down all the
trees now and planting new ones along the edge. >> So not not all the trees are getting cut down. I mean, you know, again, within the LOD, I'm counting towards the right hand side. There's three trees, a 16, a I believe it it's tough to read on the
smaller plan. I have either maybe a 20 or a 30 and then a 10 inch. Um, but again, we we do meet the the tree bylaw. So, anything we're cutting down, we're replacing, kind of ensuring we meet all the requirements. And then beyond that, we're adding a bunch of landscaping
across the site. Um, you know, >> so when you're looking at C3, the trees you're saving are right above the box that says something this located within there's three trees right above that box. >> Correct. Those are the three just
looking at it I kind of highlighted. >> Okay. So, will you be putting tree protection fences around those trees? >> Definitely. Okay. >> And we can ensure that's shown if it's not already. I can double check that is
>> I don't see any other gray. >> Yeah. So, we do on C9 just to ensure we do have tree protection fence showed on the soil erosion control plan. >> All right. >> And we also have a tree protection fence shown along the entire limit of disturbance. So, I'm sure standard
condition, your order conditions will require us to kind of stake the limit of disturbance. We'll put a fence up and then what we like to always show is a um a tree protection fence along that as well and that's shown on the so erosion control plan. >> Um
>> so how far away is the on the plan? Sorry. Uh does your tree protection fence um away from the trunk the tree? >> You do the drip line or are we doing uh three times the DBH?
our plan. I'm not sure if we currently call for I think we're happy to kind of follow um the require um so we show no closer than six feet from the tree trunk. So I think we look to on
on note number u three we would look to install at the drip line of the existing tree or tree cluster to but no closer than six feet from the trunk if necessary. So, how do you determine that number?
Seems I mean is it tied into something uh six feet away? Because I've mentioned the two that I know about which seems to be uh in some literature which I could provide you if needed. But three times
the DBH or which may be maybe six feet away. >> Yeah, it depends on the size of trees. Yeah, it could be further away. really we're we're happy to, you know, if there's a kind of a standard that the commission would like us to follow, we're happy to work with it. You know, in reality, I mean, we do work in
>> um, you know, in urban settings and suburban settings kind of in on larger lots and you have to have some bit of flexibility, right? There's times where you need to get construction equipment in. Um, so I think six feet is a nice minimum protection, right? If we need to drive by to kind of move equipment and a
lot of times with tree protection fencing, I'm sure you see, we adjust it, right? We may set it up initially kind of the full drip line and then as we have to do some of the fine-tune work, we might have to pull that in. Uh but we want to just make sure is everything safe and protected.
>> All right. So if if you put put it out there and it it needed to be closer because of construction or because of driving past, would you be able to protect the soil from compaction? >> I think we would ensure that the tree would be com would be protected. Um and
we would do whatever we need to to kind of ensure that happens. So, I you know, I think we're we're very, you know, I'm kind of looking at the the plan and kind of what we're proposing. Um, you know, if we need to kind of move it in, I think we can do so safely if we need to keep it out there. Uh but I think what
we can do in the final submission is you know ensure that we take a look at kind of the um all the trees kind of within the limit of disturbance ensure that we feel confident that they can be protected and if they can't be we'll ensure that we show that they're being removed and then replaced in accordance with the requirements.
>> And would you be okay with a condition about uh compaction and about you know putting out plates or putting out some sort of surface that you could drive over? >> Yeah. I think within within reason. I mean, again, you know, I don't, you
know, at the end of the day, Primrose doesn't want to build a beautiful project and have a a nice mature tree, you know, die a couple years later. We want to ensure that the vegetation lasts as well. >> Thank you. >> So, to follow up on that, when you're
talking about maybe moving the protection in closer, who would be judging that wherever they wanted to put it was safe? Um, you know, we've seen it a few different ways. I mean, you know, um, our office as, you know, professional
engineers will go out there. We've seen using, you know, our office works has licensed landscape architects on staff. Um, you know, sometimes meeting with the conservation agent on site, you know, depending on the final order of conditions and there may be weekly meetings or there might be monthly
reports. Um, I can just take a quick look. I mean this site will require make sure I'm a lot of listening it's over an acre right disturbance >> yes >> yeah so that we'll have a you know there
will be a swift report there will be weekly there will be swift inspections so I mean that's really where a lot of times these items are tracked >> will your on-site project manager be aware of this and the necessity for it and our concerns about loosening up >> if it's part of you know and you can you
know you could put is part of that condition that it's, you know, part of the SWIP report that we include, you know, kind of evaluating, you know, and ensuring protection of the trees because the contractor will have to follow the SWIP. And then either if our office does
the SWIP inspections or if another licensed engineer does it, they'll have it right in the SWIP. And I think in Janet's review, she noted that that SWIP would be a condition of your approval that you would need a SWIP in hand prior to any work being done, which totally makes sense.
During the last presentation, you think we had contour lines >> and you were not happy about the contours around the play area. >> Right hand. >> I forgotten exactly what that was. >> Well, >> but there was a problem with things at
different level. It didn't make any sense. >> Yeah. Yeah. What I had been asking about is how they were creating this flat play area on a very steep hill. And their answer was they've got a retaining wall at the south end
that's sort of half the differential and then a retaining wall at the north side that's the other half the differential. So that a kid's only going to fall six feet, not 14 feet. >> Good. that that was the answer I got. Um
>> well, let's just I think appropriate for the record, right? These players are are fully fenced in. No kid's going to fall off a retaining wall. We also have a fence on the on the high side on Francis along Francis Drive. So, just want to be very clear. There's obviously public participation here tonight. We don't
want to make make people to feel right. Children are going to be safe. Primrose has many playgrounds. other daycare operators both that our office has worked it with that I've seen, you know, kind of across the area, they have retaining walls around their play areas and they are very safe.
>> Yeah. Um the you said that it's dark sky compliant. Did you give us a um a phototric map like the one we just saw for the previous presentation? And does it zero
out along the edge of the wetland? >> We did sheet C8 is the lighting plan we submitted. Um and then this was the submission on July 2nd. Um and we also included the cut sheets for the lighting um confirmed
that they are dark sky approved. So Meridia very you know LSI makes a very nice fixture and they are dark sky approved fixtures. So the July >> plans are are Rev 2626 2025. They're
online as well as in the in the packet that was submitted. >> Okay. >> And correct. There's no lighting. Um no spillage within the wetland. >> Okay. And um also the way I asked the last people um the trees that you've put
down here, we're looking for true natives, not cultivars. >> Everything is true native. >> Thank you. Okay. >> Anybody else? >> Uh that's it. >> Um have you seen um Janet's report?
>> We have. Um so I would concur with the suggestion that uh you provide a written response to the comments. I know you have addressed at least one of them the D comment but if you give us a a written response to cover all the places where
she had some comment that would be good. >> Yeah just to so we she submitted an initial kind of report maybe four or five pages. We address kind of the majority of the comment. There's out of all of that list that you saw, she sent an updated letter. There's only four
remaining items. >> You have less work to do. >> Correct. We do. >> Um any other questions, comments from you? >> Uh I want to know a question about the process, but I was going to ask about the um the play area and I know that
it's turf and what is the infill for that play area? So, it it's called Envirroll is the product they use. It's not a rubber material. It's not a tire or anything like that. It's a non-toxic, non-flammable material,
>> but doesn't have crumbs in it. >> Um, the Envirroill is the fill material. So, it's a a natural sand that it's coated in a polymer to be kind of antibacterial. Um, and it's it's fully reusable. Um, so they do reuse it
continuously. So, it's not like you need to bring in rubber or anything like that. There'll be no absolutely no rubber in the turf, >> right? And maintaining um the envirill within the turf area and if it spills out of it, that's part of the
operation and maintenance plan where that it creeps out and it needs to be broomed back in. I'm only talking of my knowledge about um turf and crumb rubber. So, I'm not sure this reacts the same way, but I'm sure in a heavy
rainstorm, we're getting some movement. >> So, yeah, it definitely doesn't react the same as crown rubber. We did in the resubmission because turf was a a topic at the first meeting. So, the the wall, the entire play area has a a minimum six inch kind of lip around it. So, it kind of ensure that anything in there is
contained. uh the envirill can't flow through the turf surface. So it can't go into the ground um or into any like of the kind of storm water management system, it's fully kind of contained within the turf area. Um and we have added kind of a maintenance um portion
to the turf. Um again, if any envirill were to leave the site, which we it was not anticipated to, that they would have to ensure that it's kind of cleaned up and properly taken care of. And uh there's a small piece of turf in our last uh discussion and this commission
doesn't consider replacing the turf um as maintenance. They there'll be a condition we have to return to theation commission for approval and that's usually every 10 years. this is how long I believe these things last and we just
want to make sure that uh the latest technology is used and you're up to date with any of the new standards from D or you know uh the state or or the or the government. >> No issue. Uh then my question about
process is um with uh I just want to make sure Janet has enough uh in the budget to uh and to ask for us if if you think you're needed at the next meeting and do you have enough in the budget to at least review this next round? Janet,
>> I uh we have enough in the budget to review the next round. Um I don't think I have enough in the budget to go to attend a second hearing. >> Oh, then I would ask the commission if So, they're gonna, you know, we I believe that they're going to come to a conclusion and Janet's going to say that
she's fine with this unless Walter has a question or someone else and wants to ask our consultants um specifically that question because of fact our consultant we may uh we may want to ask that um
they come to the next meeting the next meeting is mo most likely when the vote happens. >> Yeah. I mean, it just seems to me that you're talking about four left to address. You should be able to
get those right, the satisfaction of Janet. So, I think we can go ahead with the assumption you'll get it right and Janet will be okay with it. And in her review before the meeting, I would expect that she would be satisfied. And
if not, then we'd have to um ask for a continuation and get some more budget money for Janet to come to a meeting. >> Thoughts on that? >> Um some Yeah. So I guess if you said So if you
said you found it important that Janet was available for the next meeting just in case there's a question so we can close this off, I would know what to do. If you said, "I'm not going to have Janet come to the next meeting because I think we can ask all our questions
tonight and I feel satisfied that this is your last opportunity." So, I would instruct the commission that way. I would know what to do. But waiting until we don't know would only extend this permit, which I'm sure the applicant doesn't want.
So, I'm I'm I don't know what could come up, but again, Walter's checking it out. They're going to be changing some stuff. We have one last week to review. >> It helps with the ch I mean, I would, you know, in abundance of caution if you
want to approve and, you know, we we want to make it as smooth of a next meeting as possible. Um, so if it makes it easier just to get the approval tonight to request the additional funding to ensure that Janet has the funding and maybe I wouldn't suggest an approval tonight. I was
>> at the next >> at the next one. >> Yeah, correct. >> Yeah, we're happy to we're happy to provide the funding to ensure that she can be there if it makes the commission more comfortable. >> That's probably the safest thing to do to make sure you can get a vote the next
time. So, and it it should be fairly minimal. So, if you're amendable to that, let's do that. >> Janet, are you available on the 13th? Yeah, I'm returning from a a trip, but I will be around um that evening
and um or typic so I assume um that there's you know could be another meeting or something like tonight there was another an intent. So my task to attend a hearing is $600. So it would be similar but it would be the same. Okay.
>> All right. That that's amendable here. So, why don't we plan on that then that um you'll do an updated uh plan. Janet can review it and ideally we close it out next time. >> And and if you can get um you can get
the check to town hall as soon as possible, that would work out the best. >> Okay. So, >> certainly before and it needs to clear before the next meeting. So, keep that in mind. So before we go forward, um we can open up for uh comments from the
public. Um if you're going to speak, please come to the podium, introduce yourself, and I'll call you out one by one with the magic finger, and Chuck will watch online for anybody raises their hand. If you're online and you want to speak, find the reaction
option in the lower right of your screen and on there, you'll see a raised hand function and a hand visible. Anybody in the room want to speak? >> Somebody's gonna speak to me on the Zoom. >> Sure. Yeah, I was just checking the room
first. So, there's nobody here. Okay. Chuck, who do you have online? >> Let me see. Okay, here we go. Um, >> is it Dennis? >> Sure. Uh Dennis, you can speak. >> So So Dennis, welcome. Can you please introduce yourself and your address?
>> We can't hear you. Are you muted? >> Which makes him allowed to unmute himself. >> Yeah, he can do all those himself. Unmute and turn on your camera if you feel like it. There he is. Okay. Now, can you see and hear me?
>> I can hear you. Yeah, I can see you. >> Okay, great. Well, uh, it's nice to meet you all. Uh, again, Dennis Murphy from Hill Law. Uh, I'm an attorney in Boston and I represent Lori McKenna who lives at 34 Duck. That is the property to the
west of this site. Uh, and significantly downgradient uh, by about 25 feet. If you look at the grading plan, um I appreciate that we've made good progress in the
uh considerations of uh the impacts from the project, but there are a couple of issues that I think have not been fully addressed. So, let me if I could just take those in order. When the applicant first did a site
evaluation, he hired a uh consultant named Whiteststone and there was a report from March uh March 14th where they did four test pits and one of them made a comment about the
need for groundwater mounting and in my review of Mr. client submission and Miss Bernardo's peer review. I don't see that that mounding was ever done. As I understand it, the
reason for the mounding analysis is because there's some fill at that location that was observed in test pit 2. And um it the concern is that the uh original
grade that is now buried will act as an impermeable barrier. So you could see that in the uh submission from uh whitest stone from March. So that's my first comment. Uh whether that's been done, does it still need to be done and
what might it show? Uh my second comment has to do with um the concern about the relative elevations of the property. Miss McKenna's property is the one that is
where the certified vernal pool is >> and the potential vernal pool which is maybe just a low area. So one thing she does not need is more water coming to her property. Uh and
so the concern is uh in in the discussion about addressing this for the abuing properties. I know it was and there was discussion tonight about the effect on
the other side, the east side properties, but I'm not certain that there's been any evaluation on the downgradient property to the west that's owned by Miss McKenna. So, that's my my second comment. Uh originally I was only
going to make those two comments but then you all started talking about turf which happens to be um an area of uh professional expertise. I've had several cases involving artificial turf and the one observation
I want to make that no one else has made is that this play area is at least half or more is within the 100 foot buffer zone. And in all the cases I've had, every uh testing sample of turf contains
POS and other kinds of chemicals of emerging concern that are probably inconsistent with leeching into a a buffer zone. So I'll stop there and see if anybody has questions and I hope that these issues can also be reviewed before
we close this hearing. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um Janna, can I ask you first to talk about the test pitch? I know you wrote about it in your report. >> So I would want to kind of go back and look at that whitest stone letter and
test pit two. But typically a mounding analysis is done when a system has between it it's required to have a minimum of 2 feet of separation to groundwater. And if it has four feet of separation to groundwater, a mounting
analysis is not required. But if it has somewhere between two and four, a mounting analysis is required. Um, so I am embarrassed to say that I don't remember if they needed to do one or
not, but if they needed one because they didn't have adequate separation, it's one of the things we always look for. Um, I'm trying to like go through. Usually we say it in standard three,
but they I because we didn't make a comment about it. I'm guessing they had the four feet of separation that's required. I usually even say that out loud because people ask the question all the time. Um
>> just for to help, we have 5' 6 in from seasonal high to bottom of stone. um in six and 6 feet 6 in to bottom of chamber. So over the 4 foot requirement. >> So that's what the mass storm water
handbook has a specific um requirement under in volume 3 chapter 1 page 28 because we do talk about mound analysises quite regularly. Um, and it is a requirement that happens if the
storm water system is has less than 4 ft of separation. So if they had more than if they had 5 and 1/2 ft as suggested by the applicant, then they would not be required to do one. >> Okay. Thank you.
Um, so the other the other comment was about the play area part of it being within the 100 foot buffer zone >> and the burl comment about the burl. >> What was that?
>> Um, does not want more water flowing into her vert pool. >> Yeah. Do you want to speak to extra water there? >> Yeah, no problem. I can speak towards that too if you'd like if >> Yeah, maybe Janet you go first and I want you
>> the the my my looking at the watersheds the majority of the property flows towards the wetland which is towards the west of the site. Um I don't see that property in the address but I assume it's on the other side of the wetland
further a little further west. The applicant according to the mass storm water handbook is not allowed to increase their peak flow or peak volume from their property under existing conditions to proposed conditions. So that that's what they had to prove that
they were not increasing the flow of towards that wetland was their primary objective. But they also have to show that they're not increasing it towards any of the abuing properties that they could flow down gradient of. Um but my
guess is that this property is towards the is on the west side of the wetland and they are not increasing the flow towards that wetland and that's what this chamber system is all about. >> Just for clarification uh the 34 duck
property is a direct abutter that shares the property boundary to the west. The entire west boundary is owned by uh the McKenna family. And will there be another version of the
storm water report? The one that's online is from several months ago. >> There's a new version. >> Okay. Thank you. >> It It's dated July uh maybe July 8th,
July July 4th, July 3rd. We'll be sure that gets posted if it's not there already. >> It's dated June 26, 2025. >> Okay.
>> Yeah, I can keep it brief. I think um Mr. Murphy was referencing a soil evaluation that was done by whitest stone. Um groundwater moundings not required. It's it won't be an issue. Um I think relative elevations was the the term used and uh we do look at the
surrounding wershed. So we you know as you know both our office as well as of course we wouldn't have to ensure that there is no adverse impact to any of the neighbors that includes the property to the to the east and it includes that entire property line. So we ensure there's there's no increase in water there's no adverse impact to that
property there's no adverse impact to any vernal pools um as well. And then um turf was mentioned I think some vague comments made we we did submit testing that was provided by the manufacturer. I want to make it clear that there's no PIFA um in the materials and that was
included and I did see it as of um this morning at least it was on the websites it was available. >> Okay. Any other followup there, Mr. Murphy? >> No, thank you for the opportunity. Uh I I think we're talking about two
different things. The Whit Stone report on page two uh in section 2.2 says the former top soil layer observed in the test pits may act as an
impermeable layer below the proposed infiltration system. Whiteststone recommends a mounding analysis be completed to determine the impact of the former top soil later to design of the system. I I think their concern was
different than whether or not there was adequate separation above estimated seasonal high groundwater. They were concerned actually about an impermeable barrier that they they physically observed within that test pit.
>> Yeah. So what Mr. Murphy's bring up is not an uncommon thing. I mean there's plenty of sites kind of across the state that are have film material. Um so we're happy to evaluate it. We'll kind of ensure in our our resubmission will include kind of a statement on it. But typically what happens is if there's a
layer of top soil like that it can be excavated and kind of you know naturally draining material it can be replaced. So very typical item that we encounter in storm water management >> and I refer you to Jan's report uh 2E where she says something similar to
that. So you can look at that. >> Yeah we can put a little more detail for for it. >> Okay. So before we move on, uh I was intrigued um Dennis about your comments um around or surrounding the um turf and
you said that uh NOP fast and all that PPD quome all that all that um we need to be concerned about. Were those levels from your uh understanding of this um a health risk or just an environmental
risk? And there is a vernal pool within 100 ft from what I heard of this property. >> More than that, I think >> um and so could be a concern should be a concern for the commission. This commission
isn't uh Yeah. So this commission is willing to listen, I guess. Well, I I can tell you in my professional experience a um if the if the wetland is tributary to
water supply, I would absolutely be concerned. If it's an isolated wetland and it's not tributary, not connected to the groundwater that is your zone 2, uh then it is only a concern for the plants
and animals and not the people. uh so somewhat less concerned. Uh what I think is the the toughest thing for any regulatory body like a conservation commission is that uh we're still learning and understanding and uh you
know regulations are still being developed. Um, and so, uh, good practice would be to keep this stuff out of the buffer zone. And if there were another place on the site, that would be ideal
if, if it could be accommodated. >> So, I think that's what we looked at is we ensured the product that we're proposing has no PAS in it or any of the containments. We did submit that testing. So in an instance where you know older artificial turfs and things
like that before you know there were issues but we are using a product all the things that Mr. Murphy's referencing you know we did submit testing that show that's not in this product. >> So the so the shock pad and the fibers all that
>> they tested it for all >> it's just it's just intriguing because it's so big around the state. I hear a lot about it. And he said that he had a few cases. Um, and so, uh, Mr. Murphy, do you do you, uh, recognize the product
Envirrill and is it is it the fibers and all that shock pad is made out of the same company? >> Yeah, we did submit, I'm sure Mr. Murphy reviewed, they're from Recreational Group kind of all the information. I I have not uh I've been on trial until
yesterday and I we work with a a chemist who looks at this stuff for us. She's testifying expert. She was the uh Oakluff's case which is kind of famous. >> Susan Chapnik. >> It's actually Kristen Melo. >> Okay.
>> Um she's testifying now in the Milton turf case. And so this is not Let me just be clear. This is not turf on top of an aquifer like in those cases. So I'm not I'm not
trying to say this is a major red flag, but it is a twoacre site and it is just a play area. If there's another spot, we should move it and get it out of the buffer zone. Well, I I think that uh this Envirroill
and the documentation that we that we read uh about this product and that it doesn't have um PAS is uh more than I've read before
when I uh reviewed one in uh down the Cape and then uh in the Arlington uh conservation commission. So, um, I was satisfied, but I was I was interested in what you what your thoughts were on it. So, I appreciate that. Thank you.
>> Sure. >> Any more comments online? >> Um, we got someone out here. I'll look. >> I got that. >> None online right now. >> Okay. Do you want to come to the podium and introduce yourself, please?
Hi, Steve Mays, 59 Francis Drive. Uh, just a couple more comments. Uh, I guess we'll start with the playground since that's where we left off on the lower right hand corner of the playground extending to the upper right hand
corner. Then again from the left hand side to that same corner. It looks like there's drainage there that goes down to a scour hole. that's stone lined. If that is indeed drainage, why doesn't
that go through the storm water system? And there's another drain that looked very similar that goes from the handicap spots out to just about halfway in front of the playground with another scour hole. I'm not that familiar with it
technically, but to me that looks like drainage is going to the wetland area. And if that's the case, that's where the slope is downhill and that's where the 34 Duck Road property is going to be. Um, the other thing I had was on the
snow removal. The maintenance documents as they sit now say there's no storage or none of the snow will be put within the 100 foot buffer zone, which does encompass, if I remember right,
good portion of the parking lot. What happens at three o'clock in the morning? Thank you for the comment. When the plow driver is out there doing his best, push that snow around to get it away from that area, what keeps it from going up over the side and again down
the slope into the wetland areas. The other comment I had was the plantings that are sitting out there on the southern side um go about from the corner of the building to about twothirds of the way
into the parking or the playground area and they stop. So there's no more planting buffer between the playground area and 59 Francis Drive property and the Duck Road property on the right hand
side that's all left open for chain link fence and fall protection and all the other fun stuff. Why aren't we having a buffer zone? Whether it be plantings all the way around or a vinyl fence similar to if you look at um there's another uh
daycare gddard. They've got a vinyl fence that goes all around the property shielding the children, the parking area, everything from all the abuing neighbors. There's also what I'm looking at is discrepancies in some of the
documentation. And again, I could be wrong. The landscaping plans that I could see on C10 were showing that weed control was going to be done bi-weekly, March through October. Fertilizer was monthly, March through November.
Insect control was going to be done in May and then bi-weekly June through November. But the operation and maintenance plan that I saw for 73 says no pesticides except single spot treatment with approval.
No pesticides and herbicides within the 100 foot buffer zone and fertilizers will be limited to spring and fall only. So you get two documents with two different sets of setup. So which one is the correct one and
which one isn't? Um, and again, why can't all the documents match as we're doing all these? I know there's a lot of documents, but there's a lot of stuff here. Same thing with lighting. Um, the last lighting document I could see shows
20 foot high, excuse me, a poll with a 20 foot high setup and another document shows that it's been lowered to 15 feet. So, we've got two documents, two different heights, um, back and forth. Uh, another comment
that was made in I believe it was our first meeting was that with the exception of the parking lot and the building doors for safety reasons or security reasons, all other parking or all other lighting was going to be shut off approximately 1 hour after the
building closes. Is that still the case? It's not in any of the documentation, but it was mentioned at the very first meeting that that would be done. Uh likewise, it's now saying at prior meeting, not for this particular board,
that snow would be stored up closer to the driveway area, the entrance. And tonight, we heard that all snow will be hauled from the site. So again, two different stories. Um I'd like to see if we can get that narrowed down if
possible so that we have one set of stuff that goes all the way through this. We could. And I think that just about covers it. Thank you. Appreciate >> your storm water question would be a good one for Janet.
>> Okay. Uh Janet, do you want to address the storm water question and then if you have any response to it, you can just >> the scour holes that he made the first comment he had. >> Yes. >> Is that what you mean? Um,
so the system the the pipes that are shown that underneath the turf that is an under drain system that will so it doesn't um they want to make sure
that the any water that's collecting in that turf area like it will infiltrate through the ground through this material. But if there's an over abundance, it will go out through that scour hole. But it's this like currently
a lot of water goes in that direction. But this is just the under drain. So it doesn't need to go through a storm structure system because it's not an increase of runoff and it's um has doesn't need any treatment because it's
not an impervious surface. There's no roadways that it is um over. So, it's not managing any of any significant runoff. It's just the under drain underneath the turf material. The other
scar hole is the is really the main um flowing point from this pole project site. And the structure that he mentioned that's in the handicap parking spaces is the outlet control structure that's coming out of the chambers.
That's not um an inlet. It's not a catch basin. It's um the outlet of the chamber system. And that outlet does is piped to the sky hole that's closest to the wetland. Um and that's the discharge
point. That's the point that they needed to confirm. was not increasing from existing conditions >> and going towards that wetland. >> Janet, is the water that that infiltrates through the uh the turf field considered clean? >> Yes.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> You want to address some of the other questions? >> Yeah, I can be quick. I mean the the really the under drain is also only there because of the retaining wall. We just want to ensure that there's no water backing kind of sitting behind the wall, but a lot of the water will go right through the turf into the ground.
Um snow removal very typical they'll have loader and different equipment they have to haul snow offsite just to I know there's different meetings but um you know what we talked about originally is there's some small areas in the front of the site but in order to make things very simple and this will be in our updated on&m snow will be hauled off the
site so you know any company they hire will have to have the right equipment a loader um a hauler etc question on that so taken off site immediately it won't be piled up and Correct. Well, yeah, they'll, you know, they'll bring, um, they have other
promos, has other locations that do it. Um, so they have different equipment. Some use Bobcats, you know, small loaders. They bring them in, grab it, they go >> um the landscape plan. So, O andM the O and M will be recorded. That is the document that supersedes that, but we
will ensure in the next submission. We're happy to kind of make sure that the general landscaping notes in the O andM match and make it very clear. And then the latest plan did show a 15 foot lighting. I I think the you know there's a lot of materials across two different boards, but that's why I think our goal is to have one final kind of submission
so we can come in here with a um clean application for the commission. >> Uh and what about what about the question about whether the lights will be shut off an hour after? So that remains I mean they'd have any kind of emergency lighting um at just at the
front door but we have no issue with that. >> Okay. So the the output of that whole conversation is to make some effort to be sure the documents uh speak the same way any discrepancies can be cleaned up.
>> I uh another question. So, um, so salt and sand on the driveway is something that we've, you know, we frown on here on the commission. What are you proposing for treatment for ice and
snow? >> So, in the OE O andM manual, we reference MA any approved mass mass DOT product. So, like a magnesium based product. >> Okay. Uh, we do have some conditions on for for snow removal. I'm going to send
those to you and see if those are acceptable. I can't remember them at this moment. So, I'll just send them to you. You let me know if those those work for you. >> Yeah, we're we're very I mean very comfortable. You know, any any requirement will have to meet when it comes to to deicing.
>> Okay. Uh, so at this point Oh, hang on a second. Just two other >> excuse me can come up and >> is there any comments that were already made about the um the plantings for the buffer and the fence your response to
those >> um the I think the buffer referenced is the wrong long Francis Drive. Um so in total um I believe it's about 28 new trees being planted there. Um there is a fall protection fence shown in the high side.
It's not a solid fence. It's just a kind of a fall protection fence. Um and then there is a fence kind of shown again another a fall protection fence kind of along the entirety of the wetland area. So kind of there kind of the parking area is fully continued.
>> So the question was why is there a gap and there's uh three parallel lines between the tree and the last arborite. Do you know why they didn't plant in between those parallel lines? >> Yeah, I mean these >> right there. Yeah,
>> these lines here are an old kind of easement um easement. Um but the the intention was really to kind of um infill and screen kind of the building. I mean, this area of the playground is lower. So, it's not like you have kind of a playground that's that's higher up
or kind of a raised view. Um this sits kind of lower about somewhere between six and 10 feet depending on where you're standing. So um there is you know kind of some additional trees placed some more screening kind of placed on the east side. Um so the kind of intention was to kind of pull that that
screening um kind of along the building in in the majority of the play area. >> But I will point out point out that screening is not in that jurisdiction. It's it's more you know kind of trees, how many trees, things of that nature. But >> yeah, none of this screening is part of
the tree replacement requirement. So it's all kind of additional on top of what your placement >> came by. >> So that's not within our jurisdiction in that spot. I >> think it is >> it's in with it's within the 100 foot
buffer. I don't know if you know again if screening of buildings and play structures you know falls in the the purview but I think the question was you know why? I think the the intention was to provide screening along the building and the play area. We did not extend it
the full play area. Um that wasn't done, you know, intentionally to try to kind of avoid something. There is a large mature tree located on the property on Francis Drive. You can see that large strip line. Um so there is some mature vegetation there. We're proposing a new tree about 25 ft away and then an
additional uh two, four, five, six plantings along the east side. So, you know, I think a nice kind of grouping of screening, but that is those weren't um part of the kind of the tree replacement calculations. Um >> it actually looks to me like that
southern edge is outside the 100 foot buffer zone. >> The >> your 100 foot line goes through the park playground. >> Yeah, sorry. You are correct. The 100 foot line comes kind of right through here. It's already planned. I can pull
it up the full size set if you like. But you are correct. That area is outside of your jurisdiction. There is like the 100 foot line. All that is outside. Okay, at this point um I think it's clear that u we need a continuence
continue to the next meeting which is August 13th >> that we find that acceptable. >> You can request a continuence to August 13th. >> No, I just want to make sure that that was enough time for you to make your updates. Definitely is.
>> I move that we continue this hearing till uh August 13th. >> Walter Talbert seconds. Walter Talbert in favor. >> More in favor. >> In favor. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. Thanks everyone.
>> Thank you. >> You're all done. You can leave and the room can cool down. >> Thank you. >> Good night everyone. Thanks >> Janet. >> Can you send send that paperwork to me
requesting the additional funds? >> Yep. No problem. >> We'll put it is the check made out to the town. Correct. >> Town of writing. Yeah. >> So, we have some quick stuff. So, the next one is uh on 717 2025. I received
an email >> uh from Angelo Scappa that they would like to withdraw without prejudice. >> Okay. So, we need a motion >> to 695. They want to withdraw from who's
>> 695 street5 >> is the anrad across the street from >> Okay, >> that's the part I was missing. Sorry. >> I move that we continue that we withdraw 695 Pearl Street without prejudice.
>> Walter Talbert seconds. Walter Tabet's in favor. >> Does that mean they have to resubmit the whole process? >> Yes. If someone comes back, they'd have to resubmit. But without prejudice is, I don't know, some court term, but basically they can. We won't hold that
against them. And they're allowed, this particular group is allowed to resubmit. >> In favor, >> they felt like it. >> Arthur Moore in favor. >> Ryan B in favor. Okay. Fifth and seven long word. Have you heard anything from them? >> So yeah, they were supposed to show up
and uh I'm just going to make sure that uh you don't see anyone here for that. And I and I I don't Is anyone here for 57 Longwood? Uh the request was to um I got from uh Libby Wallace of Hayes
Engineering said that they could show up, but even if they don't show up, I think that we had discussed it enough to think that they would want at least a month out. Um, and so the devel So the original request was to create some bat
boxes and some just give them to us >> and we didn't have anyone to install them and we said that's not usually what happens. You you provide them and get them installed. And so we went from that to now they're going to go to a landscape
and they're going to provide enough mitigation landscaping that they think they won't need they're not going to do the box. So at this point why don't we continue and we'll wait to see whatever they offer for >> Exactly. So I think they have a plan in other words. >> Yeah. And when we see it then we can
decide how to deal with it. >> Right. So a month out would be >> August 27th. >> I move we continue 57 Longwood to August 27th. >> Walter Talbertson favor. Walter Talbertson pardon me. Walter Talbert
seconds. Walter Talbertson in favor. >> In favor in favor. Mark in favor in favor. All right. Next one. 692 Pearl Street. >> Uh Rick Kio member also the applicant and I will be recusing myself.
>> Okay. Um and there's nobody else. So any comments questions from the commission at this point? Uh, the new material was a planting plan submitted by the
applicant. >> Can we put the planting plan up on the screen? Yay. >> So, and my wife and I, we met with Northeast Nursery. Um, we had them come on, we had her come on the property, Lara, and came up with a game plan on
how we're going to replace the trees that we are taking down. Um, I believe we have enough for I more than what we uh need to for the replacement. I think it equates to almost 24 trees. Um, we
have a diversity of trees. Uh, Mount Laurels, I think there's about 17 of them. um all along the lot line or on the ditch. Um um some abber excuse me, Chuck, help me out with this one.
>> Abbervites. We have I think seven of them. And it's going to start from where the large uh pine tree on the left side of the house in between the two my neighbor and I. Yeah. There's a there's
an area in between the um between the stump the uh the roots where we can start the abbravades. Um it's about seven and then it goes into our jurisdiction where my wife would like to put her own hydrangees of her choice. We
she loves hydrangees. That's not a native but that would be in our jurisdiction. And up front um in the front of the house we have a number of different uh plants. Another rod denendum on the side. Um um some ruby
spice. Um so after the Mount Lars, we got some Ruby Spice summer sweets bunch of there. And then we we decided to go with the blueberries, but Lara recommended that we have to go with two or more varieties of these blueberries. Um, behind the
shed, Martha, you mentioned at the last meeting, great spot for red maple. Earlier, you had something to say about a red maple. Is that red maple suggested or recommended? I think in one of the projects earlier, you said something about a red maple.
>> Yeah, red maples are great. >> Okay. But I just want to make sure like this is the right type of red maple. You had something to say earlier. >> Acer rub red maple. That would be the true native red maple. >> Okay. Just wanted to make sure. Thank you. Right. But you you know like when you look on the sign on the tree, you
don't want it to say like autumn glory underneath the words red maple. You want it to just say ace or rub. >> Yeah. And Laur said it would be beautiful behind the shed. Unfortunately, I have a shed right there that would be blocked in the view. So >> it'll get tall enough to see. Um you know Chuck told me if anything ever
happened to that shed, I'd have to move it anyways. So, there's an opportunity there eventually to probably move it to the left side by in my jurisdiction in the back when that day does come. Probably not. Um, that would make it look appealing. See that red maple back
there, but other than that, I think I I exceeded the replacement would equate to 24 degrees u for the 11 replacement because we added one additional dead plus the two. You can correct me if I'm wrong.
>> Okay. Any comments from the commission? >> You want to start? >> I always go first. I want to give somebody else a chance. >> I just see a whole bunch of white area and then two lines. >> That was Laura's drawing. >> What What What is in the white area?
What was in the white area? That's the house outline in the middle there that she wrote the description of each shrub and tree. Oh, >> okay. I see that. >> Yeah. And then the Mount Laurels are along the ditch. And then where that rock starts, that's where we're going to
start the summer suites all the way across. And then as it gets behind the shed, that's where we're going to put the variety of blueberry trees. And then behind that shed, that's where we're going to put that red maple. How far from the house then is to the top of
this diagram? >> Oh, I don't know that yet. To the top. >> I mean, you had a whole bunch of I've only been to your place once. >> Yeah. >> But you had a whole bunch of trees there and all of a sudden I don't see any trees. >> So, we're also looking at the back as well. We just don't know what to do with
it. Meaning the back of the lot line because that's private property of 714. I I I'll I defer. I'm too analytic. Sorry. >> Um Okay.
We're making progress. Um I'm not ready to approve this plan yet. Um in part, I don't see the 100 foot line on here. I don't see the 35 or the 25 foot line. So, I can't tell where our jurisdiction
is on this plan. Um, you say you're putting the red maple behind the shed, but I don't see the shed. Um, >> so if you don't mind, >> that circle is the shed. >> It says stump. >> No, that's the that's the maple. The
shed's about right here. >> Yeah. >> So, I would have liked to see that shed drawn on there. And I would have liked to see, are you taking out the buckthornne where you're planting the red maple >> as your recommendation? >> Okay. So, so I would like to see that as
part of the planting. Um, but also I know you're worried about the really tall pine trees falling on your house, and I absolutely um accept that you're worried about them, but I'm concerned that you're
putting one tree back and a lot of shrubs, and I would love to see some more trees in the back part. Um, I'm picturing the plan that
Morin Harold did for Joanna Drive where she made the first half of the backyard open and the second half of the backyard had some scattered trees in it. And you know that would feel more appropriate as
a replacement for all the overgrown pines to have some more trees towards the 100 foot line rather than just one maple. Um, and if you're going to have
rows of shrubs along the borders, I would rather see them staggered a little bit so you had a a habitat rather than a hedge, if that makes sense to you. It just um provides more habitat for the
wildlife if your berry bushes are not all in a straight line. Um, and I'm also concerned that some of your plants like the Cleftna Alnafoglia is a
cultivar and not a true native. Um, and we're really looking for true natives. Same thing with the Calia. That looks like you've got an elf cultar rather than the true native Calia. She pulled those right from the list and then we were looking at it um together with my
wife as well and we both agreed that we really like that area and she did say it was native. >> Okay. Well, mountain laurel is native. >> Yeah, >> summersweet is native but when you throw that ruby spice word or that elf word,
it's like the autumn gold, autumn glory maple. It's a cultivar of the true native. So that may be what this nursery has available, but there are other nurseries that will sell you actually
the true native plethora and the true native calm latapogia. So that's my concern. And if you're putting the hydrangeas in behind the 100 foot, they're not our concern.
>> It was a what my wife had for her wedding day. So >> Oh, that's fun. and she she would have liked to have put them in the front of the house, but she's happy with the the native hydrangeas. >> Okay. >> We're going to put that on the sides of the stairs. >> Yeah. Can we see the front of the house again?
>> Yeah. Okay. So, again, those hydrangeas are called Annabel. Um, and there are definitely native hydrangeas. They tend to be sort of a bluish purplish color. >> Okay. I wasn't aware of that. She
mentioned the white ones because some of the neighbors have them down the street. >> Yeah. Um and the other ones, the Green Mountain boxwood, >> native, we recognize that. Just my wife really likes them. >> Yeah. Um
I just I'm battling boxwood all over my property because they spread. So, um, you know, if if they stayed in their nice little hedge, fine. But they don't. You find them popping up all over the
woods. Um, because the birds eat the berries and now you've got boxwood everywhere. And I've been working trying hard to get boxwood out. So, I'm I'm concerned that you're going to find yourself like with the uh
>> buckthorns. buckthorns, you're going to find yourself with boxwood everywhere the way the buckthorns go everywhere. So, um yeah, I I would rather see a native there. Um
something like an um maple leaf viburnum or northern arrowwood. They make a nice cluster of white flowers in the spring, but they're native. they're not going to be uh hazard spreading places. Um so um
I think we're making progress, but I don't feel like we're there yet. And I'm sorry to be so picky, but you know, we really are looking for um something more like what Moren Herald
presented at 50 Joanna Drive. That's my two cents. So I only had one comment and actually was the same one that I noted that there was one tree the maple and the rest were shrubs. So I concur with >> there were some varieties
seven of them. >> I don't think they counted as trees right they counted >> they're at least 65 feet I think. >> Yeah I have to look. I thought they counted as shrubs but it doesn't really matter either way. There's not many trees. So,
I think they have to be five to six feet in height or greater. >> If they're that high, you only need two for every tree. If they're less than five or six feet, you need three for every tree. >> Here, the schedule says one for each tree removed.
>> Oh, >> so when I did all the math, comes out to 20 foot trees. Okay. >> All the shrubs. So, if you have 17 m Mount Laurels. You divide that by three, you get 5.7. Right.
>> But but we're just saying we'd rather see another tree instead of three mountain laurels. >> I think Brian and I are both are in in agreement that one red maple in your backyard compared to a forest is not a
lot of maple. >> So, can I intrude for a second to ask Chuck a question? >> Yep. Um, does replacement policy apply to NOAS, RDAs, and what have you? Is that when a resident wants to take down
some trees? Perfectly spread. >> Not sure I understand the question. Did do you have to follow the policy, >> the replacement policy >> in the RDA? >> Yeah. Or or N. We created the tree replacement policy
to uh replace the permitting process because it was um we were always saying yes to four or less trees and you know if they did these certain things if it was four
or less trees then they don't have to go through the process. Now, it was said at uh 885 Main Street. They said, "Well, we met the requirements in the regulations." >> Yeah. >> Uh and I was like, "It's really a policy." And I think that we point to it in our regulations, but Conservation
Commission um >> is not constrained by it. >> Yeah. And I don't think you should think like it's it's part of our regulations, >> but in some ways that helps. you know, it allows you to say, "Well, that's way too
many trees. You know, it's not going to work here, and we've required it, so one to one or two to one." >> Or you could say, "There's way too many shrubs and we want to see more trees." >> No, absolutely. I mean, all those kind of decisions are up to you. I mean, I
think that if if we if you want to replace the habitat, one of the things that we've said in the past, Rick, is that um we don't want monocultures. So if you're doing too many abroad or you're doing too many blueberry bushes, what ends up happening? Not saying
there's any around, but you get a disease. They're all gone. >> I think that's why she recommended two >> spread them out or deer or you know, whatever. So there would be a bunch of different ones and survivability. The tree warden does that too by different
plants along the streets and and all that. Um, so I hope that answers your question, >> right? So, the reason I asked is because that is it that pertains to the conversation you've been having about, you know, bushes and trees and what have
you. I I think we're within our um authority sit there and say we we want more trees, fewer shrubs, and to a certain extent you can with your plan set up distribution, but I don't think we're looking to restore the habitat. I
think Martha's memory of Johanna is a good one where they have trees distributed around. They have an open area so there still would be a yard but then the back part of the property would be um dispersed woods I guess.
>> Do you have any thoughts on that then? Um, if those shrubs meet the tree requirement, can you I mean, >> but that's my point. >> Right. If he's following what is on the site, >> well, the replacement policy, if it's a shrub that's considered a tree, like if
he's following what he's what he's given for information, then he should be able to put whatever he want. No, but my >> whoever follows those guidelines, >> but my point is that replacement policy is not pertinent to this RDA. It's on there for
other purposes and it does is helpful as Chuck pointed out, but we are not constructing. >> I agree with the 25, 35, and 100 foot lines. That's not on the map. >> But if he's following the plan as far as he's understanding it, then >> which is which is why we're talking
about a further understanding of it. You know, there's also the consistent thing. We want to be consistent. I mean, some of the things like it's like 24 plants replacing >> 11 >> 20 24 trees. Is is it 24 trees?
>> That's the how it equates to Yes. >> So, we've always understood it and I think I I don't want to open it up because it's too late. So, it was it was a tree for a tree and two shrubs for a tree if you wanted to go with shrubs.
But those shrubs would have to grow >> right >> certainly >> more than five feet at maturity. So as long as he's meeting that it's fine. But I do think on top of all that the conservation commission could say you
don't have enough diversity. I don't like how they're lined up. you know, if someone did it that way and um I want some more trees because we've always done that and that's how it's always been interpreted. So, all the past
projects, anyone that's come to the conservation commission, I've heard it a lot that they've, you know, people have said, I'd like to see at least one more tree or two more trees or something like that. Um, but you got to be careful that we have enough room for these trees
because we want to be like 20 feet away and you'll have enough time to grow. And you don't have to pick you don't have to I mean this is where we didn't make exceptions. So they can be dwarf trees
if that's the term or smaller trees. Um, those are acceptable as long as they're native. So these would be something that instead of being 60 feet tall, you got 25 foot tall trees or something to that,
you know. And I always thought fruit trees were more value. So looking at the plan when it comes in, if it was like fruit trees uh or something like that, you would, you know, it would mean be more meaningful. The applicant came in and
said, "I really can't fit all this back in. I mean, it just doesn't work." And but I've put some highv value trees out here and I've met the rest of the policy as he knows it. >> When you say fruit tree, can you give an
example? >> Yeah, like walnut or uh oak, you know, something like that. Um >> All right. You're not talking peaches and apples. >> Crap. Apple. Yeah. No, no. things like that would be fine, but you wouldn't,
you know, some people don't like that stuff, but no, it's just it's the nuts. Yeah. Um I was also thinking when he mentioned shorter trees, a lot of people like uh native flowering dogwood, not
the cusa dogwood, but just the native flowering dogwood. Doesn't grow as tall, so you can have that closer to your house without worrying about it dam damaging your house. And it does produce small fruit that the bar birds eat.
>> It's not as good as an o as an oak tree, but >> okay. So on that note, um >> so give so if if you're thinking like this isn't good enough, it would be great to give Rick some excellent
direction on what a plan should look like >> because it is getting frustrating. I gota we've been going >> I understand. >> I feel like it's 550 West Street all over. I'm going right through it. >> Yeah. Well, think about what 550 West
Street ended up with. They put a bunch of trees in the front yard where they took the trees out. >> I know. But >> and you know that their planting plan might have been a model for you to start with. >> Yeah. And you know the the commission
wanted me to put a planting plan together which I did with the help of my wife. My wife is getting extremely frustrated now >> and it's putting a burden on me. So are we. We're getting really frustrated. You're not coming back with a good enough planting plan.
>> So, I sympathize, but um if you could sit with your wife, whatever, modify this so we get some more trees and some distribution, still leaving yourself some space for a backyard. But again, using the model of either 550 or uh
Johanna, you know, I I think either one of those, you're not far away from moving your circles and changing some of your abbreviations. >> How many trees do you guys want? How many trees do you think is appropriate? >> Joanna Drive had eight. I'm not sure we can ask for eight
because the back part of his property isn't our jurisdiction. >> How many did they take down? >> Uh 12. >> How many you taking down? There's 11. >> But that's different. Again, that was an enforcement order. This isn't >> It's not apples or not apples and
apples. >> Yeah. >> So why do you why why do you tell me you took you're taking down 24? I thought I thought you >> I didn't understand the rules. >> Yeah. No, he's planting the equivalent of 24 trees on 11, >> but he's putting in lots of bushes to
add up to equal to 24 trees. >> That's what I'm asking. If if that equals the 11, why can't he deal with that? I mean, I'm just trying to learn what's require more trees. >> So, in this one more trees, but he's going by the rules. That's what that's what I'm trying to figure out. >> The rules only apply to four trees cut
down or less. He's cutting down 11. So the rules are not >> Yeah, that's outside the replacement policy. >> If you're cutting down four trees and you want to plant eight bushes, okay? If you're cutting down six trees, we can't let you plant 12 bushes.
>> Has to be a tree in it. >> Has to be some trees. And the more trees you cut down, the more trees we want. We're looking for a habitat that the native wildlife will be able to live in. >> So, how many trees do you guys want? um
or you know privacy. >> I Yeah, I can sew that way. Um and I I would not count an arborite hedge as six trees when we're saying we want five or six trees.
>> So, um so, so I know there may be I can just I can just tell I'm just like I'm like Carac tonight. So, I can just tell there might be a difference here on the commission. So, I think that you might want to vote on that and see if you have
enough people that agree that six trees is is what they'll agree with because someone could make a motion that maybe four or three might be better and see if that passes. >> And since he's recused, we're four. We
need a four vote to pass anything. >> You need three people to Well, you need four. Yeah. Well, >> you need four. >> Quum's four. >> Okay. reg regardless of what the current attendance is. Okay. Um I'm going to make a motion that we um direct the
applicant to modify the plan showing uh five trees distributed around the backyard um with multiple species like maple, oak, etc.
etc. is not a good thing in anyway. So, five trees, multiple species, lunata, maple, and others of their choice. >> So, if you don't agree, you don't have to second it. And you can ask for a modification, or you can second it and see where it
goes. >> Can I make a friendly amendment? >> Of course. >> Do they have to be in the backyard? Could a couple of those trees be in the front yard if you wanted? >> They could be. We've talked about that every time. Yeah. >> So, >> anywhere within the buffer zone? >> Yeah. Yes.
>> Okay. I second that motion with the friendly amendment. >> What was the number? >> Five. >> I pass. >> So you don't have a vote? >> Yes. >> So >> want to make a motion?
>> Are you abstaining? >> Yeah. >> Okay. So is there another is there another motion we should consider? Do you not want to prove it at all? Do you do not want I'm looking at again my I was only there
once. I'm looking at these big magnificent floral pines and we're getting rid of 11 of them and we replacing them with these trees and who knows where they're going to go. Um,
on the other hand, I don't have a flavor for where the lines are. How many trees can he can he squeeze in and still have his desire >> 20 ft away, you know, all that? >> So, I'm at a little bit of a loss. It's to give him an exact number, >> but if you remember that the line 100
foot angled across the backyard >> was the furthest angle. I think those trees were 60 feetish away there. the ones you that we agreed to cut close to the house on the left there was 20 feet but so there would be
room back right and certainly beyond. Yeah, >> but I thought that's where he wanted to point along which is why we have to give him directions to do the planting plan. >> Yeah, I think it's good to to have uh you know a little bit of directions. He came in with one tree. If you're like,
well, if it was all these shrubs and they weren't like in straight lines and they were scattered out a little bit, you know, that's acceptable. Just find a spot for three, four more trees or something like that or four all together or three, whatever. Whatever the next
step down, five didn't work. >> If you wanted to reduce someone's making, >> unless Walter is looking for more than five trees, that's that's what I need to get a sense from you. Are you saying five isn't enough or are you saying five is too many? >> Well, I I think you can squeeze at least
five or six looking at the property to the right next to the stream, but I I I I'm sorry for being overly analytic, but I don't know what I'm looking at
either at this point. >> Chuck's gonna bring it up. Oh, sorry. Went past it. Uh, where am I? This is it right here. >> So, hang on. The theme's going to come up for the buffer.
>> I like without the the greenery. Okay. You want the lawn back here, am I correct? The big picture. >> That would be ideal. Yes. For a playground. >> Can you live with a woods area over here? >> That's where we play. My wife wanted to
really put the mount laurels along that ditch. >> This ditch. I'm I'm looking for a ditch. >> Stranger. >> He's gonna call it a ditch every time >> until the day he dies. >> It's gonna be a ditch forever.
All right. So, let's just >> be the shrub layer >> with a tree or two above them. >> So, this is on the plan right here, but it looked like a straight line to me. >> So, I don't think it would go that far back. Um, just because
there's a tree here that's dead. It's going to be >> Would it start here with the where? >> It's going to start here. >> Yeah. I know trespassing sign is that goes along the ditch. about there and it starts to cut here and about right here is the shed. >> Do show me where it cuts too. Put your
fing right about right probably probably right about shed about right here was probably about right here I think. And then there's those blueberries which two varieties. So that's the line rightly. >> Whoops. Let me get rid of that.
>> Okay. And then the blueberries are out there somewhere. blueberries that continue to extend down and then that red maple. >> So, are those like a pocket of blueberries or a line >> two lines? How are they set up? Like in lines or pocket? >> I'd have to probably
>> So, you just do something. So, where are they? Where are the blueberries? >> Point again. >> Pardon? >> Point. Where the blueberries going? >> I'm going to probably start from here. Go down here and in blueberries have a red meat. Well, now I
could add another red medium over here as well. But if I want another tree, I could add another one cuz the pine trees are gone. Right. So, I'm going like this. Blueberries. >> I just interrupted. Is Pineville still on tonight?
>> Yes. >> Sorry. >> It's after this. >> Where is everybody? >> U Bry's online. >> Shed the bell right here. I can't >> shed on the shed's right there. Okay. And where's it? >> Go ahead. Sorry. >> And you said in back of the shed there's
a tree. >> There's a dead tree about >> No, no, the one you're planting. >> Yes. It's going to be in front of the dead tree about right here. I'm assuming in that area. That's what she pointed out would be a good spot for it. >> That's a tree.
>> That's a really big tree. >> Oh, what happened? >> That grew fast. >> All right, there you go. There's the tree. >> What else is in there? What else is in the plant? Anything? >> I could add another one over here because the pine trees will be gone. So, I could add another pine tree. Not pine.
>> But is that one now out of our jurisdiction? >> No, that's within the jurisdiction. >> The jurisdiction is somewhere in this area. >> Okay. >> So, there could be another one there. I mean, we could just draw another uh circle here. And this could be located
in the field. So we don't So we have this one here. Let's make that a different color so we know that that's proposed. All right. Um uh I thought I saw two lines on your plan. Is there >> is the
other >> the arborite are going along the other >> will be along here. So >> this is your jurisdiction. >> Probably from here that way is on our jurisdiction. >> Correct. So there's a tree here that's coming down. >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> I'm going to start the line here and
work its way to probably about here. I think that's where those two pines are. That's where it start. That's my jurisdiction. >> So like that there >> roughly. And then from there my wife's hydrangeas will start to come down in this area here. >> All right. So this is our stuff. And
this is uh outside of a jurisdiction, but that's where the hydrangeas go. That's another color. So, um is that the extent of all the planting? >> Well, besides, yeah, the front part of the house. >> So, there's stuff in front of the house.
Is there an opportunity for two more trees on this property based on what you're looking at now? >> There's a stump here. >> Yeah. >> Large stump that will have to be grounded down. I can't plant on top of it. Next, we got those small um saplings, oaks,
>> very small. >> If you allow me a room, I can put a tree there. >> And you have two maple sap there. >> There's one that was extending over the house. >> Yeah, you're cutting that one down. >> Cutting down. There's really not a lot of area around that to plant another tree.
Okay. So, the oak saplings, are you leaving them or are you taking them out? >> Just leave them. >> Okay. So, that actually will eventually be a full-size tree. It's just a sapling
right now. >> Right now, they're kind of leaning all over the place, though. >> Okay. >> I don't know what direction they're going to end up going. Yeah. And >> where's the where's the proposed lawn? >> It's like in this area. >> Is it like a rectangle behind the house? >> Maybe all the way up through here. So,
whatever. Back in this area, >> which we have no jurisdiction over. >> We do have jurisdiction. It's >> this line between here and here is probably that 100 foot buffer zone because this is on an angle. It's closer in. >> All right. Well, maybe
>> start at the corner of the blueberries and go there. right around here. Yeah. >> All right. >> Then this part starts to cut around. >> So there's a big area out here that doesn't have it. So you'd have to be in this area, which would you would take away the lawn. Seems like there's an
opportunity maybe here and maybe in front of one more tree. >> I already have three stumps right here >> and one basically dead tree that's leaning on towards the neighbors. >> Could you put a tree back in there after you get rid of the stumps? I could look
into it. I has to talk to Laura. >> I have that issue here with this stump here >> because you don't want to plant on a stump. >> Correct. >> And so there's so many stumps in that area. It's going to prevent you from planting. Well, that's what you're saying, >> right? >> Okay.
>> Now, the front yard does not have stumps and a lot of people put like a flowering dogwood right in front of the house, like one on either side of the walk. That would give you two trees. My preference is I don't want a tree in front of the house. We already have the town tree here.
>> Okay. >> We don't >> you don't want any trees out front. Okay. And then when I was saying you could have a tree layer above the mountain laurel shrub layer, basically you can plant your mountain laurels in a sort of a pattern and then in between
them plant a large tree that's going to grow and they'll be in the sort of shady part under the tree. But it makes a multi-layer habitat. You have often a herbaceous layer on the ground, a shrub layer, and then a tree layer.
>> There is concrete blocks under that soil too. So where this ditch is, there are concrete concrete blocks in the ground. >> Okay. Which would make it harder to plant a tree.
>> And I don't know if that was put in when they created the dip. Okay. We spent a lot of time. >> Yeah. So, we're pretty close. So, I I would say the direction is like we got three on. We got three trees. No one talked about three trees. So, it's four
or five. Did you say five? Five didn't pass. So, it's either more than five or four. So, um >> I'm so I want to do a motion. >> Yeah. So, I what I would Yeah. Keep keep going with the motion so we can end this. But I would say that you are
looking at um just so you understand this line of whatever needs to be you know put out in the field you know moved in a pattern that makes well you can't go across there you
know that you've had this and I'm not saying fill in this area I'm just saying understand that this is probably where we want you to put that. Same with this one. Well, and I What is this one? >> Arborvite. >> The arborite over there. And
>> yeah, >> this is closest to the stream. So maybe like a visual shading is fine over here. And then just find another one or two trees, whatever the commission decides. If we're talking one or two, if we're talking six, let's let's put a motion
for number of trees, whatever the number is that we can agree. We're going to go back and forth. >> It's past my bedtime. I'm getting grumpy. Why can't Is there a possibility to plant trees over here?
>> Dead one there. >> This triangle, >> this dead trees all in that area. Massive tree right there coming down. >> That's not workable. Can you make a pot of trees here? Yeah, but if we're taking down an enormous tree, can we plant another
tree? >> So, I think a tree on a stump that's this big. >> So, in order to move forward, >> I don't think what you're doing helps because >> instead of finding the spot, we just want to say another tree and leave it up
to Rick to find the spot. So, >> okay. So, yeah, because we tried to find spots when I was putting them up there and then we ran into this spot where nothing else worked, but it seemed like the commission wanted some more trees. But I'm hoping going through this
exercise, you understand how tight it's getting, so it's it's up to you, but I'm just laying it out. >> Yeah, I'm happier with the patches of shrubs than the straight line. And um if
we can ask you to do true natives and not horicultural varieties as much as possible, I would be happy with that. And maybe one more tree. So that would be my
motion. >> So do a motion. So, my motion is four trees, spread out the bushes on that northern side the way Chuck has drawn them, and um and pick out your
plants from a nursery that carries true natives and not just horicultural varieties. >> Martha, you said one more. One more from >> four total. No, four total. >> There's three marked up there. I want four total trees.
But where the two in red are being added, right? >> Yeah. I want >> He only had one to start. >> So that's six then. >> No, he only had one to start. >> He had one tree. We've drawn two more. I want him to find one more spot for a
tree somewhere on his property. >> That's it. His choice. Yes. >> Go then. Let's go back to the five. >> Vote for the five. >> I know. I'll vote for it now. It's better than the four. >> Is there any way I could buy the the mater of bench?
There's three on the porch right now. >> No, I have more maybe. >> I'm in agreement with four. I think that's fair. >> I can go with four. >> Are you willing to go with >> from one to four? I think is a good >> But I would say stipulation at least one of them's an open. That's a high value
habitat three. >> Okay, >> let's try four. Okay, so that was my motion. Four trees, spread the shrubs out into patches rather than a straight line on the north boundary of the property and
look for true natives, not the horicultural varieties that are listed on the plan. >> And a friend may >> Yeah. >> an oak. >> Yes. And one of the trees is the red maple. Another tree is some species of oak. your choice for the other two
trees. >> And I second the motion. Walter Talbertson in favor. >> Tim Michelle in favor. >> Martha Moore in favor. >> In favor. Okay. Next. Pineville. >> Hey, you want to give me just a second?
>> Welcome back. I know. Okay. Next is Pineville Conservation Area off Warren A. I'll read the blurb. Continue the public hearing on request for determination applicability
followed by reading trail committee pursuant to Massachusetts general law chapter 131 section 40 the wetland protection act andor the reading wetland protection bylaw section 7.1. Applicant proposes upgrading an existing trail and connecting the trail to an existing
trail with a trail head and boardwalks within 100 feet of a border bordering vegetated wetland and intermittent stream. The application and plans can be viewed during regular business hours at the town hall conservation office 16 local street reading and on the conservation division page under the
project by year assessor's map 0 Warren Avenue near culacessor's map 11 lot 272. >> All right. So, uh it's Brandy online. Just introduce yourself for the
Oh, I'll do it. Hey Brandy, it's uh could you just introduce yourself for the record and then begin your presentation? >> Sure. Uh my name is Brandy Hopkins. I am a member of the Reading Trails Committee and we would like to propose a
additional trail added to Pineale. Um I know it's late so I'll try to be quick. Um, we'd like to put in a new trail to enhance community access, connect the Pineville Conservation Area with the Washington Park exit that's currently on Warren A.
Um, um, this would be a northern access point at the top of Pineville um, with selective brush clearing to create a new path with a new kiosk signage um, and possibly a trash can. Um, we do have six
feet of entrance land according to the GIS at the top of Pineville. Um, on Warren A. We would need to add one 24 ft boardwalk, elevated boardwalk to the top to control, um, flood prevention. Um, a
16 ft bridge span would go along a ditch in the trail that we were proposing to put in. and then a 36 ft raised boardwalk with pipe footings for wildlife protection through an area that floods pretty um significantly with heavy rains.
Um all the structures will be made out of the same um durable decking materials that are currently used on the white and blue trails further down in Pineville. Um all of the bridges and boardwalks will be used built exclusively with hand
tools. There's no heavy machinery coming in, no excavators, no back hose or pile drivers, nothing that would disturb the um sensitive areas. Trail blazing, um trail clearing, all hand tools, pruners, bow saws, rigs. Um there may be some selective chainsaw usage, but it would
be very minimal. Um and they'll be marked with the same metal blazes and aluminum nails we've been using on all the trails in Reading. Um and then we have a a very strict packout policy for the trails committee. anything brought in, trash, lumber, tools, all will be taken back out with us when we are done.
Um these are some sketch drawings of the proposed bridges and boardwalks that we would put in the front um simple 24ft bridge at the beginning to raise over any possible flooding areas. The um 16 ft bridge that would span um a ditch in
the middle of where we're proposing the trail. And then um the 35 ft swell crossing. So this is the one that has um quite a bit of flooding when it does rain pretty hard. Um and so we would put in the large
um pipes to ensure that there was um clearance for any wildlife. Um these are types of bridges we've used successfully in other areas in Reading. Um, and to wrap that up, we were trying really hard to connect communities in
the Reding Trails Committee in the last year. And this would create kind of a continuous walking path north to south through all of Pineville. Um, connecting Warren Avenue to the southern exit of Pineville, increasing accessibility and promoting some more community engagement
with our natural spaces. Questions? >> Um, before we get to questions, I want to do one correction. Two time two times you said new trail. I want to emphasize that it's an existing trail that's going to be upgraded.
>> No, it's not an existing trail. So, we will connect to an existing trail. This red line on the slide does not currently have a trail. It will connect to the white um trail that is there, but there is nothing coming to
the north that connects to where a right now. I was just basing that on the uh on the hearing blurb that I read >> and also on our site visit there's >> it does look like there's a trail. Yes, it absolutely it I think people are doing it already and it has kind of
created a basic trail into that entrance which is one of the reasons why we want to create an actual trail. >> Okay, that that was a minute point. It's too late to discuss minute points. >> Sorry. >> Any questions from the commission? >> The gentleman we bumped into said years
ago People used to use it back and forth all the time, especially in the winter time. >> Yeah, >> that bottom exit from Washington Park really kind of puts you straight into Pineville. If you just cross the street, you're going straight in. So, I think people are doing it.
So my concern looking at the plot plan here, that's a very narrow >> neck >> neck that we own and then it widens out and um >> I did not get a chance to see the plot
plan before I did the site visit. So, are we I would like to make sure maybe the town surveyor could check to be sure that the trail we've laid out really doesn't cross out of our property um onto the
neighbor's property there. So, >> yeah, and this is a point that came up recently. Yeah, this just came up this week. Um and I believe Chuck heard from um 48 who is the property owner right to the left on the map. Um, but I did check the GIS. It does show that we have six
feet of clearance right there. Um, but we will double check it and um, if you guys want, we can absolutely have the surveyor make sure as well cuz we want to ensure that we're not encroaching on anything. Um, we did talk to the property owner of 48 when we were out on
a site visit and she was very excited to add a trail into the um, northern part of Pineville. Um, but again, we're happy to have the the surveyor check and just make sure that we're staying in the approved area.
>> I think I think we could just handle that with a condition. >> Yeah, >> that would have to be surveying or some means to be absolutely sure that it stays on the neck and then doesn't go to the stream >> uh too early. >> Is 48 the one that owns the top part of
the stream? >> Yes, that that very top section. Although 47 that actually generally comments on >> Yeah, >> that's who we talked to. >> We talked to the person at 47. Okay, >> understood. >> And I have talked to the owner at 48. She did come out while we were there at
a site visit. >> I got that. Any other questions, comments? >> I would just say when when is it planned? I mean certainly uh so Brandy, I don't know when you have this planned. uh you know that the uh an RDA if
approved um is good for three years. I'm sure it's going to take some time to get the town survey through >> out there. Um >> absolutely. >> I think minimal um survey work is
needed. You only need um to where that point is where the trail I guess I'm going to say turns to the east. Uh and as long as we knew that point there
and the dimensions of the trail head that would be correct. So do you know how long the trail is? So we have a approximately from what you're saying I it's it's unusual for I'm I'm thinking you got those measurements off
um the town GIS. Was there a number shown or did you just try to measure it >> for the front entrance? It was shown at six feet. >> Six feet. Okay. So um yeah it would be important to get uh accurate uh survey >> wider than our typical trail but yes
absolutely. So we do not want to encroach in any way. Is this request just for the trail or for uh sign kiosk, trail head, anything like that? >> Well, usually we don't permit signs and
kiosks, but it might be good to mention that those would >> those would be included. >> It says so on her prop uh present presentation there. >> Yes, it's trash. >> Yes, a kiosk, signage, and possible trash can. are hoping
>> crashes up to the deep. Well, you can make a request, but we even at Mlets and Morgan, they reluctantly said yes and only gave us one trash can. >> Yeah, there isn't a single trash can at Pineville now. So, we would like to try
and get one if possible. We will ask. That may not happen. Um, but there are some at Washington Park, which is the entrance to that is straight across from the opening we want to put in. Okay. So, I have a motion. >> No, no, no,
>> no. I think there's a hand up. >> All right. >> Yeah. Go and ask if everyone's finished here. See if someone online wants >> anybody online. Uh please raise your hand if you haven't already. >> So, we have a we have a hand up
and it's uh Ka at 48. >> Ka at 48. So, uh, let's see what, um, >> can you please introduce yourself? >> Hello. >> Yeah, you can turn uh your video on and
u mic at this moment. >> It just disappeared. >> Oh, we can hear you. If you want to just speak, you don't have to turn on your video. >> Entered the waiting room. Ah,
>> thanks. >> Try again. Is while uh they're reconnecting, does anyone else want to speak about the Pineville uh trail as proposed? >> Hi everyone. Can you hear me now? >> Yes, >> sure. or just came. >> Hi, sorry I pressed the wrong one
button. Hi Brandy. Hi everyone. Thank you for explaining the plan. Um, so I'm the other owner. I didn't speak to you at 48 Warren A. Um, Brandy, I you
mentioned earlier about uh speaking with Katie and you mentioned she was really excited. I just wanted to see um she might have been just be very professional and being friendly, right?
I don't know if I got the same impression of her being super excited about the plan. If possible, can we ask you to talk to us again? >> Absolutely. >> Right. Um I she's not with me so I just
don't want to you know speak for her but I also have some observations. You mentioned that there's already some people walking you know between the park through that little trail. Just by living here our house is parallel to the
trail that you propose. I personally haven't seen any people walking through it. Right. and every time um also I'm not sure about what's the usage of the chair um when I'm looking at the center street exit right I I don't see much
traffic there so I wanted to see if you guys have done any research by adding this trail how much more traffic do you think it will benefit the community >> that's a bit hard to judge because we don't have a way to judge we don't have
science and inside out. It's our camera footage of of this and we don't stand there's there's no way for us to check that. >> Right. And from your observ from your estimation, how many trees will you be chopping down to build this trail? >> We wouldn't chop down any trees. The
trail easily blaze around trees. >> Got it. Okay. Yeah. If if you can we want to learn more about the plan itself, right? I just I I didn't get the same feeling, but doesn't mean it's not true. I just uh we haven't really talked about it. We just learned about this plan. We were on
vacation last week and the town hall is tonight. So um just wanted to speak more with you guys and understand more. >> Would be happy to. >> Awesome. >> So Brandy, does that mean you want to continue until you speak to the homeowner or would you like us to go
ahead and close and you speak to the homeowner >> on your own? Um I'm not sure what is the the typical procedure here. This is my first concom meeting. Um checker will >> usually held up by
Right. >> I mean it would be it would be a nice gesture but um it I think that we have at least a split decision at 48 uh Warren Street. I think it's important to note that um who was the guy across the street? Was that 48?
>> No, 47. There's Steve. >> So, it's across the street. I don't need his name. Yeah. So, across the street was concerned that the trail goes in front of 48's house, but having it surveyed,
you can see from the plan that it's pretty far away from 48's house, and it only turns up to the stream well past the house. >> That's not true. Um it is true on the plan. I did
question the trails committee earlier this week and said um if the trail as marked goes past the house, those flags are in the wrong uh location. And that's why we're talking about survey now. So what we should see
when we're finished is a trail more like what we're seeing on this map. So I don't see how things could be any different from that. So it does go past your house but deeper
in the woods. So take it from here. I maybe ask for more comments from people online. >> Will you put your hand up briefly? Did you want to say something? Can you come to the podium? >> Yeah. Will Finch 51 Mil Street. Um I'm
on the trails committee. Um I totally agree with um Chuck that we need to get a couple survey points um located. Obviously this this narrow corridor coming down here, this this
turn point on the uh property line for number 48. Um, and probably if if they can put another point on this property line near the stream so we're sure that we're
um not wandering onto property of 48. I think that'll be enough to to keep the trail well away from 48. We're going to be on the opposite side of the stream from the the home at 48. um more a so I
don't really see any issues with encroachment or or anything getting very close to that. >> So again a condition for that survey point should cover any question about um turning too early. So it'll follow the
plan as shown and then it will in fact be past the house. >> Yes. Um, and when it's running in front of the house, it'll be as far away as it can be on that little uh extension of land. >> All right. Thank you. >> Any other comments online, Chuck?
>> I'm sorry. May I speak? >> Who uh who is this? >> Uh, this is Kate Cameer, 37 Lauren Avenue. I'm sorry, Chuck. I can't u I I can't get video and I couldn't get uh signals to uh ask to speak. So I
apologize. >> Yeah, you don't have to. Just again, you introduce yourself. That's great. You did it. Go ahead and make your comment. >> Okay. Um my husband and I have lived here for 40 years. And um so me personally, I've in 40 years, I could probably count on two hands the number
of people I've seen walking into that wooded area, wooded wet area. Um, it's nice that you guys want to improve it. Maybe it'll chase away the people that use it for the restroom that that use Washington Park for baseball games. Um, I would suggest be, you know, the the
map we're seeing is just bad. It's a map. I don't know how accurate it is, but uh we've walked the property and the flags that are out there now indicating the proposed trail. Um you know, it bends right at the that um
Ka's front door, the new neighbor. So um I don't know. I would just suggest, you know, before you vote on anything, maybe go out and look at it. It's a very tight area and it does bend towards his house right at the front door. If what you're suggesting I see on the map that
it bends afterwards, that would be um that would be preferable, I'm sure. So, um that's my comment. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. And and previously in this conversation, we've talked about putting a condition on where there will be some survey points to be sure that it
follows this map as opposed to whatever flagging is out there now. >> Okay, great. Thank you very much. I think it needs to be said that we're we're approving the application in front of us, not um >> the flags that are out there. And it
does appear that they may be in the wrong spot. So um those are just data points that um the trails committee uh used to create this plan. So, um, yeah, modifications not not a problem with
with those flags that are out there. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Absolutely. >> Yeah, we've, you know, a lot of the neighbors have talked about it and just this time of year people are away. Um, but I think the overall we're people are supporting, you know,
what the town wants to do. It was just people were concerned that that trail would bend too close to the a the little stream and then also over towards that neighbor's house. It's pretty tight there. >> Understood. Thank you. >> Appreciate that. >> Thank you.
>> Any other comments? >> I see seeing none, but you might ask again if there's any comments. >> Is there anybody else online who wants to raise their hand before we move on? >> So, yeah. Um Kate's husband Bob at 37 Warren Avenue. So, by proving it
tonight, I mean, we all a few of us walked the site yesterday afternoon and the orange flags are in fact on the other side of the stream. They're definitely there. So, >> we didn't put those in. Those definitely aren't ours.
>> I think on the other side, you mean on the same side as 48? Hello. What happened? >> So, I think there might be some flags along the top of the bank. >> Did we see
>> Did Brandy What happened? >> Um, I'm here. We did not put any flags on the left side of the bank. >> Okay. But the bottom line sure if something's over there that was not placed by the reading >> sales committee. I don't know what you talking. >> Okay. But the bottom line is if there's
flags there, ignore them. Uh it will be surveyed to follow the plan that we would would be approving here tonight and any flags that are out there now are uh not valid. It would be the result of the survey.
>> Okay. Uh will the neighbors have an opportunity to see the results of the survey before construction begins? >> You can certainly look at it, but we will theoretically we go forward and approve it tonight.
So, so what do you mean by that? I mean, are you saying they can go out and walk Pineville and look at the points? Yeah. Are we going to set up another meeting for them to come in and talk? I mean, >> no, I didn't I didn't mean that. Yes,
they're perfectly welcome. >> What is exactly what exactly what you're meaning? So, I'm not sure this the town surveyor will put out stakes or hang flags or do anything. It's uh when we
did uh Lanetta Lane, I think he only did the sides that that were needed. And so, and then I showed us part of a plan. >> Yeah. I'm not expecting a a a full blaze trail. The key point is that turn, right?
>> Right. Are you asking? Just I'm just wondering. It sounds like you're trying to get the the neighborhood involved. >> No, I'm I'm saying feel free to go look, >> but theoretically we're going to close tonight and approve it.
>> So, Chuck Chuck and Mr. Chairman, I I don't think that, you know, you guys are the professionals and I don't think the neighborhood wants to be involved in terms of planning it. How I I think like Chuck was saying or Mr. Chairman, I can't whichever the concern with the
neighbors is the bend towards that neighbor's property. If you can straighten out the the the path, that would be ideal. >> Absolutely. And I think that will be taken care of with the with the with the survey because we'll exactly where
>> the property line is and also from this and I think what we're approving is you know this conceptual drawing showing that the trail gets to the the stream well past that house. So I think every
effort will be made to kind of recreate that out in the field. And I'm seeing Will Finch nod his head. Yes, he's a member of the chair committee. >> Okay. Yep. If you guys can do that, I think that, you know, the neighbors would be would be pleased about that. Like I said, it's really just it those
flags now bend right into that guy's front door, which is unfortunate. >> Okay. Glad to hear it. Thank you, Martha. >> So, I'm thinking I would feel more comfortable if the surveyor does three stakes out in the field. one at the street, one at the
corner where the property line bends, and one where the property line meets the stream. And they actually put a stake in the ground to mark where they found those points. Are you saying they wouldn't be doing that? >> No, I'm just I'm kind of chuckling because I'm not in that same department
and I'm sure the surveyor is going to I can suggest at least three. >> Okay. >> And but what ends up happening I don't have any control over but there it will be enough stakes to understand where the line is. >> Fine. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. And um I'm interested to hear um Kate's comment on who's using that trail. Maybe they're not going very far. They're just going a little ways into the woods um during baseball games. But I also when we were there on the site
visit, it was obvious that that trail entrance was being used by somebody to dump a lot of brush there. Correct. >> Tree branches that had been cut and were piled up on the property of 38. Um, I
don't know who brought them in there, but the if the trail that is now existing as a foot trail goes on our property, then the branches are clearly in the um buffer zone next to the stream
on the property that belongs to 38, but on the far side from their house. So, somebody's c walking on the trail to do that as well. >> Minimal people there. >> Yeah. I lived there for 15 years on 32 Prescott. I saw almost nobody.
>> Yeah. Well, >> but the trail has been >> Prescott. Is it anywhere near Maple? >> There was this historic >> Washington Park. >> There was this historic pile at the at the end of Maple that was like the size of uh I don't know >> lived in the corner of Pres. >> Yeah.
>> Like I don't know a building. Let me say that. and we and we had the DPW who uh graciously removed it for us and and it's being filled up again. >> Okay. So, we're ready to close the hearing on Pineville War.
>> I move close the hearing on the trail in Pineville starting from Warren. >> Conditions. >> Conditions. >> Second or first meeting the conditions. Got it. Uh, Walter Talbert seconds. Walter Tabitz in favor.
>> Michelle in favor. >> Rick in favor. >> Martha Moore in favor. >> Rambo in favor. Okay. Now conditions. What the August big condition is survey >> trail rate. Any other conditions?
>> The usual ones which she already mentioned of hauling your materials out. um >> damaging the wetland as little as possible during construction. >> Are you going to be constructing during dry season?
>> We are unsure of the time yet. We will try to do it during the least damageable time as we are also very big fans of conserving the area as best as possible. We were there. >> Just don't know when we'll have all the approvals and when we'll have the the
volunteers to build. >> Didn't the neighbors say that the people at 48 are brand new? >> That's about a year, give or take. >> Because I just wonder if they had to get a survey to buy their house. >> Doesn't mean that's true. >> Not necessarily.
>> You don't have to get a survey to buy a house. >> Yeah, you don't have to get a survey. >> I wish. Okay. So, whatever. So, we we have conditions. Any other conditions? We have an automatrack condition to inform you before actually start construction, but you would know anyway because it's trails. Any other
conditions? >> Right. Can I have a motion to um issue a negative determination for Warren M. >> So moved. >> Walter Talbot seconds it. Walter Talbertson in favor.
>> Tim Michelle in favor. >> Ke in favor. >> Martha Moore in favor. >> Lambo in favor. Okay. Good. Good night. Thank you everybody out there. >> All right. Thanks. Thanks. Thanks for your time. We appreciate it. >> Oh, and Brandy, >> I'll I'll ask the DPW for the survey.
So, just in case was any mistake that you wanted coming from from the commission. All right. >> Just a comment on that survey offline, whatever. They often locate the center line of of an easement. And so if they
want to put a center line that's between in that order, that would be most useful for us and maybe easier for them. >> Yeah. I I I don't know how it's going to I'm just going to tell them what we're doing and which we've done before.
>> So let's move on to the old new business then. First item there is 25 Cell Street. Martha and I did a site visit. Take it away, Mizmore. >> Thank you. Um we met with the homeowner Mark who
um had Lord Tree came out and was proposing to take a tree or two down for him on the slope behind his swimming pool to
open up the swimming pool to get more light. And they also found one tree that was badly damaged. a lot of rot up the trunk. So, we approved removing that rotted tree and two other trees,
>> leaving snags. >> Leaving snags for all three 10-ft snags. And we approved trimming up to 20% of three more trees on that same bank. and
he is planning to um plant some shrubs or small trees on that bank to continue stabilizing the bank. So, um I think that's all that's relevant. >> We also talked them through cutting the
vines on the trees because there's vines all over that property. Uh we also pointed out u some old hose and a plastic bin. Asked him to take it out. He said he would and we saw couple areas with brush and grass clippings and we
instructed him not to add to those areas. Anything else? Can't think of anything else we so removing any trees. They're all going to be left as snags and it's a total of
three trees that are being cut to snags >> and one fruit. >> What about the trees that were cut down? So there's street trees that were cut down at the street warden issue. >> No, there were trees in the back.
>> There are two snags. One shag. >> These were stumps on the ground. When I went out there, >> there were stumps on the ground. There was something like seven to nine like along the bank as it broke to >> on the left hand side
>> at the face of the house on the left hand side. >> Yeah. >> Were those seen? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. We saw it the first time even. Um >> Yeah. Um,
one of them has sprouted up a lot of oak suckers that are about five feet high, >> I think. Further left than that, though. >> Yeah. >> The ones are close to the ground. So, you are correct. Um, we should be uh asking for more replacements. He did say
he's going to plan. >> So, you have his email. I'll up. So, when you finish when you finish up, let me know. It's an enforcement order, >> right? But you could ask the commission to allow you to talk in there perhaps to
resolve this issue and then you guys resolve it. I could add it to the enforcement or send him and we're done with this one. >> Okay. So he was talking about putting in plantings. How many plantings do you want? >> Well, we can decide
>> him to put in. What are you I mean we we didn't settle on >> two shrubs for each tree. >> Okay. a tree for a tree. >> Okay. >> And then you guys decide how many trees he has to has to install based on your
site visit. >> Like if there was 10 trees coming down and you're like, "Wow, this is big opening. Got to maintain some of this." >> You know, I'm concerned about the the steep drop off. So it needs to be vegetated.
>> And that's the part that he's talking about already talking about planting. He's already concerned with it. Yeah. >> That's where we'll focus our attention. That's a very steep. >> So something like that, you know, you >> Okay, we can put our heads together on that. So can I have a vote?
>> So when did this come about? Because I knew nothing about that one. >> Um >> it's been >> he actually came to two of our meetings. >> It's the first time I've seen South Street on this call. >> Yeah. So you might not have been here or you might have been online and Okay.
>> Maybe it was before I started because it's the first time I've ever seen anything in South Street >> recently. Yeah, Brian and I went out one other time to try and meet with him and >> nobody answered the door.
>> So that time we counted up trees that had been damaged, but it's hard to tell when that damage happened and they only bought a house a couple of years ago. >> So >> I've never seen it before. >> Right. >> 50 W drive
>> 25 South Street. Yeah, it wasn't on the agenda, I don't think. I think you just sent us out to look at it. >> Oh, I might have just asked him to come in because it couldn't be on the agenda. >> There wasn't time. >> There wasn't enough time, so he wanted
to talk to the commission. Maybe that was the first time he talked about >> that was and it's enforcement order, so it wouldn't show up in a hearing. It wouldn't have been a hearing. So, we went out for enforcement order site visit. So, can we have a vote to authorize
>> What are we voting? >> We're going to authorize Martha and I to uh resolve this issue. Finish talking with him about replacements. Are we going to know what the replacements are? >> Yeah, that'll be part of the
conversation. >> So, you're going to have to ratify the enforcement order. So, everything will be on the enforcement order. they'll decide um they'll talk to the applicant and then it'll be on the enforcement order and this commission will have to
look at it and say they agree when it's ratified it's official and I send it to D. So if you felt like something needed to be changed that would be your time to do it before that ratification vote happens >> which will happen in our meeting.
Okay. So, have a motion to authorize Martha and I to resolve this. So, move second. >> I second. Tim seconds. Tim. >> All favor. >> Tobin in favor.
>> Tim Shell in favor. >> All favor. >> Martha Moore in favor. >> Rand in favor. >> Okay. Next item. Certificate compliance. That's not on there. >> Sorry. >> Those are my notes. Yeah. >> Yeah, you're right. Uh Bench at Mlette
SS and Morgan. Chuck, why don't you talk to that? >> Yeah. So, we have Greg uh Schultz here, Gregory Schultz. Um get him online. He's going to do the conversation. Uh let us know that he his mom uh he wants to dedicate a bench at Mlets and
Morgan a certain spot which you saw on uh the application. beside you, that upper path, the wood chip path by the tree. Um, that's where he would like to
pay for a slab and a bench. It's approximately $2,000 for um that area. So, Greg, are you online? Can you hear us? >> Yeah. Can you can you hear me? >> Sure. Yeah, we can hear you. >> All right. Let me I'll put video on as
well. Uh there you go. >> So yeah, um my mom passed away uh a little over two years ago and she was she was a real nature lover. Loved to to uh walk um out in the forests where she
lived um until her health prevented her from doing so. Um, and my wife and I thought it would be a wonderful tribute to her to dedicate a bench uh in an area that she never saw because uh this was finished after she passed away, but I'm sure she would have really enjoyed um
had she been able to see it. Um we just thought dedicating a bench would be a wonderful tribute to her. Um, I talked to Chuck and he mentioned that uh there were plans to put a um bench in that exact spot up on the hill near the lower
uh section of the ponds at Mallet Soms and Morgan. And I offered uh to to take over the costs of both the pad uh and the bench as well as uh the cost of a plaque uh dedicating the bench to to my
mother. Okay, good. Um, any comments or questions? >> I think it's a lovely idea. >> Wonderful. >> I'll make a motion to approve it.
>> Well, so Brian, did you have uh some more in-depth questions? Uh, >> well, clearly I'm >> I mean, clearly you have to be open. I mean, like, we don't know >> this person or >> Right. So that
>> so what Chuck was referring to is when he first mentioned this to me um I don't know how we can ensure that um this dedication um is something we want to stand behind. So to a great extent we're taking your
word for it. Um, I'm fine with that as long, you know, as long as you um state to us that this is a worthy person uh besides her love of of nature. Um, I
don't there's no way. We're not going to do a background check or anything like that. So, we just want to be sure that um that this is a precedent we want to set should any other bench dedications what have you come in the future that we
don't just accept willy-nilly because we get a bench placed. Is that we've thought it through and we think that this person in this case is worthy of a bench in what is a gem of our conservation system. Now there are benches with dedication plaques on them
at umare meadow yeah bare meadow or leading towards bare meadow from material cabin those I actually recognize those names and so yeah so um it's not uh it wasn't unusual to see
that there for me. So anyways I think that this is something the conservation commission does. Um and so I know you got that out. The next thing is I don't know how to get reimbursed uh by
for the for the cement. It seems like some accommodation needs to happen for that. I'd like the the commission to talk about that. >> The pad's already in, right? >> Pad's in. We got it through a grant. Uh so it's part of a grant. So the money
can't go back into the grant. Um this gentleman is going to buy the bench on his own after I provide him the information. He'll deal with that. Bring it over to Mlette Arms Morgan. We'll we'll put it together and attach it. Uh, as far as the plaque goes and what it says, that should be run past the
commission prior to um installing it. I'm not sure. I'm I'm sure the homeowner can't install it. I'm sure Greg can't install it. It could be me or it could be the DPW. So, that's how that's going to happen. Or the sign company. So,
>> so in as far as the cost of the slab, um what we were thinking is that um perhaps you could make a commensurate donation to the conservation fund. Is that something you could do? >> Absolutely. Um but also in talking with
Chuck, he mentioned that that you had plans to install another bench somewhere in MSM. Um maybe I just pay for that pad as well. That's could be another option. >> Uh sure, it's fine. I mean that that would be great as well. I just um you talk about the one at bare metal up on
the top. >> No, there's another one. I don't know if we've thought about every spot yet. That might be further out than uh but it's something to discuss. So, can you do a motion for either or or something like that? And then we'll have to decide in the next
couple of weeks whether this works or not. >> Yeah. Reimbursement in some way. >> Yes. >> Shape or form. either the donation for this slab or pay for slab. >> I can't take a whack at that motion.
>> Is there any way for him to make a donation to your budget? >> Well, so we have a fund called the conservation commission fund and that allows us to spend that money on any uh anything um any environmental
uh need that we have. So it's not just trees, it's not just construction, it can be any worthwhile project. So it gives us the most latitude on on um you know purchases.
So a concrete pad would would work out of that account. So that's why that was what Brian mentioned. Um but you know in kind uh and in kind um or to have that slab installed again
we use volunteer labor >> and so we get the cement either in a buggy or we mix it up ourselves or the DPW does it. So, none of this has been discussed and that was just a good location that um me and Joe were
standing up there when Gregory talked to us and um we thought maybe that would be a good spot. But um it really hasn't been no one else has has kind of agreed with us. So maybe that's why I'm hesitating
on saying yeah we have a spot. >> No, I think that's a good spot. In fact, I talked about it when I talked at the opening opening celebration. I talked about >> a bench with a plaque on the top of the hill and I asked for donations. >> No, we're talking about the one where
the replacement slabs. >> Never mind. >> Yeah. Everyone likes this spot. >> Yeah. Okay. Anyway, so we have a motion um to cover either either approach either for this slab or future slab. Do you want to try that or do you want me
to? >> I I will make a motion that he can cover part of this slab. Um I'll leave that up for you and Chuck to decide on the best route to take it, but I will approve that. >> Sure. So, a motion to a motion to um
either pay it's we it's $400 basically when you're done. So, it's $400 for the slab. So, a check to the conservation fund for $400 or to uh pay for that same amount >> future slab >> for a future slab.
>> Y second that >> plus the bench. >> Yeah. >> He's going to buy So, the way that works is he's he will just buy the bench. So, >> that doesn't have to be part of the motion. >> No. Okay. >> He's just going to buy the bench and bring it over. We're actually ready for
the bench. I I hate to tell you, there's already a bench on top of that slab up there on the top of the hill. >> Is it really? No. >> It yesterday. >> Really? >> There's a bench installed on the slab on the top of the hill under the tree. The point Brian pointed out.
>> Is it the same green? The green one. >> It's one of the standard benches with the Dylan these days. >> It's a green frame with the tan slats. >> Yeah. >> That mountain songs. >> Yeah. Yeah, I sat on it and looked over
the duck pond down below. >> So, >> so that doesn't So, I told you that we had plans. So, um those volunteers might have might have installed a fence already, a bench already, which is really common. >> In the same in the same view, >> which is
>> we certainly could have put a plaque on that bench. I'm guaranteed there's no plaque on it yet. >> No, I checked. There's no plaque. >> There's a there's a manufacturer thing on the corner, but it's not a plaque. And then perhaps we could take your generous donation and use that for a
bench on that future slab that we've been talking about. >> Yeah. Mystified because there's but >> that bench is still in front of Material Cabin. >> So they stole it from somewhere and put it up there. >> I don't know who installed that bench up
there, but there's a bench sitting in cement on the top. >> We have an issue though. Let's let's talk about that. >> How about if we accept um a a donation from him to cover the the cost of a bench and the cost of the plaque and the cost of the cement and
he'll buy the plaque with that money and we'll put the plaque on the bench that's already >> himself will put the plaque on the bench. >> So, uh just reimburse us for the bench and the cement slab and he can buy the buy the plaque. >> Okay.
>> Okay. Are you okay with that? >> Sorry about this confusion, but I'm sure that uh someone's >> taking a walk tomorrow. >> Yeah, >> I'm sure it's exactly what you were supposed to get because I don't know if there's other benches hanging around. Uh
>> okay. You okay with that? >> Well, he'll go and check it out and let us know. >> I mean, I'm I'm fine. I mean, I' I've walked um um Bare Meadow and I've seen the benches there. Uh I've seen the plaques there. Uh, in the email I sent
to you, Chuck, I also looked at some benches that are installed by um the high school. That may not have been done on the conservation committee. That may be be through the through uh the the board of education. Um, but the plaque that I'm looking for is nothing nothing
ostentatious. I want to, you know, bare minimum plaque with a phrase something along the lines of um um in in memory of Karen Schultz and then in quotation marks grands, which is what what our grandchildren call her. >> And if you can just put that in writing
writing, >> I have I sent Chuck an email. >> Okay. And then he can send to us in case somebody all of a sudden has some complaint which they won't suggest a formality. >> All right, let's get the let's get the money stuff out of the way and then take a vote. So what's the final final?
>> Final final is we would accept a donation to cover the cost of a slab somewhere and a bench on that slab and the cost not the cost of a plaque as he would just provide it. So just the slab
and the bench. So that's 17400 2100. >> Anything about the cost of installation of the plaque? >> Excuse me. anything about the cost. Do we need to add the cost of the installation of the plaquechuck?
>> Uh, so I would just do it myself. So there's no cost involved, but you know, you could also use because because being a town employee, I can I can work on town land. >> Um, which I'm not it's four screws, so I'm not going to even go crazy over it. But you could also have the sign company
do it if if that was something that you want. I'm just worried about the liability. So that's why you can't do it. Yeah. >> Um >> All right. So, if you could um donate that money to the conservation
commission fund and Chuck can give you the details if you don't have them already. And we're talking bench in a slab. So, 2100. >> No. No. 2,000. I >> thought you said it was 17 and four. >> Okay. Take it back. 200. You see it's at
100. I appreciate it. Thank you. >> Checks made out to the town of Reading in the memo portion says to the conservation commission fund >> details I didn't know. >> Okay.
>> I I'm unless it's a different story. >> No, no, it's it's >> there's only 11. Don't worry about it. Chapter 11. >> It's and it's the right bench. It's a brand new bench. >> Okay. that a little bit. >> We appreciate this very very much. Okay.
>> And I'm I'm glad your mother >> um was a nature lover and I agree. She would have loved that area because it's it's a jewel. >> And and not to worry, she was an upstanding citizen. She was not anybody have to worry about >> she wasn't worried about it, but it's a precedent. So I had to ask, I guess.
>> Understandable, Chuck. I'll walk I'll I'll walk the site tomorrow, let you know if I find anything different, but >> Okay. >> Well, thanks for waiting so long to talk. I'm I'm glad uh you thought of that and I'm I'm glad that you know it was accepted. So >> I apologize for the confusion.
>> We didn't actually vote. >> So did you make that motion? >> Oh my god. It was a changed slightly by Brian. >> I'm not sure what the motion. >> Do you accept the friendly amendment? >> I accept the friendly amendment. Okay. So Rick moved. Who
>> seconds? Walter Talbot seconds. Walter Talbot in favor. Tim Michelle in favor. Are you in favor? >> Yes, I'm in favor. >> Martha Moore in favor in favor. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you all very much. I appreciate
it. Have a good night. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> That just shows how often we accept donations. >> All right. So, let's just >> I had no idea. >> Let's just forget about the rest of the agenda and >> No, no, we got to got to prove some minutes. >> No, we don't. >> Yes, we do.
>> Johanna Drive. uh continued. There's no violations to discuss the meeting for the DBW August 5th. There's no administrative report. Let's go to the minutes. >> Okay. Uh 611 25. Can I have a motion to uh approve
the minutes from June 11th? >> I move to approve to accept the minutes from June 11th. >> Walter Talbot seconds. Walter Talbotz in favor. Rick in favor. Michelle in favor. >> Wmore in favor.
>> Brian Bow in favor. Have we seen 625 yet? >> I don't think so. >> I don't think so either. >> I don't think so. >> Okay. So, that's all we can do. Um, so any last thoughts before we adjourn? Please say no. >> Nope.
>> Okay. Have a motion to adjourn at 11:06. >> So moved. >> All in favor? >> Wow. do the thing I love to do. >> I'm always afraid the racket will just knock the head off. >> Anybody need their summer vest or you
want to get that next year? >> Summer vest.