recording in progress. >> I can try. >> I'm gonna get You're gonna be distracted when I try to do this. Uh, okay. We're ready to start here. Uh, hello everyone. This is Chuck Terrone, uh, Ratings Conservation Administrator. This meeting will be conducted in person and remote
format consistent with chapter 2 of the acts of 2023, which further extends certain for the vision of the CO 19 measures regarding remote participation in public meetings until June 30th, 2027. Please note that not all all items
listed may in fact be discussed and the other items listed uh may be brought up to the uh for discussion to the extent permitted by law. This agenda includes those matters which can be reasonably anticipated to be discussed at tonight's meeting.
Please note that this meeting is being recorded. All materials uh for this meeting are available at the conservation division page under projects by year. Brian Bo, the commission's chair who will facilitate
this meeting. Please note that there will be a public comment period uh for each hearing. Each vote taken uh during this meeting will be conducted by roll call and we'll begin with a roll call attendance. Uh Brian, can you take the
attendance and review the agenda? >> Okay, I'll start with the attendance. Um Walter >> Walter Talbert, commissioner present member present. >> Has to be open. >> Vice chair present.
>> Brian go chair present. Um starting time 7:05. Um I'll review the agenda quickly. Um we start with the continuation on Zero Vine Street followed by opening of a public hearing on Zero Small Lane.
Then open public hearing on notice of intent for 24 Dustin Road. A request for a plan change for zero and net lanes. And we have several discussion items. a handful of old new
business items and an admin report. Okay, having said that, >> Brian, uh, continuation of zero vine, >> excuse me, >> is it a continuation of zero vine or is it we're opening the public hearing to
zero bind? >> I resubmitted. >> Yeah, good point. My mistake. >> Absolutely. Yeah. Um yeah, so this is opening the public hearing a notice of intent. My mistake.
Okay. Having said that, um, do one of you want to get up and say feel. All right. Hello everyone. My name is G, environmental at the MTA. I just want to say thank you for having the MTA
tonight. opportunity to speak on the next event for the reading turnback track for zero vine street. The DP number is 27082. Uh before I get into details, I'd like to just say that this work proposed um
there's no work no work is proposed with any wetland resources proposed outside zone with only a limited amount of work proposed with this is the agenda that we'll be going over uh tonight. Going over project
scope, the details, purpose, um where the weapon protection act jurisdiction is this project timeline and so the purpose of this project is to bring 30 minute frequency right into Boston. So here listed um is the
proposed service for the train. Um so right now we are on the Gabriel commuter rail. So it will be what we call a turnback track an existing uh historic double track area. We train around 4500 ft track. Uh around 14 trains will be
doing this turn for the weekday 5:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. Operationally, how it works, the train pulls into the station, unloads the passengers, the train pulls into the turnback track. The crew changes from the locomotive to the cab. At the habil train, the normal train
passes, the conductor does his brake test, and then the train moves into the station five minutes before on boarding passengers. So this is the proposed uh site. It is uh the Reading Depot station. Historically was a double track former
the track. Uh so we're planning to utilize the historic second track. Uh so the railroad bed is still there. It is b currently ballasted um today as it used to be. It extends from Neworn Street to Willow Street around 4500 ft. The 4500
ft was based on maximum train speed, train length, breaking curves, sight lines and track geometry. So for this where we have um a switch where that allows the front back track to go turn the train to go to turn back track. Um
how this was designed was the train can't sit on the the crossover switch. uh can't sit on a curve and it has to be in a straight line especially for the post track fan that we'll be talking about. Um we don't want track fans to
have any sway in them if there was ever an instance of a capture as much of that as possible. So, we don't want to have that um in a slanted area. And in the map below, you can see uh the rightway length of
the property. And just some pictures of the train back in 1950 and what it currently looks like currently. to where we're looking. Um, and it's a snowy picture, uh, but it would be to the left of the existing track is where traffic.
>> So, the MB looked into multiple alternative locations. A lot of these were brought up with the public. Um, and we evaluated, the team evaluated these, but to allow for the 30 minute frequency, this was the location chosen. Uh, here we have our engineering plans.
So the top is what we call it kind of call the west area. Um and then the bottom is the east area closer to the station. We have delineated delineated on this map the 100 foot buffer zone. We have the 100 foot river. We are outside
the riverfront. Um the dark uh crossings are the erosion controls we go in and the bottom you can see and some of our existing uh so all work uh activities listed here so this is everything uh that's going on for this project are occurring within
existing valin areas within the right of way so erosion controls um in that previous slide it detailed what erosion controls were proposing it's composite with fence. Again, they'll be installed private construction and will stay there through the life of ground streng
activity. So, there'll be no possible sedimentation into any of the uh any areas. Top six inches of the existing ballast about top six inches would be removed um and uh disposed of offsite and then new ballast would be brought
in. Um we have one crossover installed. So, I some crossover switch kind of they're We'll have new underground condo and a signal pole notified train that'll be installed existing signal box on site. Rail and railroad ties will be brought
in and then tamping rail ties so they're level balanced. We are proposing uh 16 hopefully native trees um and a screening for visual for self traps. a track panel be installed
city with an absorbent pad. Uh there's a bun that's installed on any we wherever we have an end of track. That's just to prevent um a track a train. And then a propane tank will be installed to keep the switches during cold water cold weather. Sometimes they
lock up and then the propane tank just for it's around 500 gallons and it's above ground. Next slide please. So uh proposed tree screen planting. So this is not being done for restoration
or for mitigation. This is solely uh for visual. We've heard a lot of the community uh concerns with this. So this is about 80 feet of trees will be grown to uh where the locomotive will be sitting where the track will be. So it's create a visual barrier. Um in the
notice of intent we didn't uh we suggested a few species. I think that's something we can work with the commission on. Uh they have a vertical buffer with low maintenance. Um sunny mature trees will be planted. uh they'll be planted within our right ofway and in
buffer zone and around uh near to the top of this float and depending on the work season there'll be either fall or spring planting and then for this industry standard is one year for replacement. Uh usually that's what nurseries do. Sometimes they
do two years but we'll be ensuring um success first year we can get two years to the nursery. standards. Next slide. Oops. So, this is a proposed track pan. Uh, just a show of a bun. Bun. Like I said, we have it wherever
get a lot of stops over. So, the bun is about 100 ft from where the locomotive will be sitting uh during the turn. That's just an example picture right there. The track pan, that's also an example picture from one of our
layovers. It's about 80 feet long. Inside that track pan will be an absorbent p. So the track pan itself can hold 30 gallons um in case there is a possible release. The absorbent mat absorbs only oil and that can absorb up to 48 gallons of oil. And our crews
right now go will be inspecting twice a week as they do the lines. This will be seen if there's anything that's noticed. Those absorber pads will be disposed of properly perhaps and the locomotive will be stopping at
the same location um every time it does this turn. This is done through a bulletin to our conductors. Um and we spoke out in the field, but we can also put a sign um as a double measure for the conductors to know that this is the location that they need to stop.
Jeremy, before we go on the track pan, is that covered with stone or ballast or is it open just like we see? >> It is open like that. >> And and so that's how you can tell when it's it needs uh maintenance, right? >> Yeah, exactly. And then you can tell the
absorbent mats really do when there is oil. Um they will be able to see that. And the track pan comes in three different materials. Um so it can either fiberglass, it can be metal, or it can be plastic. We usually do metal because it's in house be more custom to fit our
needs and be able to install. So this is the work within u the wetland protection act jurisdiction the track pan and the bun which is part of our tracks uh B&Ps those erosion controls will be installed those temporary because they'll be removed uh they're being installed in ballast and then
restored with ballast we have 157 millennial heat craft will be installed the buffer zone and that both um that plans that we show there's the wester west west area and east area so those are the numbers both locations and again just to reiterate the buffer is not a
resource here area protection act as such there are no standards exempt so 16 trees if there uh you know we can work with the commission but the ones we propose are we considered native so native trees are an exempt activity under the wetland protection act and
that's 10.02 B2D they'll be planted within like I said buffer within our rightway slope and then 42 Three linear feet of conduit and associated signals are proposed within focus zone to uh border border of education wetland BBW
that as well as an exempt activity for B25 and work that is not within the WPA but want to just capture everything that the project is doing. Um so it's 3,443 lineal uh feet of track and associated
track work will be installed. One propane tank that uh heat the switches. Um the crossover is during cold weather events. One crossover and 426 of conduit associated state
and again um all this is timeline uh pretty quick about a year um depending whether to tend in. Um past couple days the weather has been great. Um, so depending on when the we get the order of conditions is issued, I'm not saying we start right
away, but if the weather is uh benefit, we could start soon as winter 2025. Um, but most likely spring 2026 with a completion estimated completion of want to thank everyone for your time. Uh hopefully we've addressed um all
concerns when it comes to the wetland protection acts in the jurisdiction and please let me know if you have any questions that regarding this project. >> Thank you. >> Uh just before we start I'd let Bill Doyle in. Is there anyone else uh on
Zoom that you would like me led into this meeting? >> Um I would say either Janice Kernney or that's where the vehicle seat. Correct. >> Yes. And test. >> Okay.
>> Okay. Thank you. Um are there any questions, comments from the commission? >> Sure. Um so we before we start talking about the wetland impact directly, um has Energy Environmental Affairs or the MEEPA office like issued a
jurisdictional determination for confirming whether this project is subject to any state environmental review. >> So we've done our due diligence and we don't believe um a resident did reach out to NEPA and NEA reached out to us asking what the project um what we thought of the project. So no
concurrence was given but we did let them know that we did not believe that this project exceeded any >> and there was no submitted like environmental notification form at all for the project >> uh ENF for >> yeah because we didn't exceed any thresholds we didn't can you talk a
little bit more about those thresholds like how we would exceed them >> uh I can I don't have them all this like that's there's just kind of like high level >> um so like One common one is like public shade trees. You're removing five public
shade trees with a diameter of like 14 inches. You would have to go through that's a common one that you see at the MTA that we trigger NEA on the web not expert. I just don't remember.
>> Okay. >> But that's something we can >> Sure. Yeah. um kind of I want to pivot a little bit into land uses with higher potential moving loads as well. Um so the storm
water standard five um so under Mass DP storm water handbook rail layovers idling areas they're classified as land uses with higher potential loads um those typically require like enhanced storm water controls and spill plans um
under 310 CMR 10.056 056K in the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook, Volume 1, Section 1.3, Standard 5, applies to any project that involves the operation or construction of facilities associated with billy yards, train layovers, or storage areas. Um, where
I'm going with this is it seems like the MBTA proposal here is involving the construction and daily use of a diesel layover sighting rather than just siding. you're you're not going to have um revenue passengers at this location
while you're doing the idling. Um so can you kind of dive into why this isn't considered a layover, but you have similar kind of like layover implement installed on >> we do not consider this a stationary source of a >> so that's why we don't we're not
considering we're not subject to that. >> So what's a what's a stationary source I guess? When we have layovers, usually they're like the end of track where trains pull in, they're plugged in or they stay overnight. We're not proposing any trains to be laying over in this on
this track. So, you will not be saying trains overnight. Um, we have to have crews do that as well because we're not proposing that because no crews can be there. Um, there's not a facility there for layover to plug in to do anything. It needs there's going to be no maintenance on the train when it's
sitting like if it were to sit there. So, that's why it's not considered a stationary source. >> Okay. So I guess with that then so um I see in your application it standard five was marked not applicable in the filing. So even though it's hosting the idling
diesel locomotives daily um why was it just marked not applicable in the WPA? >> So idling is when a train is not doing operational activity. So layovers it's staying overnight at all times. This train is conducting an operational
engine switching from the locomotive to the cab. We're writing brake test and then it goes back into the station. The process itself would probably take it has to be under 30 frequencies but so it is conducting operational activity for train to go
back >> and that's the same activity that you're currently doing in the station today with your eight turns effectively >> the same. Okay. Um kind of want to position again into
pollution prevention. So 310 CMR 10.554A 10.57282. Um so this site sits above mapped aquifier protection zones. Uh continuous diesel idling introduces nitrogen oxides, particulates, fuel drips that
can infiltrate groundwater. And I know NOx emissions are recognized as a pollutant load because they can deposit into soils, water surface via atmospheric settings and rainfall settling in rainfall and alter kind of wetland chemistry. So um what kind of
what measures are you proposing here besides the drip pan that could prevent fuel or oil from seeping into like subgrade soils? >> Are the regulations you just site is that under the weapons protection act? >> Yeah, the emissions isn't covered under the protection act.
But the uh sanctuary impacts and pollution prevention of pollution interests would be under that. >> So for storm water um we this we're not introducing additional imperous
um non additional impervious surfaces. So every we're replacing ballots and then the track fans will be there to capture to capture any trips or anything like that. Um
I'm just trying to think here. So um so there won't be any sort of groundwater monitoring uh for hydrocarbons or nitrates during this operation in this location with how you're proposing the construction of the sighting. There's no no monitor at all.
>> Can there be or is that something that is again not necessarily governed by a WPA or my knowledge it's I would have to see the citation to see where it falls under the WPA. I know traffic.
>> So around I I guess I want to kind of pivot again to wildlife habitat and sanctuary impacts. So this proposed track sighting borders bird sanctuary mats morgan. Um I understand that the WPA doesn't directly cover vibration
noise and lights for unlo global wildlife but has the MBTA completed any wild life habitat evaluation per 310 CMR 1060? >> We did a wild we did a wetland delineation for this project on January
21st 2025. Y and we also compared to GIS mass mapper and that's all within buffer zone work. So as performance standards we had an existing train going through
and so that that would be the same for natural heritage and endangered species program. So there was no review for rare endangered species in this area. We look we didn't we don't have uh visa index so we didn't we went through the list of
possible permits um around even kind of mitigation for noise and vibration during any nesting periods again that that wouldn't apply then for >> so we ran uh section seven through consultation for us fish and wildlife and there was no adverse effect their
concerns are bats the big one for roosting and there was no adverse effects um around noise and vibration so not necessarily WPA but it's still significant for this location so continuous idling potential engine start
that that may exceed FRA and FTA noise thresholds for nearby homes and wildlife Has there been a conducted noise and vibration assessment based on like FRA and FTA? >> I'll say there's been multiple public hearings um and TF public select board
as well. >> Yes. >> And those have been uh spoken about and addressed there. >> Okay. So what was the purpose of then doing the sound study for example? Uh was it just for residentsform informationational like
>> my knowledge? Yes, it was based off the feedback um we received from the town. >> That's as far as my knowledge I focus on. >> And so if if there was a meet the threshold that was exceeded then a full
sound study would have been conducted or a noise and vibration study it would have been a different process. If we exceeded and meet the threshold, we would have to go to meet the yeah trigger ENF unfortunately. Um I do wanted to call
somebody um Tess or Janice on the call or more symptomatic experts and before we can because we didn't exceed any pressure and was there any even consideration I know 30 minutes 25 minutes return 5 minutes back to the station um automatic
engine start stop technology anything like that that typically would be used for temporary idling situations >> I can't see I don't The engine does not stop. >> It uh we need four different trades to turn on.
>> So if we're to turn off the turn back track, the train. >> So that's that's why it's very important that it's not >> turn because at a layover we can turn the staff there.
Could you just introduce yourself for the record? You don't have to do it every time, but once clearly >> um want to get into the alternative analysis as well. So, typically state one regulations require any project within riverfront areas or near
riverfront areas demonstrated that no less damaging practiceable alternatives exist. Do you want to kind of elaborate briefly on the alternative site locations? I know you've given public hearings on it. it hasn't necessarily been detailed around the environmental impacts of why those options didn't
work. So, for example, I know the latest one was the 1293 bridge option. There was some rightway issues with uh power lines. I believe you have power lines that are in the one right of way. But, um around the environmental analysis of
those six alternatives kind of what is the process that the MBTA? >> Right. So like you said we did do it because especially with the public feedback and just part of our normal project we would look at alternatives this project kind of just say we are outside the area so we're not required
to do an analysis um other than what you've heard and Sharon could speak on the other six five or six locations that were brought up public hearing for >> so that would Again with that
alternatives analysis uh environmental sensitivity you want to be considering environmental sensitivity with like cost or operational convenience. So for example the reason why one of the reasons why you're not constructing this in depot is that to construct it in the
depot there's limitations that preventing you from doing that. So you have ADA accessibility guidelines and AAB guidelines that are triggering 30% improvement to the facility. If you do that, you're going up to full ADA standards. The whole station would have to be rebuilt. Um,
but you're now putting that burden in an environmentally sensitive area. So, you're putting it outside of the station. It's in conservation adjacent land. Um, when you're looking at those options, is cost a factor or is it environmental
balance for cost? >> I can't speak on costs. I'm not involved chosen. >> Sharon could help out with that. Um I just know for environmentally
end of day we are just buffers historical double track. you would like more information on the alternatives to when it comes to budgeting. Projects come to us and we do evaluate
based off others. We go through the permit. We have a checklist, internal checklist that we go through 17 or 19 possible permits and we can have statement. we run our due diligence that we can't advise if some projects you have to go
this you go this route this might trigger this thought about that um this in our sense being that it's just proper zone it's very >> kind of to that point though so when this was first proposed the turn was
first propo turn track service was first proposed mlets Morgan the conservation area hadn't been rebuilt it was pretty much seen as wetlands area undeveloped. You might have had a couple of trails associated with it. Um, when was that
decision made by the MBTA to move any work outside of Depot to the current proposed location? Did that happen after AAB changed their policies with >> I can't answer that but
so I'm actually not aware issue was not it was all part So that was as October 1st, 2020. >> Same location. options to try. Is this your first proposed
um turn track that exists outside of the station that's being used in this capacity? So I know you have Anderson, you have Beverly. Both of that is happening in the station. Is this the first time that you're Is it adjacent to conservation or
wetlands? >> And again >> with idling adjacent to what? We have done a lot of secondary tracks. You know, turnback way is a secondary track. We have done a lot of secondary tracks through wetlands, the riverfront.
for our system. Yeah, I think we talked about that during the sidewalk as well. Okay. >> Um Thank you. >> Um, lastly, I have just two additional points. So, adaptive management and monitoring. So, long-term idling may
have unforeseen impacts for this particular location. Um, will the NBTA commit to any an annual environmental monitoring for groundwater, storm water quality, or wildlife observations, air quality, anything like that associated
with the service as it's ramping up? Well, for storm water, there is no change in conditions. So, no, like I said, no new impervious surface standards. So, we're not proposing. We just we don't trigger anything that
requires that train. We do and layovers that's monitored but >> vehicle. >> Yes. >> Um but we are not this there because it's buffer zone there is no proposed
mitigation monitoring restoration due to >> considering how this process has gone for the last year is the MTA can can the MBTA ensure transparency with the public regarding any compliance with the use of this turn track or any concerns that are
brought up from residents from the town etc. If there are wetlands impacts that are observed I mean we have hundreds of people a day that use zones are going to notice things when leafing is down when leaves are in you know whether or not a
train is idling for more than 30 minutes on the turn track. uh if there's delays you're you're going to hear it from the public. Uh I mean I can say we are uh we are state agency actually we get there are concerns reach out it happens
throughout our system people constantly reach out questions why what's going on here people have the right to reach out to us and we will respond I feel like we've been pretty transparent when it comes to the public hearings and stakeholder meetings um I feel like
we're as transparent as possible with the impacts here and additional tree screenings. Again, that was not needed part of this. It has nothing to do with operations. It's all visual track as well. Something we usually wouldn't do because it's only
sitting there for such a short time. Um, so I feel like we have been addressing as we hear concerns. But of course, if there's people that notice things, please let us know. >> Chuck, I got a question on that one then. So, if if this gets approved and
there are issues, then what path do residents have for that be to conservation because it's a potential a wetland's impact would be to fire. Um um so if you have excessive idling if
you see it for a week for example hour at a time the train pulls right onto the siding sitting there for an hour the GP40 it's the loud one of the loudest trains that they have locomotives that they run sits there for an hour who's the town called an operational procedure
for that >> for the conservation commission. Uh so if um so when we get through this process we need to do our findings first and write an in order of conditions but let's say there was a condition that
capped idling at 30 minutes then it would be a violation under our jurisdiction and we send out but that doesn't mean you can't contact the health department, police department and fire department also.
The EPA does require us to disclose all so it's it's there but not and I would say the order though for anything that's outside we would have a discussions on that conditions that we
Sure. Let me preface by saying the most environmentally efficient way to get from reading to Boston is by train. No question about today's technology. I have a couple concerns though about
what's going to happen diesel staying in one place for the time. Originally I remember from our first meetings it was a 15minute well time and now I think I just saw 30 minutes perhaps. So the maximum so it would
never really be there for 30 because we have to hit the prison frequencies. So I think that's the maximum possible it could be. We aren't we will not have most likely will not be sitting for 30 minutes there to get to the back to the running station if the passengers then go to Boston. Um
so the way after the conductor switches the from Robo to the cab does the brake check and pulls in will be less than 30 minutes. If I've done my math correctly, when you're traveling at 60 miles an hour,
the uh HSP 46 would cover its length, its own proper length in about 1.6 seconds. Now, we're going to stay for 15 minutes. That's over a 500 time more. Well,
looking at the train station where we know the trains are are dwelling. You look at the eyes, you look at the track, you look at the ballast, it it's covered with oil and grease. So, the troth pan is a good idea. I'm a
little disappointed that I don't see a specific design diagram for that pan. Is it impervious? No, the pan will hold um liquids if it would not be leaking out and then the absorbent mats would be collected in the
hole. >> And then the pad and what is that material? >> Uh I can provide the specs of our pads um to the commission um um I can provide what pads we use
>> and also an MSDS. >> Yeah. And now you use the term it's going to hold oil. It now rains. Does that mean the pad's going to float? >> No, the pads won't float. And so the
pads will just be collecting the oil. Even if the track pan was filled with water, the pads do not run off. >> What's keeping them in the pan? >> Um, I can get you that answer short. We don't know if they're tied down or
just by the weight heavier than water they stay in haven't I didn't get >> when you use the term oil is that a generic term to include grease >> um it would or the grease would be
sitting on the bottom of the track as well but it would I think the specs would detail exactly on what materials they have all possible And it's predicted we're going to get more rain, especially in the winter,
early spring. If the water overflows, what happens? >> It'd go into the ballast area. And at these locations where 40 60 ft of ballast and fill above the wetlands, above the conservation area.
Um, but it would be it' be captured there. Like I guess the crews go there twice, be driving by twice a week and they'll be looking at these pads, looking at these pans. If they notice that it was overflowing. If they notice something done, we address
>> I'll assume like most things they're not 100% efficient. I'm just concerned about water raising and any reaching over the sides. I can get you information exactly on how they work with those specs with the MSD forms as
well. >> Is that design a proprietary design? >> No, we just have um because our tracks it it's a they're not the standard fit because we different location, different layovers. Um sometimes they're on concrete, sometimes they're on plastic ties, sometimes on wooden ties we use.
So they're shaped for where they're supposed to be. Your picture there, all I saw was two rails and a gray surface. >> That was at a layover where the trains plug in for overnight so the locomotive
does not off. >> So when a we don't so at night we turn off the locomotive. >> Yeah. >> So that those track pans will still capture everything but that's when it the train is sitting there off. But the gray surface
is that the pad. >> No, that's just there was no pad in that one. That was just the pan >> at that location. That example picture just to show an example of what that was just an example picture of what some of our track uh pans in our system have an absorbent match.
>> So the pan rests on rails. >> Yes. >> So the height is only the height of the rail then >> but it collects up to 30 gallons. The entirey of the track will hold up to 30 gallons. >> I know it's going to be catastrophic,
but your engines have gallon oil capacity 240, >> correct? >> Yeah. >> I'm not exactly sure the total number, but yes. I mean, we can see this the same with cars if they're going to leak on the highway next to a river. Same thing releasing.
The goal is to ever have a release. That's not a chance to do. Yeah, I'd love to see the diagram of the paint, please. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> And then personal comment would be I'm a little disappointed on some of the sketches and drawings we have where
there's not even a scale on them. And to compound that, when I you folks on the tour on Monday, people ask other fellows were asking questions, where's this, where's that? Oh, we think it's there.
We think it's there. We think it's there. I'm a little surprised that somebody didn't put out steak, spray paint something. Here's where the siding starts. Here's where the bumper is going to be. Here's where the trough is going to be. I was a little disappointed in that.
>> Absolutely. And we can do better moving forward a lot of times because of foul times to have our crews go out at certain that site visit to have everyone on site. We had to have multiple flaggers because we don't have the RP have signal. So, it's just a lot of
crews that are involved for that, but we can be better next time for having those staked out. Um, a lot of times we don't like to have certain things sting the tracks within four feet. We want to track temporary specifically maybe
because it's a safety issue for our trains. Um, but yes, moving forward. And why did you choose 80 feet as the length of the chalk? >> It's uh just bigger than it's bigger than the locomotive city.
>> Again, when I went to the Reading station, you can see the oil tripage much wider longer than the length of the engine. >> Should it be longer? >> It is longer currently. Um and stations
used more often. Um but I mean as you may appreciate decades to high level where is because just going back to why we have normally
we have a track down to stop any linkage when we're this is meant for major catastrophic leak is the routine use metabolic. My prejudice is as a retired motorcycle
rider, the most dangerous thing you could do is either go through a toll booth or go over a railroad bus. I've just looked at all the stuff down at station. I'm saying that pan should be longer than 80 ft because I can't
believe you're use the obsolete term engineers can stop on a dime the same place every time. They can have to regulation and secondly they have to
turn out. Isn't it human nature since there's no passenger I can be a little sloppier in stopping on time. There is a rules. So
you can do everything. I don't want to spend your money, but I feel more comfortable >> a longer track uh the pad the underneath it the trackpad. Um so it has to be straight, right? We can't do it in a curve. >> Um I think that is something that we can
look into. Um, but it, you know, the goal right now is just to capture where the fluids would be. If it would, if the commission wanted to see it at 100 feet and it would still straight, I'm sure that is something we can look into. I say realis. It was
>> um and I did get an answer. The track mats are secured by wooden screws to stabilize them. >> I I still would like to get more information. >> Right. No, I'm just saying one of your questions. Yeah, absolutely. >> Thank you. Appreciate it. Appreciate it.
>> A lot of my questions were about the track pan as well. And I understand that if you're in a covered area and rain's not getting in, you have the capacity to hold what was it 30 gallons. But if it's
sitting out in a rainstorm, aren't those 30 gallons of oil going to be lifted up by the water and float out and go down the hills into our wetlands? >> The mats are there to capture the capture the water. So the mat should be absorbing the oil and then they have a
larger capacity than the trap pans. They can absorb up to 48 gallons of oil. And if we make it longer then there'll be more tension out. >> Okay. So the oil binds to the mat and will no longer float above water because
oil is less dense than water. >> Probably should remember that from school, but I just know that and I can like I said, I can provide the SCS forms on the absorbent PS and how they it's supposed to absorb and not go
into the trough with the water the oil. >> Um, and I'm wondering about the um actual railroad ties that the tracks are going to be sitting on. Um in my experience,
the like landscape timbers which are railroad ties coated and are considered to be hazardous waste when you have to get rid of them. Is there creassote in these railroad ties you're going to be putting down along this cornack track?
>> Uh yes. And the ones that are existing there are >> Does that creassote leech out and leech down into the soil below? >> Um no. We've used it throughout historically throughout our sites. Um and if you were to leech it's very
minimal um to my knowledge, but I don't I have we haven't had any reports of any issues. We have trains that go through public water supply areas where we use preser ties. To my knowledge, there has been more um definitely look more into
that with presum. >> Okay. Okay. Um just want to say let me save that for a minute. Let me back to something else. So can you very
briefly describe the procedure where the conductor test the brakes in a turnaround. >> I mean briefly I doesn't have to be jump. >> Sorry. Are you just asking are you asking for specific things like they're doing?
>> Sure. conductor. He goes one end to the other, >> test the brakes while he's doing it. How's that work? >> I haven't gone through that training. It's one of those that I know this activity exists. I know that there's a visual inspection involved. Um, but I
don't know all the exact details. >> So visual implies that he's outside looking at something. >> Yes, you have to get outside of the train and look at >> That's my point. So through this whole process, we've heard in any number of situations that, well, that would be a
violation. We have rules for this or things of that nature. And Martha or somebody talked to human nature. I can just tell you the day of the site walk, we went to the station afterwards to look at the uh the track and we actually
watched the turnaround. The conductor went along the inside of the train. So, he didn't get out. He didn't look at anything outside to inspect the uh the brakes. I'm not saying that you can go give him a violation. My point is saying
that your protection for the wetlands is by following rules isn't by any means iron clack. >> So, to clarify, yeah, not the expo on this either, but there's two people. Obviously there's the train driver from
these brace um who is doing one set of testing and then the conductor moving through the train has to be responsible for the brake test to the extent the brake test fails get out and check what condition is so
that's the stage I know so I it's conditional and if you can't get out and you are in a position to be able to do that safely that is the issue I don't think it's time for example a platform station
you still do the test inside the train if there was an issue then >> okay so presumably in the situation we saw he was doing something inside the train didn't see an issue didn't have to go outside multiple systems check
that's as far as my knowledge goes to go beyond that is a process. >> I focus on that just because in my background I worked in FAA and FDA highly regulated and I know people do
not always hit the sometimes by mistake sometimes less so. And so when when I'm hearing that the protection is based on that they'll always stop at the right place, that they'll always do this, always do that, I have a more than
healthy uh concern about that. I would be happier if there were uh something more constructive. So it really So many of these places couldn't have a problem. For example, you talk about maintenance
was every two weeks or something. So theoretically times twice a week. Okay. And and so I do worry about u how well that maintenance will do what they're supposed to do. Are they going to be paying attention every time? And
if not, what happens if they miss it for for one period or something? How how often does the pad need to be changed out? Can't imagine it's very frequently. Uh, correct. Yeah, it's it depends. If there was a release, it'd be
changed more frequently, but if it's still in good condition and it's still doing its job, then it's as needed. But weather plays a toll on it. So, they will be replaced also just from natural elements. >> And is the uh pad snug to the side of the pan?
>> So, it's uh just confirmed it is screwed into a with a wooden screw into the pan. >> But is it snug against the >> Oh, at the bottom. Yeah, it's on. >> No, no, on the side. So, around yet around the boundary is our cracks. >> Oh, no. >> They're totally snug against the various
sides of the >> Yeah, it would be completely on the bottom of the trackpad in one like one there or it's overlap. >> Is it wedged into the pan? Is it in the pan tightly? In other words, there's a room on the sides for oil, grease, whatever to to go
down and not be absorbed right away, which then could be washed out by erasers. Um to my knowledge it should be it is it's gold but I can get you the specs when the track pans um exactly how >> I think we all have questions about the
pads the pans exactly how they work and what their strength and weaknesses are. So that definitely is a take. >> It's not a picture of >> the mats are also applied to the side.
>> So it's the bottom and the side. >> This is a bunch of frames. >> And you see right here I >> think it's as needed. >> That's the SDS form. So that is helpful. >> No, but just ask for the material and that will suffice.
>> I'll forward it to Jeremy. We'll see if you can find a better picture. >> Yeah. And and spec should be I mean you can see if you have questions. >> So it's an area that we need more information on. >> And if you um real quick I just did confirm that they are on the sides as well. So they're the bottom and the
sides of the track the absorbents. >> If you're fabricating this, is there a design drawing for it? >> Um I can definitely look into that for you. Yes. Because I think we do it inhouse with the trade. Um, so they're, like I said, they're depending on the
location is how they're built. Like for instance, this one, that crossing great is for crews to cross over or maybe there's signals that are going over. So that's why everyone is kind of different depending on the location. Um, but I'm sure that's something that we can provide.
>> Okay. Um, and my main point is that I disagree with your assertion that um, it's there's no real relevance to the WPA. Um, the reason I say that as far as
noise and vibration, the reason I say that is because if you look at the interests of the act, the last one is uh let's see, I'm trying to find the exact
base. Um, lost myself, but it's talking about impact on wildlife. Uh that's 10.022 and here it is. Yeah. The interest of protection of wildlife habitat. Um and
there's any number of studies that are easy to come across um all different parts of the country but even around here that talk about the measurable harm um to wildlife uh in habitat. Um, I
won't go through all of them, but just briefly, there are bird studies showing that song birds in noisy areas alter their vocal pitch or timing to overcome interference, which can reduce mating success and territory defense effect effectiveness along disturbance, often
leads to nest abandonment, especially in ground or shrub nesting species found in wet meadow or repairarian zones. Frogs and toads depend on specific mating calls during breeding periods. Uh noise pollution can mask these calls to reduce call frequency decreased in the
likelihood of successful reproduction. One more mammals beavers uh rely on sound to communicate within colonies or family groups frequent again disturbance may lead to avoidance of otherwise suitable habitat. And and there's more I
can go to. So I totally agree that nowhere in the act does it say noise or vibration. That doesn't mean that there's not an impact and it doesn't mean that the interest of the act
uh allow us to take that into consideration. >> So I would have to say that the interest is wildlife habitat not wildlife itself. Um that that's true but the the intent
of the act is to protect the wildlife but protecting the habitat but it still has an interest in wildlife >> based on our proposed activities we are saying that their habitat wild
habitat will be unchanged our post work activities and the interest is the wildlife habitat But you're but you're taking away their overwintering uh you know foraging and nesting areas and so by by removing that
you're altering uh that habitat. >> Can I ask where are we removing we're solely ballasted area buffer zone. >> So I was going to get into this when it was my turn to talk. I think that you're creating a zone of disturbance around the train that's idling within a let's
say it's 500 what no 500 ft circumference around the train that the idling is so severe the noise is so severe and the NOx emissions from the elevated track deposit into the
uh into the um the wetland and the effects that that's going to have on the wetland kind creates what I'm going to call which is I get it. It's I don't mean this to be a splashy word, but like a dead zone. And so whatever's happening
out there is going to move on to somewhere else. And if you know beaver habitat, they do have their areas just like every every animal has its like like a circle around it. That's their safety zone. It's their area. like a
coyote, they go seven to 15 miles uh a day. That's their zone. They won't find another group in that zone. And so when we move these animals that are there, we know there's frogs there. You mentioned it in some of your studies, they're
going to move on. And um usually fonts frogs with with uh the noise if part of that vernal pool that's been identified down just down the tracks. They don't reproduce somewhere else. They stay and they come back the next year and they
find out they can't reproduce again. And so basically you've eliminated a vernal pool. So, I'm concerned about that and I'm concerned about the fact that um there's no data to support some of the
information that we're getting from the MBTA and I would feel better if there was data to support this like um like the knock submissions. It's doubling, right? So, I I had this section that I was going to talk about. Brian, I can stop if you want.
>> No, go ahead. Can I address any of your concerns? >> Well, let me just finish up. So, if if uh this uh could lead to nitrogen deposits in adjacent wetlands causing uh acid uh tropification
uh uh habitat degradation uh potential uh which is a significant effect under 310 CMR 10221. And so that's where my concerns are. There's
also a pH uh a pH issue. We're in a an area that has high pH. It's more acidic and uh that's what the habitat's used to. So when we change the pH, we we alter a lot. That's why we
don't let uh contractors dump cement into storm drains or clean them out in a local pond or or something like that because it changes the pH. So, getting back to another question that someone said is like how do we know
these like the safety happens out there? Someone was saying, well, he has to stop like right at the end and if he doesn't, that's a violation. How's that known? has a GPS. Someone's out there. Do these guys tell on each other so one the other guy can be the conductor the next day? I
mean, what what happens? Uh how how are these how does the MBTA make sure that what you're telling us will in fact happen? Um I mean those those are my concerns.
Sorry to step all over your your conversation. That's fine if you could talk again. Yeah. Um, so anyway, so so that without the labor in it, that's that's an issue. I could go into more on the vibrations transmitting through the substrate. It
can actually cause substrate impaction in places. So it can be physical even though I will agree most of it is to the wildlife itself. One last point I'd like to make though goes back to something that came up during Walter's part. You were
talking about um if there is spillage then it goes into the ballast and that will absorb it. How does it absorb it? Those those are rocks basically, right? They're not porous. >> So it absorb it goes into the ballast which in a way is almost like a catch,
right? We're 60 feet. So if we had a spill that ballast if it was like I said the reportable that ballast would be remove cumulative. So if you had things in there, maybe it doesn't go this rainstorm. Maybe it moves a little further to the next rainstorm and the
next and the next. So it's more the migration than an immediate impact, but either way it would get there. I just have to say we have 700 plus miles racker system. This isn't just your concerns would then be with our
whole system when we go and do tail uh rail and um tie replacement. ballast is removed, new ballast is brought in. If there's a spill, we do do all the correct measures to remove any type of spillage and dispose of it correctly. Um, we go through water
supply areas and these issues in those tracks have been there for 100 years for as long as we've been system. Um, I just I understand your concern, but I don't to our knowledge I I to my knowledge as well, we haven't had any issues to these
supplies that you're concerned about based off our activities as a train as train. >> Yeah. I mean, um, you know, >> human error, I just I can't >> you can't I mean, it is what it is. >> It's just driving a car. Someone can not properly take care of the oil, go
through a stop sign, can't stop that. But the difference is if you have a problem with a car, it's more or less immediate. Things with the environment can last forever. I mean, look at the town wells. We had a shutdown because of a anchor in 92 or something. You know,
some things don't go away from a human time frame perspective. Um, >> so that's when a large remediation project would have to occur. >> Yeah. And and see, it's not even so much a major bill. That worries me because
that would get attention and as we said in the walk, you would take the ballast down as far as you needed to and you might even stop service on the line until it was remediated. I'm more worried about small constant uh leakages
and accumulation. Walter talked about the mess at the station itself and also made a good point. It's been there for decades. The other point though is it's not all where the engine stops because some of this leaks as it's accelerating as it's decelerating, you know, and
that's why it goes much further than the the length of a of a locomotive. >> And I I I do understand I do trust in our kills and our crews, their trades, they're trained. So hopefully these spills, these leaks don't happen. That's
why our trains go through uh preventative maintenance throughout the life. So, so let's just take the scenario. I'm sorry to cut you off. It's a bad habit. I do it all the time. Um, ask anybody. Uh, so the situation is the train stops. Let's
assume it stops in the right place every time. Then it's accelerating back. You could have leakages outside of the track. And yes, ideally they're small, but again, it's a cumulative effect. It still can build up. still can be washed down even
if it takes multiple rainstorms and it can still get to the weapons and and so I don't know how you fix that. I don't have to design it. You do. Maybe it's a longer track pan. Maybe it's some other idea. When in the
beginning when you last uh came in for an NOI, there was conversation about some layer uh underneath rather than a track pan. Um, I don't know what whoever said it had in mind, but something else to try and make it more protected.
That's my my whole point is more. I mean, ideally, you wouldn't stop near the weapons at all. You' stop further back. You have other issues to deal with curved tracks and things like that. I I can't design it for you. You
wouldn't want me to. I don't know why you couldn't do a curved uh track pan if you guys are making them yourselves. So, we can't do curved track pan. >> I said I don't know a bunch of times and that's nothing. I don't >> again we're not proposing any work
within a well just just to briefly comment on you said we are buffer zone to bordering vegetative we so there is that buffer there too. Yes, there's a buffer. A buffer
is just what it says. It helps to protect. It absorbs on the way. The distances have been worked on for years to try and have it be far enough to absorb pesticides, things you can think of. What I'm thinking of is long-term
uh petroleum migrating towards the wetlands through the buffer, even if it takes a while to get there. Let me just jump in. So under 310 CMR 1022B1, the conservation commission has the authority to extend its jurisdictional
beyond the standard 100 foot and 200 foot riverfront area uh if um activities outside this zone could have a significant effect on resource areas such as pollutants, sedimentation, habitat alteration.
>> So um So can I just quickly address a couple of points you were making? So you were saying one issue is consistent small level of um pollutant. So it's either the 48 more than 48 gallons is
consistently coming out and it's spilling over or consistent not hitting the right spot. So that's that's the only way you get to that. One second. 48 30 gallons >> track is 30 gallons of >> the So it' have to be more to and then
not >> or not in the track pan accelerating decel and then acceleration deceleration that is the same as the mainline track. So that is no different from what's there. That is a super low risk because you've got a ratio duration even though it's slow speed and it's minimal
mounting out because you move it. So that would be no different from the other several hundred miles of track where you're moving at that speed. So that isn't a risk. The only risk I think you correctly pointed out is not hitting
track and idling in the road. So that is so we can look at that protections in place for that. We keep going back to this slide. I'm struggling because if the if if the pan holds 30
gallons, correct? Is that what I'm reading? >> Although the pad absorbs 48. >> But but how can that happen? Does it swell up? >> Yes. >> Yeah. The pad absorbs just like a sponge. >> So it swells.
Doesn't it go up above the rail then? >> Uh no. It wouldn't impact operations of the uh of the train. It would go >> I I'll wait till I see the diagram. >> Sure. >> Any other questions from the commission? Chuck, do you have anything else you want to talk about?
>> Uh there are, but I I just wanted to uh So, you are um required to meet the storm water standards and I was just wondering if you could provide a storm water checklist. >> Uh that was included in the nurs. >> Sorry, I missed it. Uh,
so I'm gonna hold the rest of my questions for, you know, we we've talked for a while. >> I think you're going to get to uh people online people. Hold the rest of my questions until after that's finished, but I just I do want to make the point
that we do have the authority to extend our jurisdiction beyond July. >> Okay. >> So, now we can open up for public comments. Um, you've heard us tonight trying to constrain ourselves to issues
associated with the WPA and realize many of you may not have read it as many times as we theoretically did, but please try and uh constrain your comments as well. Um, let's try and hold him to two minutes a piece. If I feel there's repetition of something, I may
jump in. Having said all that, does anybody in the room have something they want to say, question they want to ask? >> Do I stay up here? >> No, let him go up and then come up and answer. Thank you. >> Please introduce yourself.
My name is Jim Riley Street. concern related to the MOITA submitted to the conservation commission related second it was discussed
and it's confusing to me but for idling trains and wetland area what I've read under the Massachusetts storm water management standards this project needs to show exactly how handling storm water runoff including
power sediment and pollutions pollutants allow water to infiltrate safely and manage snow and ice during winter operations. We're asking the commission to hold off on improving this project until the MBA provides a complete storm water plan showing how it will remove
the pollutants manage runoff safely handle snow and ice ice and potential spills. This plan should include a clear maintenance schedule, winter operations, spill response measures in lighting. So we we know nearby wetlands and water
supplies will be protected. Thank you. Any comments you want to make for that? >> Uh yes. So the storm water was part um checklist was part of the application, but the standards so they do apply subject to the EPA. Um but that there's
no change in conditions and no imperous no new imperous surface. So therefore there count as in progress would be a change stand.
That's a question. You have to look at that. >> I mean, it's 80 feet, six foot, so maybe it's full of 500 square feet. Does that change things dramatically, so I'll have to look into that. I don't
have an answer right now. Can you introduce yourself, please? >> Live stream. Um, I have some questions concerning the NOI that the last NI did not designate 100
ft as this one does. Why the track is 4500 ft this time last time? One question, why were mailing labels used instead of addresses? the environmental justice
community residents in Tannerville noticed there's no posting the only information they had and they weren't entitled to that information and that was as of two days post I think
my biggest concern is that they have said that they are not involved they don't have no need for issues um in October I think 2022 assignment act required that if it was
an MTA project within a mile and they would have to meet and do a envir environmental justice analysis why wasn't this done that should have been included in a report done based on
included in their NOI people are attracted to any response to that? >> Um, so I just say consider this a new application first. Um, I think I understand where you're going with the linear project being a
thousand ft via notification. Um, there was someone who brought that up at the previous meeting that we didn't uh do it um to correct a butter notification. Uh but we did consult with Mass Eputo changes to butter notification for
linear projects only and we included the list of taxes just uh people at um Tannerville weren't notified. Um and but the assessor's office um tax
role only gives the housing authority in that location. If you hovered over um a condo in town, you would get everyone that's bought that condo, but Tannerville must be uh
have a different policy and they don't own those. They rent them. So, the owner is getting the uh notification. What we can answer this question came up for me uh came up to me this afternoon or yesterday is that uh for the CPDC
management assume it was management put notification in the hallways and whatnot around around Tannerville but they haven't done it for this project so it's not none of that is a requirement under the WPA
the applicant doesn't have to meet some standard about having management post this. Completely up to them. They only have to notify the owners and and they've done that and the list was certified. So, um I'm surprised they didn't know about
it based on the last application and the fact that everybody tried to get those people involved, but uh it is what it is. Uh they seem to have not been notified. I think because they're an
environmental justice community, they are mandated to be notified and involved in this project and they should have had meetings with the MBTA and an analysis done and a report done
>> and I don't see that being done and that would have uh brought up all the noise and air pollution issues. they have to safeguard that. This is part of the climate act. I mean, you can look at
>> we're not we're not and we're not administering the climate act here. So, uh if a order of conditions is issued, it does have a condition that says uh the applicant must uh
must apply and receive all applicable uh permits from city and state. Um, and if they don't do that would be uh, you know, it's it's against the uh the conservation commission. We can go back and and find them again. But, um,
there's that, but we don't reach out to anyone. It's just me would be the only one I know of that we've ever reached out to, but not anyone to climate act. >> Sure. Sorry. >> Sure. No, please. >> Pretty sure I can answer that because we
didn't exceed But that was based on your own judgment that you did exceed. >> We have consultants as well. >> So these are 80 units sitting right on the tracks that are going to have these trains back and forth 14 hours.
>> Yeah. just to not have this prolonged too much. One of the requests that we have is ask from Walter that we're going to ask for those meet the thresholds and you said you would provide it. We'll be able to talk about this. >> Okay. Any other comments in the room before we go to online? Please introduce
yourself. If you're online and you don't have a comment, please find the reactions button in the lower part of your screen and raise your hand so Chuck can see it when we get to that point. >> So, my name is David and I live
in 48 years and I I feel I have a profound knowledge of what conservation commission does. It may be fairly accurate, but it's still superficial. I don't remember why this process So I'm going to have questions
for you as opposed to data that you or we as rely on that we hire experts or we contract with certain people do some analysis and baseline analysis
such that after the project if the project goes through we can independent dependent relationship. We study the pH levels of the water. We study the population densities and certain
aquatic species. We study the population. We study the water temperatures. We study anything we can to get a baseline. effect. calls a community that
we continue to do that we have a means of measuring that how we know you know pass a question we can answer tonight but I recommend that we do some of our own some of our own experts to look at some of these variables and see how they can
be effective thank 55 Hawk Street. While I understand that the Reading Conservation Commission's formal juris jurisdiction is defined by the wetlands protection act which encompasses the protection of wetland resources areas and interests such as
flood control, storm damage prevention and water quality. These protect protection interests directly intersect with the environmental justice considerations. As already stated, Tanavville is an
environmental justice um area and given that the MBTA project is located within one mile of an environmental justice community and that the project may also may alter border bordering wetlands
hydra hydrarology and related environmental conditions. We respectfully request that the commission one require a comprehensive hydraologic and environmental analysis consistent with MEPA's environmental justice framework and two coordinate with the
MEPA office to clarify whether an environmental notification form or environmental impact report should be required due to the proximity of the EJ population before issuing an order of conditions. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Is there anybody online? Hands raised. >> Uh, sorry. You're talking to me, aren't you? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> I'll come back to the room. >> Yes, Kyle is online. Kyle,
you can unmute yourself. >> Go ahead, Kyle. Can you introduce yourself, please? >> Yes. >> Thank you. Uh, Kyle Touro from, uh, 43 Vine Street. Um, I realize that the commission here is in a a difficult situation, whereas
if they turn it down, it pushes the potential of the train being stopped further up into our backyard. I'm right on the intersection of Hunt and Vine, and so we would be even closer to the
noise that's going to be created, let alone the pollution. I think that what's important is that some sort of a commission be set up so that this inevitable train turn switchback is monitored over
the years both for pollution sound as well as for the amount of ridership to validate the operation of this on a 12-hour cycle where we only need it really if at all at the rush power. I
think it's also vital in terms of the discussion that was had about the sound that the noise will impact the wildlife. If there aren't any endangered species now, there certainly won't be any endangered species with this operation
being set up in a wetlands area. I believe that it's also important that a sound buffer be created, not a wall, but two on either side of the diesel track so that the sound and acoustics can be abated. And I think that's vitally
important. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Sure. If you can briefly >> thank you for your question. I just would like to reiterate about the sound that it's sound is not >> louder please.
>> I just like to reiterate about the WPA that sound is not within the WPA jurisdiction um for you talking about sound law. >> So the WPA does we it's not within it sound traffic
for the purview of the WPA. I know a lot you have a lot of concerns and that's where we've had public issues outside. >> Thank you. >> Sorry, the microphone is not working properly and the town should be aware of
that. We cannot hear at all what he's saying. I can hear somebody on the other side of the room speaking but I could not hear what the gentleman was saying. That's okay. I understand that he was saying that it's not in his purview. I would think from the sense of humanity that people would address the reality,
not what is written in the books that you're supposed to abide by because it's there in a book. Thank you. >> Yeah, I apologize for the sound. I did request a a microphone for the podium and there was supposed to be one dropped
off, but it it's not here. So, that's like a dead spot there. So when you guys come up, it seem to have been working because people get to us right away, but this is the furthest time tonight we've heard that it's a little bit low. So just keep that in mind when you see >> maybe if you shade this way, you may
>> I think it's been fine up until now because usually people >> No, it's been bad throughout the entire time. Sorry. >> All right, Kyle. Thanks. >> Anybody else online heard us has a comment to make?
Okay. Can you introduce yourself please? >> So 55 street. Just a couple of things based on the return back on September 23rd. Parts of the project fall inside zone 2
and zone C which are official state drinking water protection areas. That means that runoff from the site could end up in our public drinking water supply. either through groundwater or nearby streams. Projects in these zones
must meet mass DPS critical area standards using only approved pollution controls and submitting detailed maintenance and spill prevention claims. We're asking the commission to continue this hearing until the MBTA submits the
analysis and confirms how they'll protect these drinking water zones. Um, also could you go back to the slide that shows all of the >> the slide that shows all of the I guess
the number of what? >> Could you move a little bit this way just to get picked up better? Okay. >> Thank you. >> All the I don't know what I'm looking for. I'm just going to pop through. You tell me when >> I just the one that lists. >> No, that wasn't it.
>> Okay. I'll just ask my question. Um I think in the in the slide presentation you had mentioned that there's going to be one switch >> one switch >> one crossover two switches. >> Okay. So there's there's two switches
and that's consists of one switch off. >> Yeah. >> There's one correct. >> Okay. Thank you. So this might be a good time to make sure that it's very clear that the conservation commission does not control what the applicant does and at any time
they can ask to close the hearing and then at that point conservation commission has 21 days to make a decision. We cannot hold this open on our own. It's a it would take the applicant to also agree. So that's
that's just how the wetlands protection act is written. >> I just want to uh make a comment for the zone two. So um kind of like as sorry um just kind of reiterating but also adding some things. So again
there's no change in impervious area. I know the the track pan got um brought out. U we are maintaining the ballast in the area. So currently it's ballasted and we're putting ballast back in. Um and currently with the main line there have been no observable issues the current operations I know there is
comment at at the station but for the uh mainline for the work uh through that whole track ballast is being refurbished with new um with new ballast um so there's no new no new discharges or increased runoff within critical areas
that storm water standard six we're not w not within the ACC zone one Brian, there's two online. >> Take one of the ones online. >> Okay. TMO. >> Introduce yourself, please. >> Hold on. He takes not
>> for Chuck to do his magic. >> Yeah. Yeah, I had it and then it got went. Uh, so anyways, I go to Ally. >> Ally, can you introduce yourself, please? Hi, Ally Hetler, 12 Hancock Street. Um,
so my question is, uh, per the construction best practices, how will erosion, sedimentation, and temporary access be managed to protect resource areas? We're um calling on you to adopt a
detailed erosion and sediment control plan with phasing mats, silk controls, and restoration commitments. >> Uh yep. So in the current figure that you can hopefully you can hear me um in the bottom right here. So we're proposing socks and a silt fence. Those
will be implemented prior to any ground disturbing activities. Um and those you could see on the top is the west area. Um, so it's more zoomed out just because it's a larger uh location, but that would be on both sides, the north and the south of the tracks uh for preventing any sedimentation uh into the
u nearby wetlands. And on the bottom, it would just be on the north side of the tracks uh to where that uh um the buffer zone is located and it actually goes further than where exact work activities are. And we're not proposing any
stockpiling within uh resource areas. So for the conduit work um they do it in sections. So they will dig put the conduit in fill. There won't be open trenches with um for the possibility of any sedimentation into the area. If
there were some necessary there was a horrible storm event we had to stockpile. We'd be covering it with a poly doing BMPPS around which you see coming through construction and we'd be notifying uh the conserv uh conservation commission um in that case. Um and for access, majority of this work will be
done accessed uh on rail and um with equipment that is able to high rail onto the onto the site. Um and high rail is uh how like a train sits with um on the tracks. We can uh we have our trucks, we
have our excavators have those underneath so they can ride the rail uh as well to do the work. Um, so you're not driving or creating any impacts to the slope by driving an excavator up the entirety of the rightway.
>> And I think part of her question was um, a rose control plan. So that's all within the material what you just went over is all within the material that you submitted. >> Correct. Right behind right on the screen right now. >> Okay. I just want to make that clear. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. >> Ally, any other questions? Nope, that's it. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Is there another one? >> Yes. RHA is uh I think RHA is uh can talk. Just make
sure >> RHA if you have a question or comment can you introduce yourself please? Okay, I'm not hearing anything. Is there anybody else out there? >> Let me see. I did that right. >> Yeah. Uh, you can unmute yourself.
>> Yeah, this is Robert Levy from >> Tan. Yeah. And my question is, you did a two day uh a six-hour survey on sound, and that to me is not enough time to find out what the noise level is here at
Tannerville. I mean, we can sit outside. We can't even talk to each other. And the other thing is if you if your parent was in this place, would you want them here with the sound that's going through? I mean, this is ridiculous. We can't even hear ourselves.
And you're saying the sound level is fine. >> Okay. Is there a question in there? >> Yeah. I want, like I said, um, how can you have a two-day survey on sound and saying it's okay where, you know, six
hours a day is not enough time to find out the noise level of your trains? >> Yes, sir. Thank you. We got it. Anything you want to add? Thank you for your question and I we're not, you know, not trying to answer your question. For the purview of the wetlands protection act,
noise is not in the purview of the WPA. We have had multiple public meetings and met with the select board and presented that information. So that email that you saw uh at the end of the the presentation um you can email uh email them, talk to
your select board, but in the perview of the WPA noise is not covered. Okay, that wasn't sufficient, but okay. >> Anybody else online, Chuck? >> Uh, I don't see anyone else. If if other people want to speak, just use the raise
hand function right now. We have none. >> Is there any comment here? not see it. >> What am I? >> Seems like that's it. >> So, we can only go to our select point, >> right? >> Robert, can you mute yourself, please?
>> Okay. Hi, good evening. Uh, Lucas Prao, at 85 Hancock Street. I hope everybody's doing well. Um, I'm going to address seasonal wetland connectivity and peer review delineation. Uh, why this justifies a continuence. The MBTA's connectivity conclusion relies on a
single winter site visit January 21st, 2025 to explicitly state there is no wetland connection um between the railroad ditch and the bordering uh vegetated wetlands on town conservation land. Uh this is the exact kind of
assumption that can change in spring high water/afout conditions. uh what we are asking for. Please continue this hearing and require spring delineation uh when leaves are out and water levels are high as well as
an independent peer review of um CCAP determination of no wetland connection. Uh the January 21st, 2025 winter fieldwork is not seasonally representative and we're requesting we are requesting
verification of vegetation, soils, hydraology indicators along the soil and ditch areas before um considering the NOI. And then just one additional thing with regards to what Joseph um asked about with regards to trees and being cut down. I'd be curious to see I I I
but the train tracks my fence is within 20 feet of the tracks. So about one or two years ago the MBTA I'm guessing hired and Chuck may know this as well too to come down and through and clear the trees. Um I had to move my daughters
from the fence because they were wielding the chainsaw fairly randomly. Um, so my question with regards to what Joe was what Joseph was asking if this was tied to your project one or two years ago, um, was someone determining and checking off the diameters of the
trees that were being taken down? I witnessed half of this as it went by my house. I did not see someone measuring each diameter of tree that was taken down. It was very random and um, sporadic.
>> Thank you. Uh first I'd like to apologize for safety that's always going to be our concern. Um and that was not due to this project. That's through our vegetation maintenance plan. So that is due to um clearing of and that comes through the conservation commission every five years
with a YOP submitted every year um to the commission um and that's through uh throughout the state. Uh so do but I do apologize for the safety of your daughter's fence line. Um so that was due to that and that's just due to the safety of the tracks. Um and that is covered under the vegetation maintenance
plan for this project. We don't foresee any tree removal. There could be potential tree limming. Um just for if they're close enough to the new track um and that would be determined right now. I don't see foresee any trees full trees being removed. Uh talking about the
diameter that's for me which I think you're getting to for public shade trees. If it was within our rightway, those trees aren't considered uh would not be fall under the NEPA um public shade trees, which is the diameter uh comment I think you were going towards. >> Question.
>> Excuse me. >> If you want to speak, can you come back up as it is my >> and this was just off my apologies, but sorry. Lucas Prao, 85 Hancock Street. With regards to right of way, they were within five to 10, not even probably
five feet of my fence, which is another 15 to 20 feet from the tracks. So, I'm pleased to find right of Yes. Um, can you go to the site slide?
So, I'm apologies that it's zoomed out. Um, a larger figure and um be provided but our right away is the part of land that the NBTA owns from the usually it's from the bottom of the slope to the
slope certain locations when we're elevated top slope but for your location from your house I'm assume it's around 85 to 110 85t um so we own the space of 85 ft from
the edge just edge of property to edge of property Um, if you if you believe that trees were removed that were on your property separate than this, that's something we can totally explore and have that site rest for property
lines. Um, but it was the property was state. We know this was st we do occasionally. Um, we we have all our rightway state, but when we have new projects, we always redo. Um, and to address the I know it was
more of a comment to the commission regarding weapon delineation by CPAP environmental. Um, I understood it was done during the winter. I think you would have some scientists say that's the best time to do it. So vegetation isn't in uh the way so you could see the
hydraology, but at the end of the day those ditches do not connect um to EDW. That's why they're not considered awesome log that you that question I know will the question >> you want to say something
>> I do I do better than whispering um this has gone on almost two hours now I still think there's commission uh questions and there's questions from you know abutterss we've asked for some
information but you know respect for our other agenda items I don't think we're going to get through this discussion part tonight I'm just throwing that out there >> no it's it's a valid point so I I think
the ask then would be for you to agree to continue it there already been a few things that we have asked you to provide and we've agreed. So I'm looking for continue agree >> not only continue but continue with the understanding that we're not even through the review of this project.
>> Yeah. So um the first continuence you don't need our approval. The um conservation commission could continue without our approval. It's the next hearing that we have that um it could be at that point that we request a vote. I mean it'd be great if you guys voted
right now. We like that. But if there are still some outstanding questions related to that we haven't addressed related to the WPA um we could talk about that at the next hearing. >> So before we end this, why don't we list the things that you believe we've asked for? >> Any chance we can get that in writing? I
can write as much down as possible, but if there anyway >> I this is really just for the commission to make sure that I have them all I will provide this to you. >> Right. >> Okay. And we do have the we have the recording too on RCTV. I just want to make sure we
>> so this is probably not a comprehensive list. So fill in uh but we want a list of NEA thresholds want I think they're provided but I'm going to say wetland data sheets. >> Um
you talked about section seven through fish and wildlife. It' be nice to review that. we could provide the report >> more information on uh the alternatives uh and um detail uh track detail on the
track pans SDS forms what keeps uh them in place I think we found that out but I guess there's going to be a detail provided um can >> I ask one comment is there a difference between SDS and MSDS because I think you said MSDS is >> MSDS
>> is there a difference there is a between them. Okay. >> Okay. MSDS um the drip pan there was a request to have it uh beyond 85 ft
uh which I guess is the locomotive but we observed that this oil slick was right back to the elevated uh uh platform. So that would require more pan uh
what is the turnback procedure? And Jim had some great information which I hope he provides to the commission and I would like to pick and choose out of what he mentioned tonight of more things, but it was like spill response
or spill uh all that kind of stuff. Um and then there was a question about um how do you monitor each day? Like so we usually ask how long does the project take? How do you monitor each day uh if
the erosion control needs to be replaced or if it's still in good shape and uh you know spill spill prevention kits and you know that that kind of information uh would be needed. And then I guess uh so there was another question kind of
like the meet the thresholds in the EJ community um reasoning behind no action. So that was uh I think it would be appropriate to answer like that you
don't meet the threshold and uh the EJ community whatever the answer to that might be the very same thing. Uh so and then a uh I guess a better picture or something that shows the right of way. That's what I have.
>> Is there anything else >> a full like that just like a >> Yeah, I for me I don't know why. I mean I think it was about who was cutting down trees. I didn't understand why the DBH was important but um but uh
that seems like there's some some side track you got to go down with. this gentleman over here who feels like some trees were cut down that didn't belong to the uh MBTA. >> Is that correct? >> I just want to know if they
uh I still have some questions. So, what I'm going to do is to in order to move forward, I think everyone should be able to email me your questions and I will email them to the applicants or at least that far in advance for our next meeting.
>> To not to everybody. >> Yeah. >> And the next hearing date is the 22nd, 24th. >> Yes. 22. >> I think it's the 22. >> Yeah. The 8th. >> Yes. 22. >> Okay. So, can I have a motion to continue this to October 22nd?
>> I move to continue the hearing on the MBTA turnback track to October. >> Talbert seconds that motion votes in favor >> in favor in favor. >> Thank you everybody.
>> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. And I actually had a >> once again I don't know if you're type of stuff but I know how to cracks down. >> They should
also fall. I just got them. So, us. >> Thanks for pat. >> Okay, >> now we can move on to the next one at long last.
This is zero small lane. I'll read the blurb. Open the public hearing on a notice of intent filed by Joseph Marino pursuant to Massachusetts general law chapter 131 section 40 the wetland protection act or the reading wetland protection bylaw section 7.1 for
proposed tree cutting limited project roadway crossing retaining walls wetland alteration wetland replication drainage to construct single family dwelling porch walkway driveway rooftop infiltration grading and associated
utilities. All the work is within the buffer zone with bordering vegetated wetland. The application and plans can be viewed on the conservation division page on the current project assessive map 401
lot 153 and 29. Also 22 small lane map 40 lot file number 270-0803. Thank you, commission members. For the record, >> thanks for sticking with us. For the record, my name is Jack
Sullivan. I'm owner of the S Engineering. I'm here with Mari Herald of Norse Environmental Specialist and the applicant, Joe Marino. Um, we're here to discuss the one lot subdivision. I just want to correct you one thing. DP has not issued
a file yet. >> I wonder where that number came from. Just so just I I know it showed on your agenda. There was a file number, but it's still pending the check. >> Thank you. >> Um also want to note that all the butters were noticed by certified mail
and proof of the mailings we provided to Chuck. I also want to let you know that uh we filed the same day we filed with Hong Kong, we filed with the CPDC and we have a meeting November 4th, CPDC. Um I just want want to give some brief
history on this site. I know this is a new application. Um, this has been around the block a little bit. Brian and Martha know some of the history, but some of the new members do not. But some of it's relevant to this.
So, some history on the project. Um, back in 2019, uh, I had prepared plans for our subdivision for two lots, two house lots, uh, proposed on the site. and a blueberry subdivision was approved by
CPDC, but we never followed up with a definitive subdivision. So that's from its course. That's no longer. Um, in 2019, we filed an NRA with the commission and ORAD was issued in August
of 2019. LEC did a peer review on the wetland delineation. Um, and I wanted to let the commission know the ORAD, even though it was approved in 2019, it's still in force due to multiple federal extensions just
so the OAD's actually still in effect December of 2025. Uh, we had multiple DRT meetings with the town on this project over the years uh when it was for the two lots. Next Wednesday, I have one with the town
chuck probably the planner, fire chief, town engineer. Um, so we're having a DRT Wednesday. Uh, but I did want to point out, the reason I bring that up is over the course of time. U, the town engineer and the town planner um, said that this
had to be a road. It could not just be a driveway getting back to this site and the fire department wanted a turn. Right now, small lane is a dead end road, no turn around. So part of the benefit of this extension is now we'd have a phone
compliant turn emergency. Um okay in 2021 we submitted u plans for a two lot subdivision a different applicant but I just wanted uh Martha
u there were two peer reviewers assigned for that project. LEC again did the peer review for all the wetland markers as I get into it involves And the Horley wind group was selected to review the drainage. And there were three um reviews on the drainage and on
the wetlands involving crossing and we were very close. Everything was very close. It was just some loose ends and then the applicant was drizzing sale to purchase this now. He's a whole new applicant. But I thought this history was important for the especially
with the O-RAD and to see that when I get into the design, the actual road design is really the same as the two lot, but now we don't. So, do you have my set of plans, Chuck? >> Oh, is everybody watching me?
>> I'm over now. Yeah. >> Yeah. Okay. Well, go back to this. There you go. Okay. My cover sheet is >> So, yeah, I was uh hold on. You can talk a little bit longer. I'll see if I can
find it. I I looked this afternoon and I noticed that we didn't upload a plan. So, I started looking for one and I found a few things. Didn't open them to check because it was really close to the meeting.
Um, I can continue to talk to see. >> Do you know what day you sent it on? So, let me I'll just talk. I I prepared a a list of plans with eight sheets. U sheet. Uh this property consists of
three lots of land totaling 14.2 acres. Okay. So the majority of this site is made up of 18 small lane. There's a small section of number 22 small lane where there's an existing access easement through their property that'll
that's going to be conveyed over the gel following approvals to become part of the roadway. and is a piece of landlock land to the rear of 366 Charles Street that's required development. Also on the cover sheet, I list a number
of design waiverss we're going to be receiving from CPDC of interest to the concom list. I'm requesting a waiver of pavement width down to 24 feet. CPTC requires 30 ft of pavement.
They also require sidewalks on at least one side. I'm requesting sidewalks where it's just one. The reason for me doing that when we get into this, you'll see, you know, we need to take down like 7 trees on site, putting in a roadway,
we're filling some wetlands, we're replicating some wetlands. So, I'm trying to limit the amount of impervious surfaces to try to keep the wetland impact down in my storm water systems to so typically I will receive those
waiverss. The 24 feet pavement um is basically standard for two-way traffic. Going back in time, I did try reducing this to 22 feet at one point in time, but the town engineer said, "Well,
because snow." So, that's what we're doing. Oh, that's it. And if we go to the next plan, that's it. So, this is a lot plan. This is what I talked about. 14.2 acres,
small lane. It ends in like a hammerhead. As you can see on the plan, it's truly not a hammerhead though. On paper, it shows it as a hammerhead, but the pavement just dead ends. There's no turner. Um, so wish and that hatched area that you see on the screen, that's
the access easement number two. And then we continue the road and we have a fully compliant culde-sac. It's a 50 foot rightway and it'll open up to one lot at the end. and I show a drain ement to get back to a detention basic
plan. I should note that this roadway will be private. Small lane is a private road now. This extension will be private. We can go to the next. So what you're saying with the fire department and whoever else is CPDC, I don't know, but
uh they want you to build that cult. It's not just proving that you can. So, this is going in, >> right? I met I met Joe met we met together with the one of the assistant fire chiefs and the town
engineer. I get a few, but they said, "Oh, no." Because we were talking about, you know, going to one lot and could we eliminate Turner? And the fire chief said, "No way. We need something. It doesn't have to be a round sack. You
could do a T hammer head, different configurations, but you still need a large area even for hammerhead terms or anything like that. So, we just left the the full pelvis. Also, it was going to come up later in
my presentation. A lot of towns like to see like a landscaped island in the middle. It reduces impervious surfaces. It gives some landscaping. Counter reading, DPW, and fire departments. You probably know that. um for plowing
reasons and that emergency access. >> So this is going to be a road >> and does DPW have to take care of it? >> They'll probably plow it for safety reasons, but for maintenance it would be it's private.
>> So there's an inner circle and an outer circle. What's the outer circle? Is that sidewalk or is that just the extent? >> The outer circle is the right way. The inner circle is the edge of the curve. >> So the inner circle is all that's going to be built. Yeah, but it does cross the 25 foot and the 35 foot and on one side
it's pretty close to the wellness. All right, I just wanted to make sure everyone got that. We go to the next sheet shop. This is the existing conditions plan. So it shows what I did on this. It shows
all the topography and wetland lines that as I say were approved through the over process. Show the 25 and 35 foot upper zones. All the BBW flags were done on this environmental. I also show all the trees
six inches of greater as I mentioned in the beginning 57 trees to be project in the single family house development. Can I ask question? How many were removed originally?
51. >> Jack, when you say trees, is there certain diameter DBH? >> 6 in or greater? >> Yeah. And that's that's a CPDC requirement. I think it's your requirement as well. But anything offers
and I try to I'm not a tree expert. I don't pretend to be one, but I do break out hard versus so I did break that out. That's as good as I don't know all the different types, but I do break out.
Um, one thing to note, but as you come into the site, two wetlands that are separate, but there's an old 12in drain. It's like a cart path and there's a 12in drain that connects the wetlands, but it's silted in. It
hasn't been active for a long time. It wasn't active in 2019. It's still not. But that's what we're going to get into the stream crossing that where where it connects to wetlands, even though it's something that is not active. Um,
We have to meet street crossing standards on that. Um, as far as the existing conditions plan, again, I did do a number of soil test holes for the drainage system. They were witnessed by the town running engineering department.
Great soils, all sand and gravel, high groundwater table, but really good soils for infiltration. So by high groundwater table is there a potential problem with the storm water
um like the two foot you have to do a mounting analysis I did do a mounting anal so under DP storm water I need a twoft separation from the high groundwater table to the bottom of my drain system. So that gets into uh when I did the
storm water design I have to look at I I I tried to do like a I looked at doing like low impact And I will submit a storm water checklist. I think I missed that. Check did ask me for it and I haven't but I'll get that to you. But I did look at doing
low impact maybe some infiltration trenches along the side of the road and eliminate curving. But we're so close to the wetland and under the DP storm water policy you have to be so far from wetlands with infiltration. It didn't work. Um
and Chuck's right. I do have to show a two foot separation. I'm able to where I'm showing the detention base and I'll back. I'll get into that later. But if I try to do infiltration in my roadway, I would really have to build the roadway up tremendously high to
achieve that storm water separation. I'd have higher retaining walls. I would have had more disturbance wetlands. But I was able to take all the drainage and bring it out to the back of the lot. separation meet all DP.
Okay, so this is the actual design. So, as I talked about, we had that 12 inch drain that's silted in kind of kind of like in the middle by extension. So, we need to cross that. And crossing
that, we're proposing a three-sided open box cone. It's 18 ft wide, 18 ft wide, 41 ft long. And with stream crossings, you have to process standards which means it has to
be a minimum span and an openness requirement. Um I meet all those requirements that that that was part of the peer review that was done by Jan. The minimum stand had to be 1.2 times
whatever the bank width was. Our bank width ranged from 10 to 12 ft. So I'm 18t wide on the box. So I There's also an open ratio to keep so much free.
Jack, I'm not I'm just going to interrupt you just to say this sounds like you proposed exactly what our viewer looked at at the last meeting. That's correct. All right. So, yeah, we have a lot of new members, but
we just want to make sure that you're proposing the same the peer reviewer approved this plan. So, we did go through peer review. >> So, I'm just trying to bring everyone else up to speed. So, as I stated, I think I stated this
in the opening, 24 ft of asphalt curving on both sides, no sidewalk. So with the asphalt curving that's another CPDC want to see granite curving for cost
asphalt firm we'll see how that goes I think we mentioned the full caces will be extended on small lane up through this roadway we'll have a hydrant at the end of the culdeac
for fire protection as far As conservation goes, these are some important numbers. We're filling 566 ft of wetland 210 square ft to be temporarily. And we're proposing 1,367
weapon replication. So your local bylaw requires if you're going to fill weapons, you need to replicate at least in a two. And that was all reviewed by LC as well. That's the same. Those numbers are the same.
Site drainage all the same, but I'll go through it. We have a series of deep sump catch basins. So when I say deep sump is gas and foots. We have a storm scepter. I have an outlet control structure. Water will be collected in the roadway and from the
house and piped back to a a detention basin in the rear yard. Even though this is a one lot subdivision, I created a drainage easement because where this is going to remain private. Not sure and Joe's does have an attorney for the
CPDC. We're not sure the CPDC may require homeowners association for maintenance. And then I figured with a one loss subdivision, I may not need a drain ement because Joe's gonna own it and have to maintain it. But then I thought if small if
anyone ever came in and looked to get this accepted, then there'd be an easement in place. If the town did decide to accept it, there'd be an easement that that could be turned over and then the town would take over. It's probably some chance of that happening. So even with the detention basin I have
four bay and my storm water report is sizing for water before it goes into the detention basin is rip wrap snow it's so then the water continues through the basin and then I have an emergency
overflow So the commission knows the two and 10year storm is fully contained in this detention basin. Uh for reference for anyone a 10ear storm 5.2 of rain.
So 5 in no water. It'll all be stored infiltrated only in a 25 or 100 year swarm some water. But a cast with there can't be a greater peak
rate of water moving off site and volume water in all cases. Jack, if the water did go, if you did exceed that, where would the water go? >> So, it wouldn't make the U
house conditions on Charles and H going any year storm. There's still less volume of water coming off even when it goes off because even in that 100redy year event, I'm storing. But this is the drainage pipe coming down. I should note uh the
house Joe is proposing we're going to tie all the roof leaders into this as well. So we're infiltrating the entire roof area of the house. This basin will fill up in in a large solar vent. There's a spillway right here and it would go to the wetland. But even even
when it exceeds a 25 or 100 year storm, as I said, the volume of the water will be less moving to that than it is because I know and that was period because at our first meeting there were a number of neighbors from Charles Street who were concerned
>> yeah with basement flooding. So that's why we had but they were happy and as I state I will provide the storm water checklist talk about how options
as far as erosion control measures at the limit of work line we'll put in a 12 in diameter stake mulch slot backed by silk fence and coming in we'll have a temporary crush stone driveway entrance
to be installed I have a detail for that so that any construction vehicles coming in and out. That way they won't track any cell. That basically completes my presentation.
Is here. This is questions on the wetland restoration application. We're proposing the bank restoration. I do have a detailed worksheet that was peer reviewed by LEC on that bank closet and
like I said very close it's the same detail we had so really I want to make the introduction tonight we don't have to do file we still have to go to CPDC but CPTC wouldn't want to see us until we at least met with you
they want to see how you receive this project >> are you saying that's it for tonight and you want you're willing to come back another meeting don't even hear our questions I was just wondering if you wanted to continue or if you're just saying like that's all you're going to do for tonight, you know, come back.
>> No, I'd like to I'd like to get board feedback tonight. Um I had talked just when I when I first came in with Joe and we've met with Chuck and that's why we kind of wanted to show that you know >> so in the interest of getting home before the break of dawn that
>> um >> we'll turn it over but the idea was we had we had two sets of And so tonight we'd at least like to come out and say hopefully no peer review peer review is necessary but we'd like any comments and obviously we need to
continue because we have >> good question. You said the 100year storm was 5.2 in >> the 10ear storm. >> 10ear storm and what under what
duration? 24h hour period. So a 10ear storm's 5.2 in over 24 hours. The 100year storm's 8.25 in the released data back on August 5th. They gave a range. Now
uh they're saying it could be as much as 6.4. >> I heard this. So I had a meeting in Lexington last week and I the the precipitation tables that they have is usually in Lexington a 100redyear
storm was like a 9 in storm but now they something like we said they're saying oh it could be between 9 and a half and 11 in that it wasn't accepted yet but you're right there are some publications we've seen higher rainfall
right now Historically we see heavier rains. Um but I follow what is requestall rainfall event you used it TP40 is that what do I get that right? I don't know if that's it or if you use >> So when Janet Bernardo reviewed this,
she I had picked one to use. She wanted me to use N O A >> and you use that for this. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> You want to >> That's what I think. >> It's 14 volume 10 version three and then
redone on August 5th. >> Storm water guy. But the peer reviewer directly did that. I I had I was using it was similar. >> So um in the previous hearing, the reason why he can just cite this in a hearing a number of weeks ago or
whatever, um we had a similar situation and our decision was that whatever was the standard at the time of the submitt is the one we would go by. So whatever one that is is what we' be expecting you to hit.
They're saying >> unless it's better, unless it's more stringent, you've gone with that. I think that's what you've done here. >> So, >> I just want to be consistent. >> Well, >> yeah. Question,
>> right? Um, yeah, I'm really glad that you're using the same stream crossing because we've already peer reviewed that. We're using the same wetland replication. We've already peer reviewed that. So, that might
uh streamline some of what we're doing. But I do have some questions. Um you answered the one about the roof runoff. Um I don't see a plot plan that showed what your new contour lines will be. I'm only seeing the old contour lines. And
clearly where the house is drawn in is where the mountain went up to the top. And it looks like you're probably shaving off the top of that hill some. >> I am. And I showed some proposed spot grades at the corners, but I'll revisit
that and see if I have to add some contrast. I think I was trying to match it. It's a hill and he's taking he's going to take that hill down. Um, and I show proposed uh swap rates at all four corners of the garage. >> Are those the ones that are in parentheses?
>> Yes. Yeah. >> All right. >> But what about the ground outside the house? >> That's maybe I need to have I think I tried to match pretty closely and I show one proposed contour out at the edge of the way, but let me see what happens in between.
>> Okay. Um, my second question, we've got this blob of polka dots showing the snow storage area >> and the driveway goes right through it. >> Yeah, it worked for the previous plan,
but um, but you might um rethink where you put the snow. >> I'll change that. >> Okay. Um, and I think you've answered it already, but one of our hopes with asking last time
to make this a onehouse subdivision instead of a two-house subdivision was whether we could make the road any smaller and impact the wetland any. And um it's it looks from the plan like it's the exact same road.
So reducing the number of houses cuts down less trees on the top of the hill, but it doesn't affect the road. >> What I'll do, Martha, is if when I go to the DRT meeting Wednesday and Chuck sits in on those as well, I could mention that I brought it up to the commission.
They're wondering if there's any flexibility. Yeah, especially because the town >> Okay. Um and um I would love to see um tree
protection on any of the trees that are not being taken down. Um you're saving some trees along the left side of the roadway closer to the the replication area. Um, and there's a bunch of trees up at the top of the hill
that are not being put. Um, so, um, if we can try to make sure that the bulldozer doesn't gash them as it goes by, that would be great. Um, all right. So, and then my biggest question has to do with trees, which is you're taking
down 57 trees. Um, what are you going to do about that? Um, are you planting any replacement trees or or what's your proposal for what to do about all this loss of tree? I know it's a lot of
trees. Um, if you go to the page eight, our replication crossing, we are doing an extensive planting of the replication. Yeah. >> With shrubs and trees. >> Yeah, I saw that.
>> So, that'll I would I We'll talk more about that, but obviously it is a fee if you know tree policy. I wanted to discuss that at the next meeting a little bit, but I wanted maybe see if we could get some credit for what
we're planting back versus what's removed. And >> I can talk about it. >> We can talk. Okay. >> Okay. Yeah. Um I don't know. that the wetland replication
makes up for the trees you're taking out every place else, you know, because it's making up for the wetland that you're taking away. If that makes sense. And um it looks to me like the
stonemasonry fire place will be taken out when that replication area is made because it's right in the middle of that triangle. >> Okay. Um those were my questions for tonight. >> Okay. I have a couple things for
tonight. The first is your second alternative analysis is talking about you consider the common driveway. I assume that's just left over from last time because only one house. You can just take that section right out. Um
and I would just like you to pay attention to the invasives. I know you talk about this invasives and you want to do a survey when you get to it and everything, but obviously a lot of invasives take multiple uh
hits to uh eradicate. just see if you can see a good invasive management plan that'll be helpful both for getting rid of them and then keeping them out for the magic use. Um
I need pony for tonight. Yeah, that's all I need for tonight. So Chuck, do you have anything? >> Uh yeah, I do. Uh so I don't want to like rehash the uh stream crossing, but I was just wondering why you decided to use two 18inch
culberts instead of one pre-sided box culvert and how does that uffect the open openness ratio? And
it just seems to me that the larger presiding cover would be would be better. I actually I did pick up three siding. It's an open threeided
box color and we went as wide as we did. So the the bank >> and it's and it's 18 in. This is what I'm seeing here. >> 18 feet >> 18 feet from one end to the other. >> Yeah. So it's big. >> Okay. You know, it's four feet high.
>> It's late, Chuck. It's okay. >> It is late. I'll go on to my next question. I thought So, yeah, for a couple of days, I'm going what? I thought it was much larger than >> because the banks tend it that averages about 10. I have to have a a span 1.2
times the widest. And we needed some room to work to put erosion control to protect even though it's silted in. So, that we worked that out through the whole beer thing. How that should So, we don't have Morin sitting over there just not saying anything. So, we
were just wondering if uh I was just wondering if you can just go uh and let us know how you determine thankful with on this particular rushing stream. >> It was totally dry. Totally dry today in
spite of the rain this morning. >> You could just tell us what how typically it's done. >> So, because introduce yourself please. >> Sure. Morning health services. So the bank width isn't consistent
through the whole area. So we took the average of which was 10 ft. So there were some spots that was 6 feet. And then you have the call for and that was peer reviewed by ancient.
So with that um at that point this is where I was asking for how are you going to replicate the existing stream base? I don't think we ever got to an answer at the last one. But what I'm wondering
today is are you going to standardize that channel so it is consistent or how is the inside where the stream flows? What is that going to look like at the end of the day? Is there a detail of that in
here? or are we just going to try to take pictures, do a pebble count, and just try to replace exactly what's there. >> So, the good news is with the size of
this cover, we're essentially spanning the existing that's there. >> So, we're not going to be touching it. The only thing is that we're doing that 12 in
in pipe. We're going to end up removing that. >> Yeah. >> So, that's the only work in terms of removing that pipe. And we'll remove that pipe and we can we can mine it with
waddles to try and maintain the stream that's there that's upgrading. >> So, I'm hoping that um there's a a wetland which I don't know if it's upgrading or downgrading it because I don't know which house how this works around the
island that where the house is being built, but there's a house right on the corner right there and I think it's getting backed up and the water's flooding the backyard. Over time, it's probably just turned into a wetland, but if this
stream uh during the work, if you were able to kind of improve the flow, it would be uh a little bit better. I would consider that an improvement. So, that's why I'm asking. It sounds like you just want to
like put the abutments in, drop the cage on top of it or whatever this is, and then leave everything underneath the same or are you going to do a little work on the stream that's going to be underneath this resided box collar?
>> So, so the intent with meeting the stream processing standards as well as implementing this type of box cover is to minimize the impact to everything that's out there. So the house that's having flooding, I think
that's upgraded. >> As you go down small lane, it's on the right, I believe. >> And part of that problem is that culbrate that's there right now is silted in and has not been functioning.
So that homeowner has been experiencing a lot of flooding in the backyard. That's the house you're referring. >> Yes. >> So once we remove that silent and we put in this fancy box cover,
it it'll improve both from the upgra upgrading of weapon. So, I'm not stating that it's going to fix her flight problems, but I think it would help alleviate some of
>> Should reduce it. >> I'm sorry. >> Should reduce it. >> Yeah. Right. It It should help in theory. >> Okay, that's good. I hope there's more of an improvement. I mean, I do want you to
keep the stream as much as it exists now. I mean, you're pulling out you're pulling out the culvert. I mean, there's really that's going to become the stream that straight line where the culvert is and that's not natural. So, you know, we
really want to try to create a natural area. So, maybe that can be thought about when when you know you're doing that part of it. >> So, we could probably match the down gradient. So, where
You have the 12 inch tilted in culbrate then down gradient it opens up a bit. Do you remember that being out on the site? >> So we could probably try and match the down gradient stream to open it up.
>> I think that would be a good idea. Um and would be very helpful. >> Can I interrupt a second? You say downgradient. My memory is the water flows uh if you're facing the property and houses are behind you, the water flows
left to right, >> right? >> So the down gradient is to the right. >> Yes. >> Okay. I wasn't sure because it looks a little bit more open to the left, but I think the flow is going, >> right?
So, so we could we could work on on matching where that pipe is now. We'll remove it and maybe matching the overall width down stream and essentially once it starts blowing stream's going to
create itself any >> we can help. >> Yeah. I just don't think calling sediment that's built up there over the last 25 years a stream or bank. I mean, we can improve that a little bit and I think that's what you're talking about.
So, that's a good idea. >> We can work on that. >> All right. And my last question for tonight is just I was just more of this cover thing. Um, so you know that that cover is not going to be inundated in any storm, right? All the way up to the
100 year storm. based on the Noah Atlas 14++ whatever it is. Okay, that's that's I'm done. >> Oh, one last thing I want to say. I should have said in the beginning, I am in the butter. I'm not recusing myself. I'm not being partial. Same as the last
time we did here. >> So, any other comments from the from the commission? Any comments from the huge audience? >> There is a lot of people there. Is there anybody in the audience would like to say something? Uh, please use the raise
hand function and uh we'll call on you >> hearing nothing >> also. Um, before we kind of like well let's come back to the kid mission right now because I'm going to say I'm very upset
that we're putting in a culdeac at the for one house. uh it's impacting our 25 35 foot uh you know 25 foot is the zone of natural vegetation 35 foot is a no structure
zone I know that it's you know the fire department usually asks for these things I was hoping I do remember that I yes I was at the meeting I thought we were talking about a hammerhead that wouldn't look like so much disturbance so I think
it's important that the commission um lets the applicant know for our DRT meeting that this is not acceptable. We would this is way too much way too much. >> I would much prefer a hammerhead as >> I don't want them to go in there thinking oh didn't even come up.
>> Yeah. I was going to go do the math to feel what the difference is. It's what? What? Why do they want >> I wish this wasn't recorded because I'd love to be funny right now, but I'm just going to say why do they have to be able
to turn around at the top. >> So, >> I can answer that because the alternative they have to back out and that's the long way to back up and they're concerned about >> and they look at this as an opportunity. They have a dead end now. They have they
have to back out now. They can get a fully compliant turnaround. My thought was when I first met with Joe, I said, "Now that we have one house, if I just sprinkle the house, we can probably do away with the turnaround." If he has fire, if he has a sprinkler system,
>> we saw even the hammerhead, it sounds good, but a hammerhead >> come up. Let's say you go to a T, you go 60 feet each way and it's 24 feet wide. >> Yeah. So, I'd still be in your zones. Um, but we can talk about it at the DRT
chuck. And this is why I want to meet with you guys first >> and we know sometimes boards have different opinions. CPDC has a different set of standards and convict looking more public safety and turning
and the fire department carries a lot of weight because of public safety. So where the existing end of Small Lane is now, was it discussed at that point where that would be where the stack is and then it would just be a driveway up to the new house? >> Yeah, because even that hammerhead
wouldn't support that. >> I'm turning that turn that into the color. >> I can't because I'm dealing with you got number 22. It take that bubble and try to move it down. It's difficult
>> but even then wouldn't there be an issue unless they can run the lines >> that need more air. So where I have the culdeac now I'm I'm close to your but I'm not filling I but further down that's where the stream
crossing I'd be filling a ton of wetland. >> Yeah it's just I mean look at the size of the house compared to the culver. I mean it's going to need its own little zip code there. All sacks are huge. >> Yeah, it's ridiculous. And it's not
>> there. It's private. They have to accept it. And they still won't let you vegetate the center of it. So I I I I see that it's crossing. It's not You can't tell on this one. Uh and this one here, you can see that it's crossing the 25 and 35 foot.
the the town has a dead end road 500 ft. >> Small lane's already 350 ft. Now I'm extending at 300. So I'm I'm requesting a waiver for a dead end road to be greater than 500 500 linear feet and in
order to support that waiver part of my thing is well I have a turnaround now where you don't have one. So CPDC will see that as a benefit and probably grant the relief on the dead end if I did have a turnaround. They might say we don't support your
waiter. You're just making the dead end worse. >> And why don't they just how come this I've heard it before where they just prove that you can do it and then they allow drive. >> The only thing I could do is I've done things on commercial sites not like
roads. um where we do like a open pa and grass it or it's a a plastic or stone and it's a different surface on a pavement that you that a fire truck and H20 rated vehicle can drive on with a different surface. I don't know fire it
requires some maintenance I know. So these are the things I can talk about next Wednesday that it came up and let's have a discussion. >> I don't Yeah, we'll probably I'll probably lose what we do.
>> The only other thing I could see from this plan is if you made the road a little bit longer and the front yard of the house a little bit smaller, you'd pull your culde-sac into the wider part of that crumbling. It wouldn't help a
lot, but it would help a little bit. If you look at plot um four, sheet four, you can see where the house is. >> Yeah, you're you're right in that. Yeah. And to go back and this is a new
application, but just as we talked about when Ana was on the commission, we actually did things to reign the culde-sac as I show it now to try to balance the site and limit the amount of impact. I actually shift adjusted the driveway. Yeah.
>> So there was a lot of discussion with the is how we got to this design. >> Anything else? check it says >> no well again I think that it's late and there's further discussion just on the
presentation here so we are coming back so >> um so when's your >> okay so our next meeting well our meetings in November are the 12th and the 26th
>> no we have Um, >> oh, so it's the 12th. >> Well, you should I is there more to discuss before they talk to D CDC because we have the 22. They come back on the 22nd and see if we can move it forward a little bit or do
we need to hear what D CBDC says? We'll have the input from the DRT. >> The problem I have is that I haven't had the plans to go over in detail. So, I did look at Martha's hard copy today in the site visit, but I went online and it
wasn't there. So, >> haven't had time to really play with it. >> Well, we usually do that within the two weeks in between the meeting. Why doesn't that work this time? >> I say rather wait, but we could have another meeting even
before. I think that's worth it. Okay. It work for you 22nd. >> That works work for you, too. Yeah, that works for us. >> Have a motion to continue this to move to continue this. >> Oh, wait a minute. I have two hands up.
Sorry. >> We were so close. So close. Don't want to look in that direction. >> It's not even 10 o'clock yet. >> See, uh, C's iPhone. I'm gonna You can
unmute right now. C's iPhone. Can you unmute yourself and identify yourself please? >> Can we move on to uh >> Okay, here I am. I'm sorry about that. Hi, >> it's uh Christina Liddani. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Yeah.
>> Hi. Yes, I know. I don't want to prolong your meeting. Um I'll definitely be in person with the next one. Um I had a question about what's going to happen with the pump. >> Can you give us your address, please? >> I'm so sorry. Uh 17 small lane. >> Thank you.
>> So, um with this uh new construction, what will be happening with the sewage pump that was uh installed about what 25 years ago? That'll stay. That's still going to be operational. >> And will the uh new house be using that as well?
>> Yes. >> Okay. Um could we get the specs on that to make sure that it is adequate to be able to do another whole household since we just had the house on 22 built up uh
for a larger family. >> I should check with the town engineer on that. Yeah, we're going to have a four bedroomedroom house. be adding 440 gallons per day. So, it's a small amount of flow. >> I'm sorry. >> I'll find out that information from the town engineer.
>> Okay, that's great. And you'll present that at the next meeting? >> Yes. >> Okay. Also, a question. With the 57 trees being removed, won't that take uh saturation away from the area and bring it cascading to Small Lane and also
Charles Street? No, >> no, I have I have a detailed drainage report. >> I'm sorry. >> I have a detailed drainage report that I submitted to the conservation commission. >> Uhhuh. >> That's where the microphone.
>> Oh, where is it? >> You might be better off. >> All right. I'm right next to this guy. >> Um, can you hear me now? >> Yes, I can. >> Okay. So, I submitted a detailed drainage report where I model uh the site pre-development and then post-development. And I'm tasked with
showing um drainage for different storm events. So, that's available and I'm showing less water moving off the site in the post-development scenario even with the tree removal. >> Yes. And u what was the answer with the replacement of the the wetland trees? We
still have to talk more about that, but we're doing a a wetland replication area and I'm doing some trees and shrubs in that area. It won't equal the 57 being removed, but we're going to try to tally up what we've planted. See if we get some credit for that towards the 57.
There'll be more discussion on that. >> Okay, great. Wonderful. Um, that's all for now. Thank you very much for taking my questions. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. And Keith was uh another one. So Keith, you're on. Unmute yourself.
>> Can you introduce yourself, please, Keith? >> I thank you. Uh Keith Edgemont 39. I'll be brief. I guess I just want to address water concerns as well. Uh wanted to bring it up earlier, but I couldn't find the raise your hand signal. So um I I've
lived at 392 Hil Street for over 25 years. grew up on 398 Hail Street, probably 20 years there. So, I've got about 45 plus years on the street. Um I I I'm just concerned about water. Um we are even in today's rain, there was
standing water in the backyard. It's a little bit of a dry summer obviously. Uh but there's the spring summertime here. There's constantly standing water back there. There was some comment about the uh culvert allowing for water to I believe move
into the wetlands and the way I understand it that drains into a culvert under uh Hil Street near 398 Haveril Street and across uh into the woods over there. That culvert hasn't been touched
by the town. I can't remember the last time. Uh I I know I maintained it because I've cleaned out both ends of it on several occasions to help the water flow go. And so I just want to be on record. I'm concerned that um I don't
think that the there there's there's been a lot of thought. It's a little bit of a cavalier approach. I think considering that, you know, we're talking 10 year rain levels, 100year rain levels, and with 45 years experience in the street, I can tell you that uh you want to come here in April
and visit the site, you should bring a boat because it's pretty wet back here. So, I just want to be on record. I'm concerned that uh there's going to be issues with the water. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Any other comments we need to address? Anybody else online? the commission uh we will be issuing the storm water permit for this. So I expect you know whatever storm water questions uh and maybe a little more detail on
how um when you have a forested area with a you know leaf litter on the ground it seems very absorbent and all that. How's that? I mean, just for everyone, how is that calculated? Now, we're removing the trees. We're removing that. We're
putting in pvious surface. How do you come up with the storm water stand? And I know there's that answer and it takes it into account. There's certain things that you have to check out. So, for the next time, maybe that is something we can start out with. Give it 30 seconds. >> Okay. So, when I'm doing drainage, you look at
the land cover. So the existing conditions this is woods and you you say if it's in good condition poor or fair and based on that and based on the soil types if it's an A B C or D A being great like this is great sight it's all
sands and gravels so you have an A type soil with woods that are in good condition um it gives you a value it's a runoff number it calculates how quickly water would move off the site for a wooded scenario now my site's going to pavement
grass, different surfaces. There's different runoff levels for that. So, I I have to model all the the proposed land use for this site. Some of it's going to stay wood, some of it's going to be grass, some of it's pavement, some
of it's might be crushed snow, you know. So, I model all those different things and there's corresponding runoffs so that when rain hits the ground, depending on the surface, it shows how quickly it removes. Now, litter. They don't really account for that.
That's the 32. And we know when trees are removed, trees absorb water. They suck it up. So, it's a model. It's not It's not perfect, but it's the model that everyone uses. Hydroat. >> And so, what is what is that all about?
Why why is all that needed to ensure that you either meet or decrease? Uh so go into that >> meet or decrease I don't cause flooding problem. >> No, the water stays on the on the property. So
>> exceeded your 30 seconds. So >> but we have to Well, that's important because a lot of people are worried about that. I know with uh Annette Lane it was >> it was at least an hour and a half of discussion. So not that.
>> Okay. So can I have a motion? >> I move to continue this hearing for zero small lane to October 22nd. >> Talbert seconds that motion. Walter's in favor of that motion. >> In favor in favor in favor.
>> Thank you. >> All right. >> Okay. Next one. >> No, I have a special. Can we uh skip over that for just one second? >> So simple. >> Sorry. Are you here for
>> Oh, is there Can we skip >> the next uh I'll get there something else here for us. >> Chairman's prerogative. We're going to change the uh agenda and pick up zero in that lane before we do 24 dust.
>> All right. See you some guys. So, I don't know if you have to say anything, but here's the process. Do do you want to say something? >> I can I can answer any questions. I mean, >> sure. So, why don't you introduce yourself for that? >> Just be brief. Yeah.
>> Yes. >> And so uh there they uh have submitted a plan with me. They've shown me a plan that changes the approved uh layout of the house. It increases the size, shifts it around within what we allow. It's
still within the 35 foot area. Um, and uh let's see if I can grab it while you guys discuss this. But Brian's going to go through uh through the criteria. >> Can I just get your names again?
>> Uh Dale Harvey and Jessica. >> I don't know. >> Yeah. my tablet. >> So, I'm gonna I'm gonna be brief and I'm going to just list out what the uh process is for a a plan change request.
Um, so this happens after we've already issued an order of conditions and then if for some reason the applicant comes back and wants a change, we have hearings like we're having now. you submit any pertinent uh paperwork to
show the changes and then we review the proposed changes and we have three possible outcomes. The first is that the plan change is insignificant and the order of conditions requires no
amendment. The second is that the plan change is significant and the order of conditions requires an amendment. The last, the third, that the plan change is sufficiently different from the approved plan that a new notice of intent or
abbreviated notice of intent must be filed. Um, so we'll we'll have the hearing that is certain timelines required. We have to give you a decision within 21 days of the applicant's notification.
Um I don't know to go into the rest of this but essentially that's the point I made. So we're going to have this conversation understand and then here we can tell you is it uh basically administrative approval we vote on it. Go ahead choices a plan order condition
change or home. So having said that does anybody have any questions? >> Let me just set it up a little bit. So, uh, if you can look on the screen, you can see the grade out, um, the grade out
house and driveway is what was approved. A couple of questions that we had. Um, but it says, but this new plan shows a little bit more driveway where it says proposed driveway kind of
expands over what is the existing driveway. and the house not only is larger, it's pushed to the back and turned on the property. Weren't sure if the trees, this is a question for the applicant, if the all
the trees represented there with the X's on it were already grooved or there new ones that are going to be coming down and uh and somewhere in that mix there's new trees. Also, >> are gone already taken down. the ones that on the right you can see there
still exist things so none there'll be no more tree everything that's down is down uh and was able to make the house the engineers are going to twist the house enough we don't affect any so the old structure was I think 28 by 60 new structure is 50 by 59 so it's a
little bigger it's more square than rectangle but then I took the front porch and the rear porch >> that's a lot bigger that's a little bit bigger >> it's yeah roof wise it's about seven square roofing and >> 1,600 to 3,000 requests.
>> Oh, yeah. And I took the rear porch and the front porch and I raised them. I'm going to do um crown and we get rid of the footprint of the actual foundation. >> Back to the houses for a second. >> Y >> um so on this part here was the froz driveway. There were two that are marked
that I'm assuming would have to go away and they're not exed. >> They're not. He put that the engineer put I told him I wanted to widen the driveway on the right a little bit. He did propose but we're not going to dig. >> Okay. So the actual plan would be somewhat less. >> Yes.
>> It's like 18 ft coming in. So we almost double parks. I don't think we'll need the little side off still using all the same uh rain infiltrators that we looked at the gut was the drainage. We said all it really was making more of a square structure and shifting it to
the right. We didn't encroach in the easement any further in the back. We still got 35 foot set back. >> Yeah. So there was uh a lot of uh butters at
this discussion not only for um the water they thought was going to increase flooding but they also had um site uh issues where they would they asked about visual screening and certain things
about that and their proximity of the house to their own houses. So, um, >> one of the things that they stated for the record, which helped, but they said no water would exit the property, >> everything would be infiltrated or
handled. That's still going to be true. >> Yeah. Same where the engineers said all the same uh infiltrators that he had the original proposed plan uh will still be hooked up to the exist the new gutters, >> but it's a bigger house, more roof, more runoff. Is the size that was proposed
before sufficient? Yes, he said it was and he'll redraw that. I just wanted to get through the first meeting. >> I'd like to see that numbs up. Yeah. >> So, if there's if there's questions or you want to you're unsure about the trees, you're unsure about size of the
house, the infiltration, that's not what we should be talking about tonight's meeting. If those questions aren't answered, you need to amend or a new notice of intent. I guess what I'm looking for is to find out if the changes are significant enough to
mint. Um certainly the house is much bigger, trees are about the same, drainage is about the same or the same. Um I don't want to talk my myself into something. Um >> how do you
>> for amend we do not give a butter's notice. >> We do give a butter's notice. Okay. For administrative approval, we don't give a butters notice. But for amend and notice of intent, those both require a butter. >> They do. An amendment is exactly the
same as a new notice of intent, except it doesn't have an application. >> Yeah, we tried to make the existing speaker up and running and been trying to get back to running for >> five years now.
the house just >> so I'm I'm thinking we should go for amended order of conditions. Reason being there's a few other things that we think you need to do. Um that's still the middle ground. It's not a full NOI
obviously, but you have an opinion. But for example, um the area to the right of the boardwalk, that area was damaged during the original work. Uh so we'd like to see that uh properly reestablished. >> Yeah.
>> And also the the boardwalk on the Annette lane side. Um it's kind of a too steep an angle on that. Like to see that come out. Great. >> Talked to the current owner. He said he's already changed that ADA%.
He said everything that's in that wood chip fil wetland area has grown in and My discussion with Chuck is we'll add I mean I don't mind putting as much woodland seed as >> okay >> you guys want in there and we plan on doing a ton of >> so we we didn't get to that visit today
we had too many other ones but um we will go look at it and and have judgment on that area in the boardwalk itself >> and I don't mind planting you know a lot more and we're big in landscaping so >> yeah I'm also going to look at the trees that were damaged during the previous
work um obviously we have questions about their survivability. >> Yeah. >> So want some kind of condition to cover uh that situation if in fact one or more of them don't survive. How many were there again that were damaged? >> So there were 36 and that was taken
>> the damaged ones. >> They looked at I looked at them the other day. >> No more >> there was like nine. >> I thought that's a fair number. So anyway, the bottom line is that's something I'm going to >> that last blossom it really hides damage and it may be sufficient. Uh but I just
mentioned that those trees are a question mark. It all the things you're talking about here is you know would come up in the amended order and I know that we're pressed for time. So I also think that's appropriate but not for anything you mentioned.
>> I think they changed the house. Well, it's the old order of conditions stands and when we amend it, it's still in effect and we're just adding new conditions to it. So, you have to you're going to be
opening it up and the commissions can add new conditions uh that they want to this process. I mean, that's what you have to understand, too. And you were there for the for the meeting. But I just think because it's moving on the site and it's changing where people the
abutters um thought it was going to be I think that's a change that's too great to not get them into the conversation. And so for for me I would have said just because it's moving like that it's bigger and it looks like
it's and the abuters don't care about the wetland. It's just it's moving back so it's closer to their property all within our okay zone but >> he said the rear end wasn't he didn't put it back any >> if anything going by the baseline of the
property. >> Well shows right here that's further back than the existing house. >> He said it wasn't encroaching into the eastment any further than the existing order that you guys had prior. I can have confirmed that, but I told him that he knows he couldn't vote because Andrew was the
>> Do you work for the MBTA? >> Just making sure. Okay. >> That was harsh. >> Even I wouldn't have said that. >> Okay. But anyway, so I think we're looking at an amended order of conditions. So, um, we should I need a
motion and then a vote to ask for amended order. So, can I have a motion? >> Says, >> how do we phrase this? >> Uh, a motion to require an amended order conditions for zero net. >> I move that we require an amended order
of conditions for zero and late. >> Walter top seconds that motion. Thomas in >> favor in favor in favor. Thank you. Get out of here. >> Thank you. >> Um let's go back to 24 Dustin Road.
>> Let's check. You raise your hand for 24 Dustin Road. I see one's up. >> Yeah. I'll read the blurb while they're coming in. Uh, open a public hearing on notice of intent file Sean McFeffrey pursuant to Massachusetts general law
chapter 131 section 40 the weather protection act and or the reading weather protection bylaw section 7.1 or raising the existing home and constructing a new single family home with associated porch patio garage and driveway. Portions of the work are
within the buffer zone bordering vegetated wetland. The application of plans can be viewed on the conservation division page under current projects map 26 lot 164. >> Can you introduce yourself and take us
through your project? >> I am happy to. Uh for the commission's records, my name is Andrew Tibo. I'm a wetland scientist with Gutter Consulting. Thank you guys for the um the hybrid option tonight. We had a couple meetings to juggle, so this is helpful. Um, I know the commission's had a late night, so I'll get right to it.
Do I have permission to share my screen or do you prefer to share yours? >> Uh, uh, yeah, you can share your screen. >> Awesome. Does this come up okay in there for you guys? >> Yes. >> Awesome. Thank you. So, again, for the record, my name is Andrew Tibo. I'm the
wetland scientist for the project. Also on this call is Stan Dani of Civil Engineer uh, Engineering Solutions Group. He's our civil engineer for the project. And then I have a client Shauna Mcoffrey as well. So, as you'd read into the record, this is a notice of intent for a raise and
rebuild over at 24 Dustin Road. Um, to kick this off, I just have an aerial photo of 24 Dustin Road. This is about a 0.6 acre lot. Dustin Road comes down. It's the house at the end right here. I believe the commission is well aware of it. Um, currently on the lot is a
driveway in off Dustin Road. It leads to a detached um standalone garage. We have a single family house, a couple sheds, and then we have maintained lawn that slopes gradually to the rear of the lot. Um there are a few um trees that exist within the property. The lawn actually goes further back to the rear of the
lot, but there are a few red maples that stand throughout the lawn that um obscure some of the lawn on the aerials. So, prior to this project being filed, um I was brought on and delineated the wetlands on July 23rd of this year. So, as can be seen on our contours, there's
about there's a ditch in the rear of the lot. If I go back to the aerial, there are some off-site wetlands in an area to the east and they come to a ditch that runs um laterally along between the low point between the property and behavioral tea line. So these wetlands follow a pretty
defined topography line for quite a while um before they bleed up into the existing lawn. I know the commission had the opportunity to visit this site uh this past Saturday, so I believe you guys were able to see this in the field, but um eventually the ditch flattens out. There is an area on this property.
It's been maintained as lawn for for quite a while, but um the hydraology is such that it has hydric soils. It has wetland vegetation that attempts to grow in um before it's mowed and maintained. And so it met all the indicators to be considered a wetland. And so our line was included up to portray that area.
So, what that does is it puts um portions of your 25 foot zone of natural vegetation, your 35 foot no build into the existing lawn and it put some of the existing sheds within that 100 foot buffer zone. So, what we have is a notice of intent
that proposes to raise the existing house on the property and to construct a new single family house that involves um a relocation and widening of the driveway to service an attached garage, a rebuild of the single family house and a patio off the rear. This does push the
house a bit into the 100 foot buffer zone, but we've cighted it entirely outside of the 35 ft no build and the 25 ft zone of natural vegetation. There is a bit of grading that's associated that we can see off to the west of the house. What our engineer has done and is happy to speak to if his questions is include
a three-foot retaining wall. Limit the grading just to that area around the house. The intent is to preserve the grades that exist throughout the lawn as well as in both of your bylaw buffer zones to keep um keep impacts to a minimum. Having worked with the commission in the past, I am aware that
there is a true replacement policy. So, one thing we want to highlight is the raising and the rebuilding of this home does require the removal of three trees. Um, as I alluded to earlier, there are a bunch of red maples scattered throughout the lawn. I believe there's nine in total. Um, and what that is is the trees
have been preserved, but the remainder of the vegetation was converted to lawn many years ago. So, they exist as native trees um that exist within the the lawn itself. So, we require three of those to be removed in the area that we're grading for the house. And then there is one landscape tree in the in the very
front of the existing home. And so what we've done is we've identified that the the best area on site to replace these trees is actually within that existing wetland system. As I had mentioned earlier, that portion of lawn up there exhibits wetland traits. Um it meets all
the criteria for a wetland, but it's been mowed and maintained as lawn for quite a few years. and and as a result it it doesn't exhibit the uh the wildlife habitat characteristics that a wetland typically would. And so what we did is we proposed a full one to one replacement. So we have four trees
proposed to be put into this area. We have red maples consistent with what's coming down from inside the yard. We also introduced two swamp white oaks for a bit more biodiversity. And because we're going to seeing in this area and restore it, we have a natural herbaceious vegetation that's going to
come up. We have our trees going in. We also just included um sweet pepper bush shrubs as um extra plantings just to get the proper layering and um accelerate the regrowth of this area. So that's this project at a high level. It was designed to limit grading to the extent
feasible to keep us out of all the bylaw zones and then to replace the trees um at the 1 one while finding the area that we can improve the best on the site. So as I had mentioned um our engineer Dan is on the call if there are questions on the design and I know the commission was able to visit the site. There are any
questions on resource areas, the buffer zones? Uh, we're all here and happy to answer them. >> Thank you. Questions? >> Um, one of my questions had been where are you going to put the trees and now I see it is marked on there. I think
that's a good location. Um the just below that um wetland area there's a small mound that goes up to 193 feet in the center. Um do you think that's
actually um uh like rocks and stuff underneath there or do you think that's just an old leaf pile that is so big and has been grown up in trees? That was centric rings just below your
wetland vine. >> Yes, I assume we're talking about this this big pile here. >> That almost looks to me like a giant leaf pile. >> Yes. So, I I would agree. So, I did attempt to augur a bit into it just to see if there was natural soil formation
in there. And there certainly was some. It's more likely that it was it's a very very old pile there. Um there is woody vegetation that's growing on top of it. I didn't measure to get the proper ages, but it has been there for quite a long time and it started to form its own natural soils and have vegetation grow
in. So, I I do agree that it's likely an old pile that has remained out there and now has vegetation growing within it. >> Um, good. That's what I thought. Um, not not good that it's there, but I'm glad
to hear you agree with me. Um, I am concerned about two other piles of clippings. Well, also on top of that pile, there seems to be some loose grass clippings and leaves that maybe need to
be removed. But also off the end of Dustin Road, um there's a pile of glass grass clippings right near flag A18 and there are some boards that are put down and then a whole bunch of more
grass clippings on the property that's labeled Bradford Road. Um, and I'm concerned about the the dumping of grass clippings in that area. It's a fair question. I did see some of
that out there. I can only speak to um to what's on our property. I'm not sure where some of that offsite's originating. Um, but as far as our property goes, uh, with the intention to bring our plantings in and restore this wetland area here, um, it's it's certainly also our intent to remove any
clippings, dumping that's there. Uh the intent is certainly to work with the commission and improve the conditions. So as we go through this review, um we'd be more than happy to take a condition to remove some of those clippings when we get these plantings in. >> In support of Martha's point, um there's gr grass clippings in a number of places
across the back of your property. Uh including off to the back left with an opening going back to the drainage channel ditch. Um there's uh definitely grass clippings all around that area. There's some leaves. There's a cinder block and other associated debris which
needs to be removed as well. >> Absolutely. We'll be more than happy to work with you guys to do that. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Um >> I think that was it. >> Okay. I have a question. Um
I'm not quite sure how you came up with um the part of the wetland line where you uh are showing some of the formerly grass that you're going to allow to convert back to wetlands because it is
wetland. Um, a lot of the ground outside of your line, um, visually, I didn't do any augers or anything, but visually looks just as likely to me to be wetland. So, what did you do to draw the line where you did?
>> Yeah, that's a good question. So um as part of this application I did do a full wetland border report that details some of the auguring that we took within these areas some of the plant species that we found within but it was a combination of both. So as you can tell by the the existing condition plan
grades are very gradual. So you see a very very slow transition into um more wetland vegetation. So the way this line was established was was based on two criteria. One is the depth to redux features that we see in the soil. So areas that have been maintained as lawn
for quite a long time and may not have natural soils, um a lot of times you don't get that nice depleted subs soil that you would see in a natural wetland, but instead you meet um a hydro soil indicator called dark redux. And it's when you you have dark um top soil material and you have um redux
depletions and concentrations within that soil that would suggest that water movement comes up during the growing season and comes out at the right times. You have to have that within 12 inches of the soil surface and it has to be um within a certain uh darkness of a matrix and chroma. So it has to be at least a
matrix of three and a chroma of two or darker. And so within the wetland system we meet that because that area is saturated for a little bit longer. The soil has a bit more organic content to it. And then we also had those redux concentrations and depletions all within that top foot where you can tell that that water table is. And then the
vegetation that grows within there, if you take the long grass out of it, met the 50% coverage um throughout the entire area. Once you go upgradient of this line, most of the soil samples don't show that the color that's dark enough in the signs of redux until
deeper than 12 in. Um in most areas, it's not a lot deeper. It can be 14, 16 in, things like that. So, it's certainly indicative that there's still a high water table because, of course, you're just going up a shallow grade. um but it doesn't meet the criteria for a hydraic soil. And then similar similarly these
these flatland flags were hung during areas where there was vegetation breaks. So when you go and take little microtopo and look at the areas there this is where upland vegetation such as um species like bed straws or clover or wood sorl things like that start to come
up. So if you take little um data plots in these areas you have primarily open vegetation and then the soil colors were a little bit too deep to be called a hydro soil. >> Okay. So, if I can drop for a second, um, did you do any I mean, uh, so beyond
the squared offish point in the area where it's still at the 190 foot grade at all, that whole area is 190 ft. So, did you do any testing out beyond where you're drawing the line currently? I
don't know why that would be different. >> Yep. Yeah. As part of as part of the wetland delineation, we're auguring up and down. So I would have augured everywhere from you know the very back of the property where you have obvious wetland and you usually go in a line all the way up. So I would have been auguring at the 190 contour to 191
vegetative samples throughout that. So we would have looked at the whole backyard here. >> Okay. But what I don't understand is the line where you put the wetland flags that little squared off region that's at
190 ft. Right. >> Yep. And it's 190 ft all the way out to the contour line, whatever that is, another 15 20 feet out. So why is that area in there also not wetland? I mean
it's same grade. >> I I understand your question. Yeah, that wetland lines are typically along a similar contour throughout most of their reach. So, what I can tell you and the main reason is is this area here is is a well- definfined ditch for much
of much of its reaches. Even this fill pile here, when you come off of it, it's still at a higher elevation where there's a channelization of water, and that ditch is still at a lower elevation. I know we don't have the the contour information further in here, but there's still an internal ditch that
moves most of the water interior of the line, and this only comes up a bit. That's because of the shallow grade in the hydraology. Although it doesn't meet the exact contour, it's because most of the surface water moves through the area and continues down gradient. And then the other thing is is wetland lines may
not follow the contours exactly if the vegetative breaks occur sooner. Um because if we were to take half foot contours, things like that, you'd see some micro contours that come in here and would show that there's a very shallow pitch. So you sometimes see those vegetative breaks before the contour lines.
>> Yeah. I mean, I just I didn't do any any samples obviously, but there also seemed to be more of an obvious I'm going to call it a breaking slope, but that's probably exaggeration in terms, but um back further also. So, that's what I was wondering about that area.
>> It it's a good question. It is gradual, but it is there. I I agree with you. >> Uh so, few things. Um we don't use straw waddles anymore. So that needs to be a mulch sock.
>> Absolutely. That can that can be changed. >> And also, can you add to your plan where you're going to have your stockpile area? >> Absolutely. >> Um, we usually ask for construction entrance, but I don't think that matters
much in this one. Um, and how you plan on handling uh roof runoff infiltration. So that's a good question and I I had talked with um Chuck earlier today. So we do have our engineer on the call. At present we don't have a storm water
system for this project. Uh we were going with the the mass EP standard of single family houses being exempt. I had spoken with Chuck today that that's a typical request of the commission. So, we actually have our civil engineer on the call and our intent was to discuss that with the commission, see what the the typical protocol um under your bylaw
is for storm water management and then he'll be able to incorporate that into the plan set in advance of your next meeting. >> Okay, that sounds good. Um we don't have to discuss that here. You can get all that information from Chuck offline. >> More than happy to. As long as you guys
are content with some some being added, then we can work with Chuck and we can get that on there. >> Sounds good. Um um I was going to ask for a planting plan. I also didn't see him on the plan, but now I do. Um ah yes. Um so you've you've
drawn in this area where you're going to let the uh what's currently lawn go back to natural vegetation. But beyond that, I don't see um a zone um natural vegetation. We typically, you know, our
bylaws say we can do up to 25 ft. We don't usually usually ask for that much. We do ask for five to 10 feet of a zone around the uh around the weapons. So, what are your thoughts on adding um I'll
say five feet since you already given up some of the lawn, but five feet beyond um so outside of the wetland flags that you marked, five more feet for a zone of natural vegetation. I think that's a reasonable request and
I think it also accommodates, you know, some of the questions about this being a a very gradual and exact wetland line. I think the intent of of us putting our plantings in this area is regardless of exactly where that limit of hydrarology ends in the lawn, we want to restore it back. So, I think if there's if there's
a 5ft increase upgraded a little bit and we square it off, I think that's a a net benefit to the area. And because a lot of that area is wet lawn, it's it's not wellmaintained and it's not very usable. So I don't think that's a sacrifice to the project. So that's something we're happy to take a look at. >> Um so
typically in those um ZNVs we try and have multiple layers. Um you know we don't want it to be just ground cover, just shrubs. We we like a mixture. Um let's see. Would it be sufficient if we
had you um submit ideas along those lines to Chuck? And if Chuck agrees that they're good as you write them up or minor changes, then perhaps we could uh accept that in
obeyance, if you will. >> Absolutely. Yeah, we're happy to do it that way. >> Okay. Okay. So, I mean, we'd be looking for, you know, tree, more than one tree, something that likes its feet wet, red maple, something. And then, um,
uh, it's hard to say. You're going along the edge there. So, I mean, I would think a couple of trees. >> Well, I'm looking at the concentric rings. There's already vegetation growing on those on that mound there. >> Good. So that if we if we preserve those
trees as zone of natural vegetation and I didn't notice that they were a lot of invasives. I would have to double check but that that vegetated pile of leaf debris. >> Right. >> So those are
>> um if those are native species that would be part of your five foot extra zone of natural vegetation already. Oh, you're right. We did see some buckthorns. Yeah. So, we might want to
>> get rid of some of the buckthorns. >> Okay. So, um so we're looking for is a planting plan for the zone of natural vegetation that includes a few trees. I would think even two would be sufficient. A few scrubs
and shrubs and then some ground cover. by all means and our our intent is already to provide that. So what I had shown here was two red maple trees, two swamp white oak trees, sweet pepper bush and then the ground cover. So what I can do is so we have um our existing square
footage here. We can add that 5 foot right here and just see what that square footage is. And then there's easy calculations on spacing of how many plants should be in there. My my gut tells me that the plants that we have here are probably the proper spacing for that area already. And this area is all
naturally vegetated. So if we're able to incorporate those all here and move that up a few feet, I think that that would definitely be in line with what the commission's looking for here, >> right? And also the removal of the invasives. >> Yeah, buck buckthorn's a good one because you can handle there's no good invasive, but um for management wise,
buckthornne can be hand pulled um by the roots, especially when it's in the wetlands and removed pretty easily. You don't have to go back there with anything crazy. So that's um that's a very easy request on our end. >> Okay. Um, that's all the question I have. Anyone can commission talked to you or anything?
>> Yeah, I'm just going to follow up on what you're saying. Uh, so this, uh, back in the day, uh, this applicant, uh, not this applicant, but the original owner has an enforcement order for this very same area and it was altered to
probably what it is now. um cutting down trees, filling an area, and uh turning it into more useful lawn. Basically extending the yard. So, it was too late. I wasn't able to
follow Brian or Andrew. So, I know that he said, "We'll square off the wetland." And to that to me that means where it says CA11 it's going to go pretty much straight down to where the 25 foot or 35 foot
buffer zone is. And then there was a discussion about adding five feet to that for vegetated buffer strip. I just want to make sure that's either it is or it's not what we're talking about because I'm wondering why we're
not requiring the entire 25 foot which we've done in other cases at least we've had this conversation uh to turn the 25 foot Z&V back into um yeah a zone of natural vegetation.
>> So I wasn't aware of a previous enforcement order. Well, that was just another data point, but still it's the 25 foot ZNV. But >> my point is the property owner gained some space. That's different. I was trying to um
give credit for the fact that they are growing in the uh the wetland where is now grass um and then going somewhat beyond it. Um, >> so to me, what's happened there is we have this drainage ditch that comes from
the bottom of the screen up towards the top, so south to north. >> And the street has historically dumped leaf and and lawn debris basically in that drainage ditch. >> They're still doing it.
>> So, it backs up and that's an area where the water has been pooling for years. and which has created this condition. Um, so anyways, they created their own problem. So
I was just trying to figure out what we're talking about 25 foot line or or a different or what's being proposed. So were you were were you happy with or or just explain what you were asking for again?
>> Okay. uh as far as squaring off the edge. >> Yeah. I don't even remember using the word. >> You didn't say that. That was >> Okay. Um so if you if you look at the um rectangular
protrusion at the uh screen north and then just south of that there's the mound which we all believe is probably artificial, although old. Um, if you were to take the line that's
there and bring it further down. Um, so heading screen south with a little bit edge towards screen west. So, it's not a perfect straight line, but it's like a a bending line. And that would incorporate
where they're marking off wetland and it would incorporate the um the part with the mound and just if they leave that in a five- foot buffer, let that be the zone of natural vegetation, then that's a reasonable buffer from the uh from the
from the drainage ditch. Definitely. >> Can you all see my cursor if I screen up here? So I just want to make sure that we're discussing properly with with the commission. So the way I was envisioning this is there's a good portion of the 25
foot that is naturally vegetated partially because this fill pile all is to the rear. So I was expecting us to leave this entire 25 that we see here all naturally vegetated. And when I hear that five feet, I think about that in this tightest lawn protrusion since
that's area that they were they're giving up and planting. But I think we would basically take this line and we would cut it to connect with the wetland flags. That way we get a bend up in this area. Five feet is incorporated and it gets the majority of the 25 foot in this half of the site and then it still gives
a nice little buffer to that area that we're restoring up in the northern portion of the site um where that lawn encroaches up further. I would make to that. I agree with everything you said on screen south, but up screen north where you have the uh
boundary drawn by CA13, CA12, and CA11, I'm looking for five feet to the right of that because that's that's your wetland line right there. So, I'm looking for five feet more outside of the wet flats. >> Yep. Yep. I'm tracking with that. I may
not have traced that perfectly on my end, but that's what I'm envisioning as well. And that's that's perfectly reasonable. >> I'm not speaking straight. So you you cannot speak straight if you want. >> Okay. So are we in agreement that that's the intent is here.
And that's the that's the part where we're talking about a multi-layered approach. >> Yep. Understood entirely. And that that's something that we can absolutely incorporate. >> Okay. I guess I'm just thinking I think that
you have enough trees, but you might need a few more shrubs. And that may make sense, especially as we're planting areas closer to the house. Shrubs tend to be favorable over trees. That way, we don't ever create a situation where we're putting in new trees too close. That way, the shrubs
can stay there and continue to expand in perpetuity. So, I'm happy to take a look at that. And um at this point I've forgotten. Um you will will be putting in the ground granite bounds, right? >> Uh we haven't discussed that yet. I was going to ask the commission. I know that
that's typically something the commission's condition in especially when lawn um leads straight to wetlands. So I think I've seen this commission do that before. If that's a typical special condition, then we're happy to incorporate that. >> Okay. So it would run
um >> along the 25 ft line. >> Yeah. >> Which is a very weird 25 foot line. >> Um Chuck, any thoughts on where the bound should go on this one? >> Um yeah. So uh one at the uh one at the
edge of the property line. So that would be two feet in the ground, one feet above the ground. >> And then um something on that uh 190 contour where we can see something, but it could be
>> flush. >> Well, I'm thinking that could be incorporated depending on where it goes into the zone of natural vegetation. So, I think those three are above the ground. Um,
and then one flush with the ground around CA11 on the 25 foot line. >> Oh, my only thought of that, if we're saying this, so it seems like the request is to have these bounds um or to have our restoration come up 5T, would
it make more sense to have the bounds at the limit of the restoration area? I'm not sure exactly what your bounds language say, but the way I would foresee that is exactly in the locations you guys are describing, but at the limit of lawn to sort of mark that that agreeable um buffer that we're setting
in perpetuity because I think if we put them up in the 25, it sounds like we're going to have our a little bit of lawn behind them and then our restoration area and because it seems like putting them right at the restoration area may be the best way to do that. >> Yeah. So, our language is that they go on the 25 foot line. So that's been
consistent for, you know, decades. And so all administrators and commissioners know that when they see them, they're on the 25 foot. So we don't we eliminate them before we would put them somewhere else. >> So I think those choices either they're
not going in or they're going on the 25 foot. >> At the very least, they go on the property balance. >> Yeah, I agree with that. Yeah. Yeah. So, my my thoughts are just because that area would be maintained as a lawn, it it may not make sense to put them there, but I'm more than happy to put them at the property boundaries. I think that
that makes sense. >> Yeah, I think you can fit three in the way I'm looking at it. But, um, >> yeah, I think you do need one in the middle. >> This is and this is not usually a discussion about where these go.
I don't know why we So, uh, >> no, we we appreciate you guys working with us and three. We can definitely do three. >> Yeah, I think that you you you have an opportunity where it says 190 and it's kind of cutting in between the 25 and 35 foot line to be close to the restoration
area with a bound and it's still on the 25 foot line, I >> hand is right now. >> Exactly. >> Yep. And that's that's reasonable because that's in line with an area we're storing. That's natural. I think if we do three and include one there, I
more than happy to do that. >> Yeah, that would be >> okay. All right. Any other discussion? >> All right. So, um at this point, I
entertain a motion to close the hearing on >> No, you're going to continue. >> I am lost. >> Yeah. >> I'm sorry. Yes. >> I would just continue it to the 22nd. Just a motion for continue. A motion to continue to the 22nd, >> please. >> I move that we continue this hearing to
the 22nd. >> Top seconds that motion. Top in favor of that motion. Miss >> favor more in favor. >> Rambo. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. And I think we're going to be talking about infiltration and anything
else that you want to, but we prepare you for the next meeting and hopefully get out of there at that. Okay. >> Yeah. No, that sounds good. Thank you all for your comments tonight. That gives us exactly what we need to get you a plan. So shock, I'll work with you offline and we'll get that added. >> Thank you. >> Thanks, guys.
>> So Ellen Shanov's on the line if you want to take or unless there's somebody else here that wanted to talk. >> Where is Ellen? >> Ellen is at 32 Harvard Street. and we talked about a fence at the last meeting
and this meeting she wanted to continue the conversation about >> the infiltration area and she's got some feedback from >> Okay. Um this is this is an item that was not on the posted agenda. Um we are
going to uh talk with homeowner at 32 Harvard and our last meeting we um talked about different options for infiltration. has to come back with some information information. So, Elanor, if you want to uh take the floor, please
introduce yourself and go ahead. >> Thank you so much again. I know it's very late. Appreciate you letting me speak. I know it wasn't on the agenda. Um, last time you asked me to go back to the engineer for our property where we
have a lot of groundwater and we um had originally asked for a waiver of the infiltration requirement. So, I spoke with Ian and he was able to write a letter uh that he sent to Chuck that I think Chuck can show you all. I can
briefly summarize the letter if that's helpful. uh he said in the beginning that uh as he had said during the hearing for the notice of intent he stated that this property is not conducive to infiltration. So he talked a little bit about how the groundwater
level is just too high to make it workable. Um, and so then he talked a little bit about how we did the groundwater test pit and the pieces that I know you're all aware of. The the amount that we're adding to the to the
blueprint isn't very large. Um, and so then at the very end he says if it must if something must be installed then the most workable thing would be the infiltration trench at the ground surface. So that's something that you guys had mentioned last time, the drip
line trenches um he said along the exterior wall of the house. So we were able to talk through all the options that the um commission had gone through and I mean his so I don't know if we should stop talking at this point
>> since it's so later if there are questions. >> So so I I I don't know if it came across. So he said the most uh viable option out of the three would be the drip trench, but he also said I had a
conversation with Ellen that's you know I guess if he was forced to do something that would be the one. So he's not recommending anything based on his understanding of this project. He's been on it from the start. So that that that's probably
you know it's not an endorsement but he could do something, I guess. So, >> yeah. Right. The way he sort of put it was it's the least bad option. He's like, I stand by my original um
>> Yeah, we'll be talking to him >> perspective. >> Um the least bad. >> Yeah. >> So, here's the point. So, what I said to Elanar earlier is I said, "This is this is interesting. It's going to be the
first time that the commission is going to or possibly approve a house >> that we can't get infiltration in. And we haven't really even thought about that. Uh, you know, as a commission, >> what do we do? I mean, when when the
groundwater's too high and nothing seems to work, >> well, what is the point of infiltration? You want to reduce or eliminate surface flow, right? You want to recharge fast you can.
You're always worried about velocity. Ground is pretty flat. Um I mean, do we need to do anything different to achieve those goals? if they had down spouts, for example,
is that water would have then migrated with force to the wet. >> I think you lose control when you're just doing down spouts and they're spilling out on the ground unless you grade in anticipation to move things towards the backyard, which may have
happened here. I'm not sure. remember the western >> but if it if it went >> the neighbor's house you know on one side that wouldn't be that wouldn't be a better situation um I think velocity and all that can be handled with grass you know as soon as
that's established >> but but we do lose control so >> now the house on the left as you're facing this house is one that we have had a project on as well and they certainly had
surface water certain points of the year. Remember they were ones who were constantly running the sump. >> Yeah, I think they were. Didn't they end up doing infiltration? I don't remember them not >> I don't remember anything about that project but
>> they have the plans um in place and we actually in our house installed a storm drain a pipe under the sidewalk that connects to the storm drain down the hall and so we have told them that it's there so that they can connect to it when they're able to. Um
>> when you say storm drain you mean in the street? >> Yes. It's It's down the street from our house. >> I think that's what we're supposed to be trying to avoid, isn't it? >> The sump pump going.
>> This is from the sump pump from the basement. >> Um, >> yeah. >> Roof infiltration is not supposed to be just going into storm drains and and raising the average. >> Some pumps do the same same water.
Water's going to go into your house and go back. >> It's always the initial surge that you're trying to dampen, right? How fast it gets there. If it's infiltrating through, it's less likely to cause the same problem. That's the best sit.
>> Well, you have considerations for the house, but then you have considerations for the weapons and you know, storm water in general. So you don't want to steer it to the street or something quickly. You want to
give it a chance for it to >> I don't see another alternative. I mean, you know, >> I'm wondering why the drip trenches is not considered to be a reasonable option. My understanding is just that it the
ground is so wet already that it's not going to move water. I don't have an engineer's understanding. Um, and I guess if I read the language of his letter, it's just I stated that this
property is not conducive to infiltration. The elevation of the backyard is less than a foot above the elevation of the wetland. So the groundwater table is likely just below the surface and the property small size makes it difficult to raise the grade for an infiltration system without severely impacting the ability to use
the yard or to navigate around the house. Um, so I guess my limited understanding is just that it won't achieve the aims that the installation of things like the underground chambers
were set would set out to do because the water the ground is already so wet. >> So Chuck, when it came to downspot, which the point you raised was we lose control, right? Um, but a drip trench
would solve that problem. It wouldn't solve the fact that the water table is so high, but it would control. It would go there, infiltrate, so it wouldn't run off to a neighbor >> in any abrupt way, right? So that's
better from that perspective. >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, you could do the drip trench and you could direct the water from the down spout into the drip trench and it looks like it's going to have I usually drip trenches a two foot wide, two foot deep. This is going to be
two foot wide, one foot tree deep. It's going to be right at groundwater. >> So, it could infiltrate the water in that first foot. Sounds like there there's something
there. But I occasionally I guess it would it would fill up. >> Yeah. >> But it would it would do something. >> Yeah. It's a margin of game, but it's a game. >> And there is still planning to be a rain
barrel at one corner of the house. >> Yes. >> We can do more. I don't know the intent behind the question. Um, we could do more rain barrels certainly. The other in terms of weighing
the improvements to the wetlands, you know, versus any drawbacks or risks. I mean, I can't help but mention cost that I absolutely want to do everything in favor of protecting and being respectful
to the wetlands. But if the installation of the drip trench doesn't change very much and it costs me a lot of money, then I just wanted to I just wanted to put that out there as one of
the other I think drawbacks to to the installation. >> Do you have a recommendation? Because in my mind, this may be the first time that we don't require. >> That's the funny thing about you know, we're always right there. >> It's okay.
>> I can run with that. >> All right. So, let's go with the idea that we don't require infiltration. >> First time ever. Don't tell anybody >> in the public meeting. >> Could we make >> a motion that's kind of bulletproof
>> specific to this site because the and the capacity was only like 27 square feet or something like that. I'm going to make motion. Make a motion that in the case of 32 Harvard Street only due
to the um >> high groundwater level, >> the the water table being so close to the surface, not allowing for our typical modes of infiltration.
We vote to not require it in this in this one instance. >> Well, they also have a sump pump, right? You did you say you have a sump pump that directs water into the storm drain? >> Yes. >> I think you should mention that too
because that's another hurdle. mentioned that um they have to have >> because the groundwater level is so high and because that the applicant has already uh tried to uh >> circumvent
>> yeah like resolve or attenuate or whatever the whatever the term is >> address >> address the water by installing a sump pump um you know those so that's two things you know I don't think anything and and
I was just going to say and because the addition is only 19 square feet which you can fall back on that. >> All right. So >> and they are having one rain barrel >> and they're >> I will put as many rain barrels as you
would recommend. >> All the water. So, I I'll make it. But, you know, >> but the rain barrel holds it for a couple of days until the and then you can water your garden. >> But they don't need to water the garden either. >> Well, they put one away. So, let's
mention it. So >> make a motion that in the instance of 32 Harvard given the following conditions that they have previously installed a sump pump to help address the water problem that the water table is very
high that there is no measure no significant gains in any of the commission's typical um methods for water infiltration in this one instance >> and the increase in impervious surface
is less les than 20 square feet >> and the increase in impervious services less than 20 ft. Um make a motion to not require infiltration for this one site. >> Yeah, I think that was a good good three
or four constraints on it. >> Anybody want to hear rain barrel in that list? >> I think we have enough >> friendly amendment. Friendly amendment that they are putting in a rain barrel. Okay. So, five. Anybody may want to second that.
>> Sure. Walter second that. >> No, just one second. >> I'll stick with one. I'll let them have one right now. >> Second the motion. >> Walter seconded. >> Walter Talbert in favor. >> Martha Moore in favor. >> Ryan Bow in favor.
>> Okay. Elena, are you free? >> Yeah. >> Thank you all so much for doing this. I really really appreciate it and for staying on until this late. Thank you so much. >> Well, thank you for that. We have to be >> done by
>> I'm just looking in five minutes. >> We have to be done in five minutes. >> 3:30. >> Okay. Uh, next one. CPA discussion. We had a discussion last time. We gave ourselves time to think about it before
we voted. The vote. The question at hand is whether or not we support CPA committee bringing their recommendations to town meeting. And do we have any input on the
percentage? >> Right. And it's it's select board and then town meeting. >> Right. Okay. >> So can we just vote on that? So, do we want first do we want to vote um to support their bringing the
proposal to select board and then town meeting have a motion for that? My issue is going to be support $20,000 item. I think the issue that was also fun
and I worry that at some point will that match end? >> No, because it's it's funded by fees that you pay at the registry and people are going to be always buying houses. So the the the match will fluctuate.
>> It may get smaller, but it will never get zero >> or one negative. >> Yeah. It'll never go negative. >> Almost every communities has applied. Now >> 201 out of 250 out of 350
>> have applied. Yeah. So it yeah it's not likely to be zero ever but it's not it's not a one one anymore which they used to you know 10 15 years ago used to be one to one >> that's more >> it's not just and not by number when
Boston came in it was it just >> made a big difference in what the match was >> so >> but it's still >> it's still a great program >> it's still a nonzero amount that we apply to the three or four targets
historical recreation conservation >> housing >> housing. >> So without without that match being significant what what are your concerns because the match was one to one that's I guess we
would say that's fine and that you would agree with but since it's less than half >> does this look more just like You know, >> yeah, there's a match. There's a match on whatever, right? There's no And I
don't know how they calculate the match. >> They will give us a percentage of that money on top of what we raise. So, if we only raise 500,000, they will give us whatever the percentage is of 500,000 that they are giving to everybody. So if
we if we voted for 3% we would get a lot more money from the state. If we vote for half a percent we get a lot less money from the state just because >> right >> they only give a percentage of what we've raised.
groups that are >> oh well not communities but within reading there would be um a low income and senior citizen um uh >> exe exemption and there's a first
$100,000 on your house exemption. So >> for everybody that that um you don't have to vote that in, but the CPA has already committed that they will go for all the exemptions possible. So um so they would start with that
first 100,000 for everybody and they would have also the extra exemptions for the low income and senior citizens. >> And how much of an increase we're going to see on our tax bill? Is it $100? >> If we go for 1%, an average homeowner in Reading would
pay an extra hundred each year on their taxes. >> And what are the It's half a percent, 1%, one and a half%. >> Those are the three that we're choosing between. >> Okay. >> So, if we go for a half a percent, the average homeowner would be adding
something in the order of $40 to their taxes. And if we go for >> one and a half, it would be more like $150 per year. >> All right. So, the goal would get it on the ballot.
>> Yes. And then the town gets to vote. And the goal is to get it on the ballot in the midterm elections in November of 2026. Okay. So, can I get a motion for the conservation commission to support the
CPA committee? >> Do you want to just do one vote and that percentage or you want to do it in two? >> Two. I like votes. >> Anyway, got a motion. >> I will move that we support this
>> CPA CPA uh proposal. Sure. Any seconds? >> I bells ring bells ring. >> More in favor. >> Okay. Three against. >> All right. Let's move on to the next
thing. I don't even have time to >> Doesn't matter. >> Doesn't Joe get a vote? >> No. Conservation Commission >> and no point in voting on the percentage if we voted. >> Y. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Moving on. >> So, um,
>> we don't want an update on Pearl Street. >> No. And >> never mind about the monthly meeting. Talk about the violations. >> Um, do you want to give us an administrative report even though it's late? I'd love to know what's going on with yet.
>> Oh, well, I'm glad you mentioned that. Uh, well, I'm not glad, but I can't there's not really much to tell. I uh we're we haven't had a second staff meeting about uh Mater being closed. Uh we did get an initial report that
highlighted on I'm going to say it's on a higher level than than the the group could uh kind of un not understand but kind of understand who would do the work and how much it would cost. So we wanted to go back to the architect or engineer
that put this together and asked for some more specifics and some additional things that the building commissioner thought they missed. So they actually have to look at more things at the material cabin which weren't in the initial report. We just wanted to make sure those were in there. So it was
three or four additional items that he wanted he insisted that they would be on there. So my understanding is that I think it went back to the engineer to do something about those
questions and we're going to get some numbers back on how much things cost and some more definition on what they actually want done and that would be the second staff meeting. Uh so and it hasn't been called out yet when that staff meeting will be
and I don't know anything about any reports. >> So is the information you get on the cost going to be tiered as in here's the minimum we have to do here's ideal for x number occupancy and here's what's needed for full occupy.
>> So right now I think the minimum tier would be for 20 occupants that includes everyone all the people in the building. So, that's probably what we're going to go for. And then we're going to work on something more. The
typical feel-good capacity for that based on rentals would be around 30 35. That would be a doable number um in the future. And I think that, you know, if
you let's say birthday parties is a huge slice of the pie of what we rent to You know what? Who's coming to your birthday part bodies? I is it is it 20 people including adults? Maybe then it works. I don't know. I think a few of mine were just 20 or less. Um but let's
say you had 10 kids and >> 10 adults, then it then it doesn't work. So, >> but the bottom line is at this point we're stuck waiting for somebody to call that second meeting so you can get more information. >> We don't have any more information to
discuss at this point. So, I hope it's uh being worked on. I'll I'll try to get an update from Jane tomorrow or next week to report at the next meeting about where this is. >> Is the deck usage part of it?
>> The deck is closed. The inside of the building is closed. The uh trail committee's garage is all come to light because of the school. Is this how it all kind of got in motion? I think it would be unfair to
characterize as the school started this. I think it would be more fair to say that at one of the meetings because we were there to talk about the school, the building commissioner and the and the uh uh fire chief said, "You know what? I
haven't been there in a long time. Maybe we should take a site visit." >> But I mean might have been a little >> Yeah. certainly. >> Well, yeah, that's true because not only we're not trying to hide it,
>> this commission, we were trying to increase use. So, that question about are we doing this right would have naturally come up at some point. So, I'm not we need this uh occupancy. Yeah, we
need this occupancy because of the things that we want to do and we'd like to get it to about 30, >> you know, in that area. It seems that would be more reasonable than 20, but it's probably a big step between 20 and 30. And I know that includes another
bathroom from what I've read. I don't know if we can get a uh sometimes you can get like a variance for that. So >> trailb in town hall. >> No. And I'm going over there to get
material out uh when they need to work on it because I don't think it restricts me, but I hope it doesn't. >> Okay. Is that enough on that? >> It is. And now something that's I don't know if you have it written down, but I >> 1295 Main Street. >> So you can't vote on this, but I just
want to set you up. All right. So 1295 Main Street was the house that was put in. and they got their certificate of compliance and they haven't received their bond back. Bond is for $5,000. It's uh lot A.
It's at 1295 Main Street. Lot A. Um >> is it cost from the veterary clinic? >> From the veterary clinic. Um we found all the information the check the original transmitt form for the security bond. I don't think
there's any reason why we should keep it. You guys have met out there with the homeowner and talked about that 25 foot natural zone that's in that one. The reason why we can't vote on this because it's not on the agenda. I wanted you to know about it and it will be on the
agenda at the next meeting and we can get that processed. So, is there anything you want to do like a site visit or or or is it more concerns or you think it's I mean, I'm recommending >> giving the money back the whole amount. >> You already do a certificate of
compliance, you say? >> Yep. >> And I look in every time I drive by just looking for where the where it's cut, not cut along the bounds. >> So, put it on the next agenda. No sight wire site visit needed.
>> Okay. So, next is minutes for approval 8:13. I thought she sent us updated ones for two revise today that I have already, >> but that's okay. We we have to vote on revised original. >> So, I think we can vote on 813. We already voted on 827. We have not yet
voted on 813. >> Really? Okay. >> Yeah, she did them in wrong order because 827 was a motion to accept the minutes for 813. Thomas second that motion in
>> favor in favor in favor. >> I have not seen 910 or 924. Right. Okay. So, we're good. Any last thoughts before we >> I move to someone's online. >> Just ask whoever's online if they have
anything to say. They've been sitting here all night. It's Heather. >> Heather, do you have anything you need to add to our guest presence? Going once. Going twice. Martha as you were. I move
to adjourn at 11:10. Time for