Thank you. All right, do a roll. Um, Anthony >> here. >> Brian >> here. >> Tom >> here. >> Bernardo >> here. >> Joe >> here. >> Wilson
>> here. >> And Nicholas is here. Uh we have a full house. Uh next up is a review and approval of the meeting minutes from our June 3rd, 2026 meeting. Uh any comments, questions, concerns, additions,
subtractions? >> No. >> I'll make a motion to approve the previous month's minutes. >> Second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I excellent. All right. Uh first up we have some new
business. Uh this is um D file number 0610863. This is the Mills Creek Shade Mill Dam. Uh partial removal of the dam. Um so who is here for that? Excellent.
Thank you. if you can turn the mic on and identify yourself for the record. >> Good evening. My name is Megan Karns. I'm a wetland scientist from Weston and Samson and I will be presenting the Mill
Slades Mill Dam partial removal. Um, and I do have a presentation. >> Sure. I'm just going to open the hearing. >> There we go. And I did just want to provide these green cards. >> Thank you.
All right. Uh so as I said, we are here to pre present the Mill Creek Slates Mill Dam partial removal project. Uh next slide, please. Uh the applicant is Kristen Homire from the city of Chelsea. She was not able to make it this evening. Um, you've also
seen Rihanna Summers from Weston and Samson for previous submissions. Um, also unable to make it this evening, but I am here presenting the project. Thank you. Just want to give a brief overview. Uh, next slide, please. So, project background. As you know, Mil
Creek is a highly uh altered urban title system. There's been historical shoreline modification, trash and debris, industrial development all along the stretch of Mil Creek. Uh in 2019, the Mil Creek Restoration Assessments
identified opportunities to restore the habitat, uh improve title function, and enhance public access in this area. All good. Uh the city then developed the Mil Creek Habitat enhancement and waterfront
access improvement project to implement a lot of these um strategies such as the partial removal of the dam, invasive species management, cleaning up trash uh and debris along the banks and improving the waterfront access uh along the stretch of Mil Creek. Next slide,
please. Uh so the broader habitat enhancement um includes all of these waterfront um improvements that was reviewed through the MEPA process and that concluded in February of this year. We did go through an ENF uh draft and final EIR. There was
extensive um local and state coordination um and review for this project which I'll talk a little bit about later. Um but construction funding has only been secured for the Slates Mill Dam portion. So this NOI is just for the partial dam removal even though
there is the larger um project. Next slide please. Sediment sampling took place uh we are in front of you all about a year ago uh for the sediment sampling um that has taken place a few weeks ago. So we will
have that information and that is to help um provide background and support during construction for disposal methods of the sediment. Uh, next slide, please. And just to reorient um you all, I'm sure you're well aware of where this is,
but um it's located just south of River Beach Parkway. Um the area in red is really the focus of this partial dam removal. Um and as you can see, um there's also a photo here, although it is probably small for you guys, but um shows, you know, general site conditions
as well if you haven't been out to the site. Uh next slide, please. Uh so as I said um it's a historic earth and burm that um was part of the former tidepowered slates spice mill. Um there
are high flow velocities in this area. A lot of um localized erosion and scour um and there's little navigation and public safety concerns out here. There's sticking out rebarb in some areas. A lot of trash and debris. Um and the burm itself provides pretty minimal
ecological habitat right now. So hoping the partial removal will help restore some of that ecological habitat through the area. Um and just kind of a an odd thing about this project area, the River and Chelsea municipal boundary goes right through the center of Mil Creek.
So there is a portion of work that is taking place in Chelsea. We have submitted a notice of intent as well with Chelsea and we're going in front of them next week. And next slide, please. Uh this slide just goes over the wetland resource areas out here. Um the kind of
weird red squiggly polygon that looks like a jellyfish is the uh project limits. Um as you can see, we are accessing the dam removal from the Chelsea side. We'll be placing timber mats over some salt marsh to access the dam. Um but most of the work is taking
place in rever of the dam removal itself. Um in yellow you'll see um that was delineated as tidal flat which is a subset of coastal beach and there's some coastal bank and salt marsh out there as well although there are no salt marsh impacts in river.
Uh next slide please. Uh this is just a quick overview of FEMA. Um the whole site is located in FEMA flood plane which is a resource area protected as land subject to coastal storm flowage. Um so just wanted to note that and it is in a regulatory floodway as well. Next
slide please. So the proposed project why we're here in front of you this evening uh will be removing the high terminus um the high elevation terminus of the existing dam. Uh this will help to restore um some
natural flow through the dam that's currently not there. improve some ecological habitat um as well as um help with navigation and public safety and erosion as I've mentioned. Um so to access this they'll be placing timber
mats in Chelsea across the salt marsh out across the dam that will be installed during uh what's called dry conditions which is essentially low tide in the wintertime. [snorts] Um next slide please. Uh ultimately this
partial removal uh meets the project goals instead of the full removal. There were extensive hydraulic studies and an alternatives analysis that was provided in the notice of intent and the partial removal does meet the project goals. Um so that is what they are um moving
forward with. And I did forget to mention um we are using a turbidity curtain uh within the river uh within the creek during construction. Next slide please. Uh just to give a quick overview of the plants. I won't go through every sheet,
but um just highlighting the grading sheet. You can see here um where the dam is being removed and how it is being graded back. Um there'll be rip wrap placed to prevent um any scour or erosion as well. Um and next slide please. We'll show the access from
Chelsea um on the timber mats getting out to the dam. Next slide please. Uh to briefly touch on wetland impacts, um there's a total of 2,490 square feet of impacts to tidal flat,
land containing shellfish, and land subject to coastal storm flowage. Those are all the same numbers because they're all overlapping resource areas out there. Um there are mostly temporary impacts and that's due to um access to get out to the site and erosion controls
because the timber mats will be removed. The permanent impact is the actual removal of the dam itself. Uh, next slide, please. Uh, there's been a pretty extensive historic coordination. Um, I know that's not necessarily your jurisdiction, but
just wanted to let you know we've gone through extensive um coordination with MHC and the local River and Chelsea historical commissions. a memorandum of agreement has been executed which stipulates um a long list of mitigation
measures and um other documentation that um we'll need to abide by. Um it also includes the installation of educational signage out there which is a fun thing that I thought um would be exciting for you all to know. Uh next slide please.
Uh just to briefly summarize um we've minimized impacts as much as possible for this project by using timber mats in the in dry conditions. Um we'll be placing turbidity curtains to minimize erosion as well. And we will be abiding by the time of year restrictions um that
both the Chelsea Conservation Commission and DMF have um stipulated which is no work between February 15th and June 30th. Um, and I believe that is it. Um, oh, and D
has not issued any comments as well to date, but I will open up for questions. >> I appreciate your, uh, presentation. Um, and you have all of your components that you need to submit for your plan, erosion control plans, all of that. >> Yes.
>> Submitted. Okay. Excellent. Um, so the only other thing that I would want to see is your borings, what that harbored, but I know that it is um kind of inconsequential. It's mostly filled land in that area. Um, especially the
parts that encroach on the waterway. Um, trying to restrict things so that you can create hydraulic power for things and stuff like that. And I completely understand. What's the ultimate goal essentially? Is this leading up to a
complete restoration or is this more of a put a band-aid on it for right now so that we can foster that flow down towards the end of Mil Creek? Just curious where that's going. >> Yeah, and I I don't know the full answer to that. I know the goal is obviously to do the full restoration project. They're
having um they're still working on getting property private property owner permission signatures and easements in place. So that is um delaying the project a little bit. So they're focusing on pieces of it now that we do have um approval for in hopes that the
full project will be completed. >> Okay. Um, I did walk down that site um with your counterpart and it was definitely loaded with trash down in that area um all the way up and it definitely had that sense especially
when you got to that uh burm that it was man-made. It was definitely put there by something else. There really wasn't a lot of uh species that like red muscles or any mollisk growing on it. It was just kind of a place where it like stopped to catch
trash essentially on the one side and the other side looked like it just went straight down which was kind of interesting. >> Um not atypical of a dam but um I'll open it up to any other commissioners if they have questions. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman. I' I'd like to ask a few questions. Um compared to what
exists now, how much bigger will the opening be become? >> That is a good question. I don't have the number in front of me. >> Well, you know, I was looking at the drawing you were showing about the uh uh you used the term jellyfish, which it
did look like, >> and I was wondering if that actually indicates the new size. >> Oh, no. So, the the red shows the limit of work that we're proposing. So, that includes the swamp mats going from or
timber mats going from Chelsea into River. And then um it's more of the I guess you could say the head of the jellyfish, that dome portion. That's where we're focusing on removing the dam. >> But still looks like it would probably double. Do you know
>> double double the >> the the width that there is right now? The permanent impact is 612 square feet, right? >> Right. >> I'm going to go with about 612 square feet larger. [laughter]
>> Well, it probably by about 23 to 24 ft. Yeah. >> Yeah. It's >> It'll It'll open it up by about 20 23 to 24 ft. It'll open it up >> 25. >> So, there will still be a portion that is blocked, but >> Yes. Yes. >> Would you could we say that it's double
the size it is now? because it looks very narrow now. Looks like about 10 feet now. A free flow. >> Yeah. >> Go ahead, >> Nick. You were there. What do you think? >> Yeah, it's in previous meetings that we had
on the project. The purpose of that was that eventually that recreational space, but right now it's too get through there. So that's why so that's sort of the limit of work is to open it
safe. >> Well, there is a point I'm getting to here eventually. U was any title study done to uh designate how the flow will affect the Mil Creek and Marsh area in
that in that vicinity. >> Yep. So we did a hydraulic study. I don't believe we submitted it as an attachment, but we definitely could provide it to the commission if they'd like to review it. But to summarize, there's really no difference between a full dam removal versus the partial dam
removal on hydraulics. Getting tidal flushing in the partial removal basically does what the full removal would do. So, um, based on all of that information, the city moved forward with the partial dam removal to meet the goals of the project.
Does that >> So you're saying that this won't have any effect on on on changing any of the U marsh area? >> No, it should not. And the overall goal of the project is to restore the marshes as well, which hopefully will become will come to fruition.
>> And then the other thing that was mentioned in the in the uh what you uh showed us >> was the invasive species. Have they been identified? >> Yep. We've done a whole invasive species survey out there. Um there are quite a
bit of a number of invasive species that is part of the project as well, but it's not part of um this submission right now. >> So not that you probably have this number in front of you, but is the median timeline going to increase after removal of this or was that a part of
the study or no? >> I don't know the answer to that, but I can I can get back to you with that. >> Yeah. No, that that'd be something that I'd like to figure out. >> We can definitely provide the hydraulic report for the commission to review >> just so we have it on file so that we
have it um available if someone needs to reference what historically was >> recorded and how it would have impact. I mean, I think that would be my only concern would be the median tideline because once you take that
uh dam out, it's the water will eventually equilibrate a little bit more. Um, it's probably not going to increase dramatically enough to make an impact, but >> I don't believe it does. >> I'd just be curious to know what something like that would be. >> Um, >> any other questions? Just wondering what
the timeline would be for having the place cleaned up. As I've driven by this 10 million times as a former resident of Chelsea right over the line and a current resident of Rivera Beach, um I've used that road and looked at that area more times than I care to have mentioned. And the only thought in my
head was this is really bad. So when do you think it would be cleaned up? >> I know they're still looking to um get funding for all of the portions of the project. And like I said, the private property owner permissions and easements have been delaying the project quite a
bit. Um, so we're still working on coordinating and having engagement with all of the the property owners. >> Is when you say property owners, that building, is that condos or is that apartments? >> I believe there's a condo building and then there are several single family homes as well along that stretch.
>> So the the building that used to be the slate that's now I believe that is that condos or apartments in that building? That I don't know. >> No. Okay. Because are they the ones that are causing the issue or is it the other houses? >> I don't know which which >> are you talking about the building that
is on the other side of the that's uh business I believe that's that's uh lease space for businesses I believe at this point. >> Okay. Yeah. I don't know the specific um of that are or property owners. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Delaying it.
>> Wilson, you had a question. >> No, thank you. You got it. I wanted to know a little bit of data. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> Okay. Um I don't have any further questions and I think you've definitely done your due diligence with this project and the fact that it's an actual
restoration project or in part a restoration project is something that we definitely need for Mil Creek. Um >> two cities. >> Yeah, for two cities is right. Um hopefully Chelsea sees the value in this as well and I hope they do. Um, any
other questions before I close it out? Okay. Uh, motion to close out this hearing. >> Motion to close out the hearing. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I um Okay.
So seeing as how you have your lay down areas, your plan to go in without uh being invasive towards or minimally invasive and that you'll be increasing this to enhance recreational use as well as water flow uh unimpeded
water flow. Um I don't see any reason to deny this or how it violates the wetland protection act seeing as how it is a restoration act. Um, so at this time I'd like to call for uh approval. A motion to approve this notice of intent. >> Motion to approve the NOI.
>> Second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I I >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you so much. Thank you for your time. >> Yeah. Good luck with that. >> All right. Next up um is Salem Street RDA. Uh this is
over by um Overlook Ridge. the um exit and uh or is it an exit off of Route One or is it an >> It is >> exit off of Route One. >> Yes, it is a Route One off-ramp and we're here today to determine its um
viability as a wetland or isolated wetland in this case. Um if you wouldn't mind um turning the mic on and identifying yourself for the record. >> Uh it'll be red when you turn it. >> There we are. >> Yay. All right. >> Thank you. Okay. Uh, for the record, my
name is David Cowell. I'm a senior wetland scientist with Hancock Associates, and we filed an RDA and request for a jurisdictional determination on a uh depressed feature that's located uh as we described um on uh the Route One Salem Street
interchange. Um in the existing condition, there's there's a depression there. Um the purpose of this is that uh it was observed that there was some fragmmites in in this feature. Fragmmites as I'm sure you know is a wetland indicator plant species leading
us to um investigate whether or not it is a jurisdictional wetland or not. So um I visited the site uh I did some investigation there and we don't believe it's a jurisdictional vegetated wetland
on on two counts. one first and foremost um wetlands as I'm sure you guys know vegetated wetlands are determined based on it needs to be um dominated by wetland indicator plant species and there needs to be the presence of of
hydric soils of which um I didn't find either and then um secondarily and we'll we'll get to this is that um if and only if the the commission believes that it's a jurisdictional vegetated wetland Um it was our understanding that this feature
is isolated. Uh I've since talked to I think Anthony here that pointed out um there there's some town information that there may be some buried uh storm water infrastructure that may refute uh the the question of isolation. But before we
get to that, first and foremost um we need to determine whether or not it's a vegetated wetland or not. Uh uh isolation notwithstanding. So, when I did my investigation, this is a a depressed area that's that's located between Salem Street and Route One. As
as we uh discussed, um I did not find any storm water infrastructure there. Uh we do have um uh some records. I think VHB was compiling a lot of data on infrastructure there on behalf of Mass Highway and Hancock Associates has quite
a bit of survey that we conducted uh on behalf of overlook ridge road or or the overlook ridge development. Um let's first and foremost let's talk about wetland uh whether or not it's a vegetated wetland. So, despite the fact
that there is some fragmitees found in there, I did my investigation. I think um um some of you guys were able to make it to the site this past weekend. I regret that I wasn't there. Um that was my fault and I apologize. Um the aside from the fragmitees, uh
which you know there's a small pocket of it that that I observed, the other dominating species in there are all upland dominant species. Um, you guys may have seen a uh ground cover species uh that you had asked me if there was poison ivy out there. I believe that's
English ivy. English ivy is a a non-native introduced species. That's an upland indicator species. Um, and then in the plant profile, aside from fragmmites, um, most of the species that I found in there were were also upland indicator plant species with the
exception of the fragmitees. Um I found trace amounts of uh sensitive fern which is a wellland indicator species but again not not dominant. Um and then in investigation of the soil profile and again the soils need to be classify as
hydrick soils. Um it looks like what's happened there is that with with this depression and uh even if there is this infrastructure that that Anthony pointed out there's some some town record of um a catch basin inlet there that trains out. It seems to be impaired. It looks
like over the course of time that um um storm water is uh not flowing properly through there. And when I looked at the soil profile, the first 17 in was um blue sun consolidated uh sediment
deposits, which isn't a true soil profile. Those are accumulated sediment deposits from storm water over the course of time. um within those sediment deposits, I could see evidence of road salts and sands and and things of that nature. And then once you get below that
17 in of accumulated sediment, you hit the true soil profile, which is um urban fill. And um there's no indicators of um hydric soils. Hydric soils would need to to exhibit either redux or or or
oxidation under anorobic conditions. and I didn't observe any. So that's first and foremost um I don't believe that it's a vegetated wetland uh at all because it doesn't have dominance of wetland plants and soils. Um I don't know if you guys want to
deliberate on that. And then and then the second point that I made in the RDA was if and only if the commission were to determine that it is a vegetated wetland based on dominance of wetland plants and presence of hydric soils that the feature is isolated and the state
nor the city of Rivier regulate isolated vegetative wetlands. They regulate um bordering vegetative wetlands. So, um, that's it. I think with that, uh, I welcome feedback or deliberation from the commission members.
>> Appreciate that. [clears throat] Appreciate you going through and explaining that a little bit better for some of us that might not be completely aware, uh, or did not visit the site. Um, what I did notice is that it is
roughly around elevation 8 and a half to nine at its lowest point. So it is in the flood plane. Um so that part I can't it we is still under our purview. Um but as you said um the concentration of vegetation is not where it what it
should be. It's a it's a tiny little tiny little chunk of land. Well I just mash those words up. Um that is maintained by the DOT that is just on basically just an on and off rampant but it is lowlying. uh water does
collect there and I have some concerns about the tidal influence in that it might not be functioning properly but it is still adjacent to >> plenty of area which is right across the street. >> Sure.
>> Um over there so I I don't really know the intention of that storm water system. Um, it does have inflows, it does have outflows, it has ways for water to move all around. I know you've identified here where we picked up that
manhole cover at the corner >> um over there where those catch basins go. Um, >> and we weren't able to track it all the way down, but there are areas of it that >> Yep. >> as you get across the street may serve
into those. Um we I couldn't find where those were going to, but there is definitely when you look down in them, it looks like it goes right towards the Rumny Marsh area. So that's and I know Chapter 91 title influence is not under our purview, but
that is something I definitely want to make sure that gets on the record. Um but we still are left with the lowlying nature of this property. Yep. with it being below uh nine feet or it's
>> which is the which is a fair bit of that portion. So anything that happens we would have to have a notice of intent >> to have a rework or any of that. um as far as the applicability to the wetlands act it still applies as far as
um elevations are concerned but as far as protecting a isolated vegetated wetland I don't think it does I don't think it meets that criteria >> okay >> um but we would still need to treat this as land subject to coastal storm flowage
with considering its elevation >> um so anyways I'd like to open it up to any of the other commissioners to share their thoughts about this before. >> Mr. Chairman, yeah, a quick question. Wouldn't Wouldn't you consider uh frag bodies to be an invasive species in this area? >> It is. Yeah, it's it's invasive, but
it's still considered a wetland indicator species. So, it's still wetland indicator. >> That's my question was change the status >> species. What's that? >> That's what my question was. Does it change the status? Because >> no, even even invasive species or non-native species have wetland
indicator status that don't change how a wetland is is calculated. >> Yeah. >> So they >> that's pretty they're pretty ruthless. >> They are. >> Yeah. The fragmmites that root system is just crazy. >> That they are right. And that's it. I I I I see fragmitees growing in areas that
aren't wetlands such as um I see them in uh rip wrap uh uh areas that have moisture below them that just come out of there. So, it's a tough species. Um but I digress. Again, in in consideration of this RDA, I'm asking
the commission to determine whether or not it's a bordering vegetated wetland. If it is in fact flood plane, I'm not asking for a finding on that. I'm not asking for chapter 91 jurisdiction vegetated wetland. That's it. >> Um, anything else?
>> So, is it all right if I commissioner? I just [clears throat] want to I want to comment on what I think the drainage system >> that I'm looking at. What I what I believe I'm looking at is a poorly a very poorly maintained collection area or retention pond that was made by the
state. I have two sets of drainage systems going in here. one by the state, which it looks like when they did the work for the off-ramp, they used it as part of their their storm water management. They sent everything through this little detention area with a catch
basin that is clearly buried. >> So, obviously not maintained, which is why you probably have the soil, you'll see, which is probably why you have the fragmitees because it's not draining properly. Should probably be cleaned out, be jetted. Seems like all that water is heading down to the brook,
which I think is the Lynenbrook. I'm not sure if that's how you say it. Then it looks like the city of Rier later took the opportunity, probably got permission from the state, but I don't have any indication of that. And theirs is in the green. The manhole that we looked at has
a one, two, three catch basins in the area directing into that manhole which then go into the outfall which is going to collect and is supposed to go into the catch basin that's at the center of this depression. Um, I don't see
where we popped the man or this is towards the the commissioner. I don't see where that system connects to the marsh. I'm not sure that it does. It heads off up Salem. Good chance that it's just goes up to a couple of the catch basins. I think the only way this
connects to the marsh is it connects over at the brook at its outfall. So, I think the state probably I honestly guys I think it's man-made. I think the state created this as part of their >> storm water management. And the reason that there are frag mighties there is because it's been it hasn't been
maintained properly. >> No. >> So I I don't personally think that it's a >> I don't think it's a wetland area. >> I think it's something that was man-made as a drainage system and it'd be great if the state could get back over there and maintain it so it would work properly. >> Right. that and that definitely would
foster a lot of >> the water that's collects in those areas instead of dumping more soil to raise the elevation. A properly maintained storm water management and retention pond system would do the trick. Um the park that they made over there to raise
that elevation up was >> one of the reasons why they did that was because of the poorly maintained state system. Um so that's something that needs to be addressed. Um, but as it stands, I I don't think
that this qualifies as a bordering vegetative wetland. Uh, if it were across the street, maybe. >> Uh, but I don't I don't really think it does in in this case here. So, >> I don't know. Anyone else? >> Chair. Um, just a question. So, let's
say we we do vote to make it that it isn't and then you would, I believe, have the then the ability to build on that land. Would that be correct? Even if they were to be able to build on that land or change the the orientation of the roadway or you know the slip lane
the way it is because of the elevation it still falls under our jurisdiction because it is land subject to coastal storm flowage essentially. >> So what is what is the hope and goal the endgame for this land? >> Uhhuh. Good question. Um, I do know that they're doing studies about
reconfiguring the the exit ramps off of Route One as it as it gets off of Salem Street. So, where that that the exit ramp gets off and this this feature lies to the left, they want to know whether or not they can shift that roadway and
potentially fill it. If it is vegetated wetland, they could potentially fill it as long as it's 5,000 square feet or less, provided that they replicate for that. If it is flood plane, as you indicated, if it's coastal land subject to flooding or bordering land subject to
flooding, they can fill it. But they would need to demonstrate compliance with the performance standards for for flood plane, demonstrating that if they were to fill volutrically displace flood storage in one area that they compensate for it. >> So best case or worst case, this is
going to basically still be an off-ramp. >> Yeah. Yeah. There's no there's no it's too there's no development in terms of a home or anything. It is um located on the Mass uh highway um rightway. It is a part of the Route One highway and
there's no no potential for development per se of a building, but the ramp may realign. >> Got it. All right. Thank you. I appreciate it. And the and the folks that hired you were the mass DOT to do this work or this?
>> No, it was um who was my applicant? There's so many cooks in this kitchen. Uh >> Overlook Ridge. >> Was it BHB or >> Overlook Ridge? >> Overidge. Yeah. Gotcha. >> Sorry. >> Just just trying to just making sure I'm doing my due diligence to ask. But no, I I do think that this as you said, it's
they're going to come back with a notice of intent at at some point. But someone says if you guys have anything else to add, please. I I don't >> They've been trying to do this for 25 years. Uh it also includes straightening out Route One, and this is never going to happen. So,
>> right. Um >> it is it is the slow state grind. You're >> correct. The uh the new exit, the new offramp that went directly to Overlook Ridge in the backside. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. The uh the off-ramps to nowhere. Um it's it's all sort it's all sorts of
fun over there. So excuse my um levity there. Anyhow, >> that's fair. >> Yep. Go ahead, please. >> I could you please ask DOT, I don't know if you're in touch with them. I would
really like this to be resolved. I want them to find the catch basin, clean it out, and make sure that the water flows like it's supposed to. I'm pretty sure if we all went over there right now, we'd have a pretty full depression with water because of what we just took. I if
they're not planning or your department or whoever is not planning on doing anything anytime soon, the right thing to do would be to find the catch basin, jet it out, make sure that we have proper flow so that we can get the water off of the streets properly because our
city is using that clearly as a as a or as a place to send the water. DOT is using it with I don't know what they got >> uh >> like seven catch basins. Now it's not that many. One, two, three. That's six of them going in there. >> So, I don't know if you can pass along.
Let's Hey, D, let's do the right thing. >> Yeah, please. >> I'd be very happy to. I I believe our our point of contact um has been with a gentleman named Wayne Amo who's with VHB, but I believe he is the VHB liaison to Mass Highway or Mass DOT. Um, and I
can certainly pass it on or I can find out the Mass Highway or Mass DOT project manager for this. Um, so that at least there's a a point of context, right? Instead of going into the the void of >> Yeah. I'm not a state agency. >> And I'm not trying to be difficult. No.
>> But if the city engineer hadn't provided me with these plans today, I was going to say that it was a wetland. >> I I I mean that. So if if this wasn't found, I would have been like, "Oh, no. There's there's there's no way. This is definitely a wetland. All the water
pools there. So I maybe the state could do us a solid and take care of their infrastructure. I know that's not on you. I'm just frustrated. >> I'm the messenger, but I'm happy to be the messenger. Very happy. Yep. >> Okay. >> Let them know. >> Um I kind of think we have all of our
information and I think we might be ready to make a determination. And um at this time I call for a motion for a negative determination that this is a bordering vegetated wetland. >> Make a motion for a negative
determination. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. And it isn't lost to me that if it's flood plane, we'll still be back with the notice of >> Absolutely. No, you guys will definitely be back with a notice of intent and we'll go through it thoroughly at that
point uh to figure out what the best plan or best course of action is. But I thank you for your time and and sorry for us yelling at you on speaker phone while we were on site. >> No worries. That that's that's that was on me. I apologize. That was that was my fault. >> Um but anyways, >> thank you for your patience.
>> No, no problem. Thank you very much. >> Like 20 years before you see that >> I placed all the sidewalks at Overlook Ridge. It's No, it's >> all right. Uh, next up is uh Salem
Street. I mean, uh, mast number for um, 20 is not been assigned, unfortunately. So, we will open up a hearing for this. Uh this is construction of ADU. Um [clears throat]
total area built for 856 square feet. Um if the representatives would like to come up. >> Good evening gentlemen. My name is Oscar. Uh this is Marta the owner house. uh
tonight is coming to present the uh the project for the ADU in the 28 shower street. Uh the idea is present the old store water management plan uh follow
your recommendation after the visit to the house. Uh in this budget uh in the first in the first plan is this you can see the the construction for the
trains around the old house for the collect the drain the storm drain and construction the two uh collectors and uh obtain the permit with the DPW to
connect it directly to Yeah, it says beam pipe existing right now to the house. The idea is the for the this manager restore water is the keep the water
more away for the foundation the new house the new IDU is construction for the 14 ft above the ground follow your recommendation on the for the regulation for the
river um importantly for the DP is no answer for the the application and I'm wait for the the other commission. Uh I hope for the
the next meeting is possible presentation the one project completely approved for you. uh in this case is only uh for Miss Ellie um
have the give the opportunity for the presentation a little presentation uh that this project uh for you um I don't know I follow all recommendation
uh in the area for the shed area and construction the for the filter stone uh under the shed. >> Oh yeah. >> Follow your recommendation and and construction the two trench and the two
frames drain the boot size to the house to the controller discharge the old store water that run off of the dump pines and they connected directly to the net to the DPW
in the in the street. Do we have um more of this plan? Is this the only page we have here? Uh like do you have a like a overhead like a top view of it like you've got? Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. >> Do I I didn't see it in that folder. I
apologize. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um so over here on the driveway side. Yes, sir. >> You have drainage ditch going right across which goes right over the easement as uh Commissioner Pazi pointed
out to me just now. Have you received permission from them to do? So, I I don't know. I don't want you to go and build all of that in the front of the driveway and then say, "Hey, rip it up." Uh
so, yeah, there's I I have a couple concerns with that. And then the other concern is it it doesn't it defines how large how deep the French drain is around there. It doesn't really define how wide unless
I'm missing it here on this plan. So that so that would you'd be able to >> bottom left. >> Is it bottom left? I'm sorry. Thank you, sir. >> So 18 inches. do deep 12 in wide and
then it's the entirety. So, so that I want to find and then calculate how much water it's capable of storing. Not as if that hasn't been identified here,
which I haven't I didn't see that. So, yeah, that's that's something I definitely would like to have identified. How much square footage of water are you going to be able to take on with that French drain? And then in the back where you had your shed where it's just up on concrete
>> um blocks on CMU blocks. Is that also going to be the same? That's It looks like >> you said while we were on site you said it was just going to be pavers to put it on. Is there aren't going to be anything underneath that as well? Because I didn't see anything there either.
>> Yeah. under the ship. The idea is uh remove the asphalt right now and construction of the filter stone and install again the the shed uh over the pier the concrete pier
>> y >> for the elevation maybe for eight or 10 inches above the ground. Yeah, it's it's like I like I said, it's resting above the ground on those CMU blocks which are starting to sink into the ground because of the its nature and and what you
probably have the weight inside of that shed. So, I'd be curious to know if you're going to be putting anything underneath like subterranean to foster water retention over there. >> And so, I I need to know how much, how deep, how how w I need to know all the
specifications of that. >> Okay, sir. So clearly identify how much square footage or how much cubic footage is going to be able to retain water. >> Um, and I know we had a little bit of a language barrier while we were on site.
So I I don't know if either of you might want to translate uh to him what I just said. I would be fully comfortable um if you were to do that. But if you understand what I'm getting at, I don't think I don't think we need to. Um the
footings that you've described here seem adequate as well, but you will be disturbing over there. So that's fine. But I you're creating more of a canopy with your ADU even
though it is open underneath. So I just want to make sure with your storm water management system with your down spouts, gutters going into these things. One, is a city okay with going over their easement? on the property.
>> Two, how much how much cubic footage is is all of your French drain going to be? >> And if you do plan on putting anything underneath the shed, make sure that that is identified as well, cuz it is not on here. You have runaway uh collectors,
French drain collectors in here for your piping, and then what a typical section is going to look like here. And that describes the stuff around the property. So, if you're not going to be putting French drain under the shed, >> that's that's okay. But I want to know
exactly what this calculation is. >> Okay. >> How much water are you able to retain on that? And then the asphalt, we said that it wasn't going to be removed. It was going to stay in place. >> Yep. >> Okay. And then where you have the blocks
and that awesome bar that I can't believe you're ripping out is where you're going to be putting parked cars. Correct. >> Parked. Yes, sir. Okay. Only. >> And how many cars are you did now? Do you have your permit to park those vehicles underneath? >> Right now in the existing driveway, two
cars and the one car more uh in the on front. >> Yeah. >> Now, do you have you received a permit from the city of River? >> Y >> to park vehicles underneath that ADU yet? >> That is also something that you need to do. And I don't feel comfortable
approving this until they have given you >> that approval as well. >> Driveways are controlled by the DPW and that's something you need before you come back up against us. >> Oh, okay. Sir, >> they ex That's what I'm saying. They You need permit for a curb cut.
>> Yeah, >> you need permit to park those cars on that property. You're increasing the square footage and you're increasing parking on that property. So, that should be a part of your plan as well. And what you intend to pave underneath, is that going to be crushed stone? What
is the plan for underneath where you're going to park those two additional cars? >> Okay. >> Is that we we said crushed stone, but I'm not not seeing it. I I don't see that identified on there. If anybody else
sees it, please point it out to me. Lovely shot of a roof overhead, but not of what you're going to be doing for that because currently what you have in there is is a PA situation that's elevated which car could not pull up on which I'm sure which you're taking all
out. So just identify the material that you're going to be going putting underneath to park cars on. Okay, >> that needs to be be identified as well. >> And then I think that's unless anybody else has any other questions. Please, Anthony, >> I' I'd like to know what the seasonal
high groundwater is over there. You're down 18 inches. Does the water how much space do we have between your filtration system and the groundwater when it goes up? And I also would like to know what is the the distance between the city pipe, the city's drain, and your French
drain. Because if you have all crushed stone underneath there and water is is dissipating out through that point, especially where you have the basin um or your catch area, you're going to wash out around the pipe and we're going to have a sinkhole. So, I I personally if I
I wish I'm not I'm not in Rava's DPW, but I I would suggest that you look at an alternative to where you're running your French drain, >> especially uh within you're you're you're going all the way down the line of your driveway. That pipe goes the
distance of your driveway and it it goes off under somebody else's shed in the next yard. And if you're running a French drain along that, I don't know how deep their pipe is, but if you're going down 18 in and water is able to filtrate out over there, it's going to eventually over time wash out around the
pipe and you're going to have a sinkhole that goes from the top of your driveway to the end of your driveway. I and I don't think DPW is going to let you do that. So, you you're probably going to have to come up with another idea on that side for for drainage. And I'd be
looking at that. I I I don't even know if I can require you to do that. I wish I could, but >> if they >> I think it's a bad idea >> if they if you redirected your water instead of pushing it into the front of the house and then to that catch basin that's in the front. If you redirected
it to where your shed is and to this other catch basin basin that is over on the other side, it would be a little bit better because at least you wouldn't be over a pipe and you wouldn't be across the front of your driveway. And if you created a large enough storage area
under the shed, you wouldn't have to do any of the the front or down the driveway side. >> Okay. >> That would that would be something that to to look into in the feasibility of that. And then if the city were to come in and need to fix that pipe, they
wouldn't have to cut into your French drain. >> It's possible. Got it. >> I would plan for I would hope for the best, but I would definitely be planning for the worst >> in this situation. So, um, so a few more things that you need to bring back to us. >> Yes, sir.
>> Along with the D file number and we can definitely see if we can get this to go and make sure we have all of the questions answered >> and um, get it going. But for now, we're going to have to leave it open and we look forward to seeing you guys next month.
>> Thank you, sir. >> We'll say it again. >> Yes. I and this is also something that in the meantime once once you've gotten a updated plan, you might want to be at the next site plan review with your updated plan and present it to them and
see that how it would impact our city infrastructure and roads. >> Okay. >> Thank you guys. I appreciate it. And uh we'll see you guys next month. And please be in communication. You have any questions. >> If you have updated plans that you need to submit to us, please submit them so
that we can get this ironed out. >> Yeah, my a calculation all worked. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Appreciate it. >> Okay. Um All right.
So, we have some continued business, but we have nobody here uh to represent these properties. Uh, >> you want to comment on the shed project >> on No, I kind of want to have the information in front of me before we make a comment, but >> uh it is it has definitely gotten to the
point where something needs to be figured out with this one and both with very very large sheds. Um, oddly enough, and and I I would just like a little bit of clarification from the city and from its officials about how to proceed with both
of these considering that one is right on top of the property line and another is encroaching on an easement of the city. Uh, we did have some site visits 28 Shaman uh 76 Endicottav. Uh this this one here I want to just touch upon
briefly for those that were not in or not able to make it to that site visit. Um so apparently they do not have a city permit uh an official city permit from the DPW for the driveway pro problems uh or to
regrade or do any of the work in the back. >> Great. So, another wrinkle to 76 Endicott A, but uh hopefully things will get sorted out soon and we'll be able to proceed and make a updated determination about this. At
this point, I'm at the I'm almost willing to say that we need to revoke their notice or their order of conditions at this time because the city has not even issued a permit for their property. So, >> chair, do you want to do you want to do that? Not at this time. I I want to give
them an opportunity to be able to get the things that they need to with the city done first and see what they have to say. If all goes well, great. If not, we have the ability to revoke that order of conditions. Um the Salem Street uh site visit we had very cut and dry. And
then we had some communications which if you wouldn't mind showing that on the screen now. Uh this was from National Grid and this is to inform um departments about trimming back from the
power lines and this would just be some vista pruning to make sure that trees and things are not encumbering these uh electrical structures. Thank you very much. And then [sighs] that's it. Um any items
for discussion? >> No. Can can you confirm the date of the August meeting? >> Is that on the I don't have my uh >> is that on the 3rd, >> 5th? >> The 5th. Is it? That's the first
Wednesday. Is the fifth? >> First Wednesday. I just want to confirm. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Um, and just, you know, just for the record too, moving forward, I definitely want to make sure that all com all submissions are complete, uh, before we make any determinations,
uh, it it is not fun for our conservation agent to track folks down to find storm water management plans or things that needed to be submitted when they submitted their notice of intents, RDAs, or any of other items that are submitted in front of us. Uh, so I want
that to be known that we are only accepting complete submittals at this point and that will be updated on our website at some point and we'll be making some other additional updates on the website. We've got a a list of things that we've
already got going on, but I just want to make everyone aware that it's complete submissions only. Um it's it's difficult as it is to get everything that you need to make these submitts, but even more difficult to track it down
after we've approved things. So, um that's definitely what we want to do moving forward. But seeing as there's no more discussion, uh motion to adjurnn, please. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Second.
>> All in favor? I I Thank you very much.