Hey, Walker. Hey there. How you doing? >> All right. How you doing today? >> Staying warm. >> It's all we can do. I'm just happy that other storm supposedly moved out for this weekend.
>> Yeah. Yeah, it'll be nice to uh you can just enjoy this snow. >> Yeah. >> Hi. >> Hi, everyone. >> Hello. >> I'm waiting for um Scott Con to get on.
He's having a little trouble. He's trying it on his phone instead of his laptop. So, we'll give him a couple minutes. See if he can get on. Yeah, it's too bad we couldn't go out in
the field and walk around, but um we've got about 3 ft of snow, so it's uh >> Yeah. >> Not going to happen. We >> have to use like sonar to find all the stuff, right? Yeah.
It's hard to get back in the woods and do anything right now. Yesterday I went in my on my skis behind my house and I knew I'd have to break trail through my property, but I thought when I got to some of the Cole's bigger trails, somebody would have either skied already
or come through with maybe a snowmobile or something, but I was the first one to get back there. And so I only went, you know, I didn't go that far because it's so much harder when you're breaking trail with your skis. But I was surprised that nobody else had gotten
back there yet. >> They were waiting for you. >> Maybe some of the snow dealers will get out there. This >> Yeah. When Where are those snowmoilers when you need them? >> Yeah. Where are they?
>> Everyone sold all their their snowmobiles because it doesn't ever snow anymore for log. >> That's That's what somebody was saying at work. I was say talking about this and and they were saying, "Oh, I think a lot of people in this area did end up selling because it just wasn't working
out anymore." Um, but um, Matteo Scott says he keeps getting a message that he needs a passcode to get into the Zoom. >> I shouldn't need a passcode. It's the same link as the um, regular Concom
meetings. I can send I can I'll send it to him right now, I guess. >> That would be great. >> Yeah. Talking about snow, I um I moved my mother up here from Florida last year
and she was complaining about winter and I was like, "We don't have winter anymore. We don't get snow anymore." And apparently this some this winter wanted to prove me wrong. This is your fault. >> Yeah, I'll take some of the blame. Yeah. >> Yeah. It's I It's a It's work, but it's
a lot of fun. I think it's kind of fun to have this much. >> I can't remember the last time we had snow that lasted this pure for this long that we didn't get rain on or something. That's >> yeah, >> it's been I mean multiple years I think
that we've had >> I think >> anything hasn't gone up to 40 degrees in sometime in the next week. >> Yep. I think so too. >> And to even get that much snow in a in
one snowstorm, >> you know, I it's again it's been years. >> I remember when. Yeah, like you know we have pictures when my kids were little like you know 2008 I
think back then there were years where we just had storm after storm. So like the snow banks on the sides of the road were just big, you know, huge. But we haven't had that in a long time. >> Yeah. I'll go on record as saying I'm
not a fan of the snow. I was liking I was liking the milder winters. >> Yeah. It's definitely easier. You know, >> yes, >> this week's been a lot of work.
>> What I've liked about it is that I just definitively can't do anything >> as opposed to the years past where it's like, "Oh, it looks like the ground's thawed. I can do something." And and then, oh, it's all frozen. Oh, wait a minute. It's thought again. Oh, no,
it's frozen. Oh, it's raining. Oh, quick. I better get all my stuff undercover. Oh, it's frozen. Yeah. >> So I can just say, "Yep, nope. Can't do anything." >> Yeah. >> Call me in the spring. >> Yeah. You guys remember back in I think
it was 2015 where we had like storm after storm after storm for like four weeks in a row. >> I remember I was distinctly looking out my yard thinking, "Ah, you know what? I'm going to start getting some projects done, get ahead of the springtime, and then we just got nailed." Yeah.
>> Yeah. Ah, there's Scott. >> You made it. >> Thank you. Sorry, I I joined the link off the calendar, which is I guess not the same link. >> Oh, yeah. No, this was a link that
Matteo had put on the concom web page so that bitters and people could see it. one that's the Shootsberry calendar that has like the 3:30 Concom. So I guess there are two links. >> Oh
yeah. Well, I'm glad you're here. >> Me, too. Sorry, friendly. >> No, that's okay. Um, now did you want to kind of lead the meeting, Scott, since this is your your thing? >> Yeah. Hey, everyone. Um, very nice to
see all of you here. Uh, my name is Scott Khan. I serve as a commissioner here on the conservation commission with Beth. Beth is our chair, but maybe we could start with just a quick round of introductions here. So, um, Beth, I'm
guessing you already introduced yourself for folks here. >> Not really, but you just kind of did. Yeah, I'm the chair of the Sheetsberry Conservation Commission. >> All right. Well, maybe we'll just hop around here and um we'll make this fun.
I'll hand it to Tony and Tony, you can hand it off to someone else and we'll just go around the room. >> Sure. Um thank you. Uh my name is Tony Summers. I'm a landscape architect and the landscape architecture team lead for SWCA. Uh I'm also the chair of the
Concom and Conway. So um let me hand it off to Taylor who's also on my team. >> Hey, my name is Taylor Schildo. I'm a landscape architect with SWCA. Uh, and I'm actually on the conservation commission in Shelurn Falls. >> Great. All right, Taylor. Where are we
going next? >> Um, I'll just go to the next one on my screen. Uh, Walker. >> Hey, I'm Walker Corbyn. Terramore LLC over here in Montigue. I'm not on a conservation committee. I'm on a tree committee though. Montigue
here. All right, Walker, who are you gonna hand it off to? >> How about Josh? >> Uh, good afternoon everyone. My name is Josh Marquette, estimator for Saladino and project man uh property maintenance
out in Dairfield. And uh >> can't see everyone on the list. Uh I guess Aaron is the next one. Sure. Uh my name is Aaron Sabs. I am a civil engineer project manager with Tyen Bond.
Um we are a group of engineers uh planners. Um and I don't know if I've been paying close enough attention. Uh >> David. >> Oh, David. Okay, there we go. Thanks.
>> All right. Uh so my name is David Alden St. Pierre. I'm one of the partners in Northeast Trail Works. We're just north of Boston. I was on Beverly's conservation commission. Left that, but I'm the chair of Beverly's open space and recreation committee. So, I hope that maybe counts a little bit there.
>> Uh, and looking I think is that everyone? I think that might be everyone. >> Might be everyone. >> Awesome. Well, thanks for making time on a snowy Friday. Uh, all of you here to to join and talk a little bit about this
project. Um and um I apologize that we can't go out there and see it in person. I I don't think we would get a whole lot out of that given the snowfall that we've had. Um but I I do know that we had been fielding a number of questions
from folks on this project. um and Matteo's done an awesome job at um trying to pull those together and and uh along with the answers and I know that have been shared with all of you here too with some of the Q&As just so
everyone is aware of um you know the how we have responded trying to clarify the scope of work on the project um >> oh also say this is we're super excited about this project it's on uh land that's managed by the coner conservation
commission. There's a existing trail system that's been used um kind of mixed recreation. I know we have primarily walkers, but um also snowmobiles use this system uh trail system or at least parts of it.
Um and some bikes as well, I know that have been using the trail system here. It's not overly well marked. I know some of you have gone around and looked at that. Um it uh the trail goes through some resource areas. Um
uh there are some bridges that have been installed over in time with kind of in varying degrees of um um maintenance. I know some of them are relatively new, many of them are old and in disrepair.
This project we were hoping to uh to see it unfold really in a kind of a two stage process. One would be a design phase. We don't have you know specs for um you know the the
bond bridging or other crossings. Um uh we're looking to all of you to to kind of pull that together for design for what you would recommend for this system and then the build aspect of it to come later. um to take that design. Um we
would be taking it. Um uh the concom would be uh taking the information you all would provide in the design uh to to pursue any wetland permitting that is needed here in town and then we would um
be permitting that for the build phase which would come later. But I'm going to stop there. That's kind of the the highlevel overview of the project and what we're looking for, but I'll stop and see if Beth or Matteo if you had anything more to add.
>> Can I just ask real quick, uh, I just So, you said there was a an email that got sent out with the questions and answers that have been up to date so far. >> I think there's a link. Um I know it was on the town
to me it was hooked to this meeting invite. It had um the the Q&As's. >> Yeah could probably answer. >> The link for it is on the um on the town calendar page for this uh meeting. It's also on the concom web page. If you go
down at the at the bottom where all the links are in the paragraph that has the link invitation for bids. Um you'll see there's another link there for the um questions that we've received so far from potential biders and the commission's responses to those. Um it did it did not go out uh via email
though. >> Okay. Because I just got a link to this meeting via email. I never got anything else. So >> can we put the link to the Q&A potato in the chat? >> Uh so Shootesbury does not have chat active in unfortunately but if you go to
shootspray.orgconom /conom and just scroll down to the bottom. You'll you'll see the link there um for the uh questions and answers so far. And then I'm also taking notes on this meeting uh which is also being recorded so you can watch it uh in the future if
you want, but I'm going to add any of the um questions and answers that come up in this meeting to that document as well. >> Great. Thanks, David. Good good question. Yeah, I just don't want to have to ask I don't want to ask questions that have already been addressed. So, sorry.
>> Yeah, no worries. I um are are you able to find that? Okay. >> Yeah, I just found it. Yeah, thank you. >> Okay, great. >> Um Beth, did you have anything else to add to kind of the the overview?
>> Um my cat. Um no, I think you did a a a good overview. It's it's it is design build which is um you know it's a little tricky I think to bid sometimes um but the idea is that that you would be putting a design together that then um
we would bring through permitting um and then go from there with the build. Um and I know it's also tricky with this particular to not have seen the site really to not have gotten out. I'm kind of hoping that some of you may have been may be
familiar with with the trails. Um and yeah and then it is really based on um so the CPA application I believe included the assessment that was done by um a previous Com member a very
a very kind of general um look at the trails and um suggestions about what needed to be done on the trails. That was part of the CPA application, right, Scott? >> Yes. >> Yeah. So that at least has some maps showing some areas.
Um but yeah, my cat. Um so yeah, that that's all I had. I think um this this time is really to get questions from you all. Well, with that, maybe we'll just throw
it open. Um, if there are questions that you all have from taking a look at it, I know or or need further elaboration on any of the Q&A that's been posed there. We'll do our best to answer here during
this time or uh if we can't answer them right now, we'll do our best to get answers and then send them out to everyone. Did um did you guys have a specific design in mind for your bridges? I mean just it mentions bog bridges but that
can mean lots of different things and that can mean two 2 by 12s or you know something more substantial. So in terms of what you're looking for, >> it did reference the standard in the state the state standard for um
construction of those kind of trail design elements there. And I think we have a link to that too in the Q&A but's recommendation. I think it's like 32 in.
>> I'm sorry. Say that one more time, David. >> Well, so if you go to like if you're referencing the DCR's best practices, >> it shows different types of bridges and it shows a bog bridge, which is, you know, sort of like the linear ones, then it's more like a punching bridge. >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> What you guys are looking for. I think the, you know, the the I think the limiting factor for um the crossings are that they're also used by snowmobiles for crossing at
least in in portions of the trail there. So I I think you know ensuring that those those portions that are part of the snowmobile trail are u you know able to be crossed that way. Um that's what
we were looking for. >> Okay. >> But I I think in terms of um you're right in terms of you know whatever options there are uh out there I think we're pretty flexible. Well, I think
that would be part of looking for your recommendation on what what you would look forward to do um building in those in those portions along the site. >> And in terms of materials, pressure treated, okay, are you going to want
black locust or cedar or something like that? >> Yeah, I again um you know, for materials, I think right now most of what's out there is pressuret treated. Um, and you know, I I think that that is
um certainly, you know, would would work. If there are other elements that you're thinking or a different design, I'm guessing that would add to the cost. Um, but, you know, again, there might be a reason why pressure treated doesn't
work. Uh, in which case, we would look for you to include that in the design. But right now I I think most of the elements that are out there are all pressuret treated. >> Okay. >> Uh do you guys have a groomer that goes out and does the silhe trails? So we have to accommodate that too or any kind
of like grooming equipment. >> I don't think they have any grooming equipment that grooms the snowmobile trail. At least not to my >> okay >> knowledge. It seems like it's that there hasn't been a whole lot of snow here
over the last decade. So, they're out today and I know they're running around, but it I don't think they're grooming the trails. They just kind of use them. >> Okay. I had a couple more questions. Um the access uh for the trail improvements.
Um, you know, I know we're digital today, so um, I was hoping you can kind of describe like how we can access some of the bog bridges and the bridges that need to get replaced. I'm just curious about the level of effort for getting materials out there and everything. >> Yeah. Um, access is is tricky. So, there
aren't a lot of access points to get into the trail system. Um, I think the the primary one that was identified in the package is, you know, on the from where the boat ramp is off of S Randall Road there.
>> Yeah. >> Um, so that would be the primary way in. Um, there is access off of Wendell Road as well. Um that is um I I I think that would be
excess that we'd have to approach kind of case by case that goes through private >> property there. I have talked with the land owner. I think they're comfortable with people gaining access if it's needed, but we'd have to talk with them about that. >> Okay. Um I think I was more curious like
are we able to get like a kind of equipment in there? Uh you know small UTV things like that? Yes. Okay. >> Yeah. I think UTVs, ATVs, um you know, small tractors, I think all would be able to have access into the
site. I think if you're looking to get, >> you know, large vehicles in there, um that would be tricky. I I don't think the site would accommodate that. >> Okay. Um two more questions. Um, and I I know
I understand the conservation commission is going to be flagging the delineating the wetlands. Are you guys going to be picking up the flags as well or those have to get uh GPS by the consultant to add to the plans? I >> think actually we're looking for the consultant to do the Is that correct,
Beth? I think we're looking for them to identify where the wetlands were that they were planning to cross or or are we having are we >> we're doing we're doing the delineation but we'll do the flagging and then you guys would be yeah as part of you know
GPSing into your site plan that we'll need for the the plan set to then bring to the commission. So we'll also do >> the actual notice of intent you know form and narrative and that kind of thing. But yeah, we'd be looking to you
guys to GPS in the points. >> Um, in that same vein, do you guys have any is there any map info available for the trails already or >> it's very sparse, right?
>> I I I I'm not aware of anything beyond what was in the application. Okay, that's pretty much what we got. And thank you for for clarifying that, Beth. Uh, >> I got a question. How, as far as the um
the designing and such go and the reroutes, how uh how attached is anybody to any of the existing trail system? I mean there, you know, I was out there the other couple weeks before it snowed and um you know, yeah, there's some well
well worn in logging access type roads and everything, but uh a lot of it was if you took the blazes off the trees and let it let the leaf drops a year and those trails would be gone. >> Yeah.
>> More or less. Um some of them. And uh yeah, there was there there was some the the grades and the topography were not sustainable essentially for a lot of the trails there, the walking trails. So
yeah, I guess there what I'm saying is that how if there was a wholesale reroute of everything in there, would that be acceptable? Or would that be like, oh wait, no, we're attached to those because, you know, there's historical meaning behind the loop that goes way up an escar then way right down
an escer and all that kind of thing. If you catch what I'm saying. >> Yeah. Can I'll answer that, but then Scott, you can chime in too. I like you said, I think there's some areas where we wouldn't want to change things, but I
think some of those are the higher up areas. I think especially closer to the um the uh the boat launch area. So, when you first start from there and you're heading and you're sort of next to the lake there, that area, like you said,
you I've gotten lost there, you know, and the the blazes aren't very very good. And so, um, and like there's not there isn't really a real defined trail. And I think that's also an area where we would really like to try to keep folks
out of low more wetlandy muddy areas more than possibly where the blazes are right now. So, we're looking for that with this project. Um, and I would I think in that area particularly, I don't think people are, you know, set in stone
as to where the trail has to be. Um, I think if we improve it and reblaze it and, you know, make some turns and and to keep it up a little higher, um, I think I think that'll be fine.
>> Yeah. I almost feel like having a because that was my inclination. And it was almost to start from scratch in there to be honest when I was walking around in there. Um >> it didn't help that it was one of those days that there was ice everywhere and I couldn't get up some of the trails. Um
>> yeah, >> except on my all all fours, but um and in some ways, I mean, obviously that's going to I feel like you could redesign the whole trail system and actually eliminate a lot of the bog bridging and still have a really
desirable trail as an example. like um >> so you know in some ways I'm asking if if there were some parameters where we said hey we want to make sure there's two miles of trails and they're with you know any they're less than 15% grade
every anywhere and they stay at least 25 ft away from wetlands. Um, and we don't have and trail widths is 24 in minimal and we don't have any outs slopes greater greater than 5%, you
know, things like that. Give us what you got. Um, I don't know. I feel like that might be that might be different. Well, I know different way of doing it for sure. Um, we might better might be get get better results all all
told, I I mean, there's a lot of designers here that um you know that go out there and look at it and say like, "Boy, this doesn't make a lot of sense." >> Yeah. My only thought on that is I don't think we want to see a lot of trees
taken down. Oh, sure. No. you know, so there's that factor that kind of limits you to in some way to kind of the general area that the trail is right now in some places is that you wouldn't want to be taking trees and and even a lot of shrubs and stuff down either. So,
>> but I know what you're saying that you can move it, >> you know, 10 feet over and it might be a much >> Well, I'm talking moving it like >> 50 feet in a whole different direction for for some of the stuff that I was, you know, basically >> rerouting it and looking at what would
make sense based on the topography and the wetlands and the user experience there because right now it it's um it feels pretty random to be honest. >> Yeah, I agree. couple other questions >> or well I don't know that if is there
any more to answer on that if there's any more >> I I guess I just add I do think the what Beth said the you know that northerly part and I think if you look at the like some of the photos and for those of you
h who haven't been out there uh and for those of you who have you know they you know identify places like Um, you know, photo 7, photo 8. I I think that those where they
actually talk about where short upland reooting would make sense. That portion of the trail is not at all well defined. Um, it's been blazed with ribbon and other things by neighbors. Um, it's not
I I I don't I don't think anyone thinks that that's in the best place. And that's where I think just some rerouting in that location um may make some sense as opposed to like bog bridging or something else. As
you get further down, uh it really then starts to get on the logging roads and there are existing bridges there. That's where the snowmobiles are using it. I think rerouting in those locations probably wouldn't make a lot of sense.
>> No, they look pretty straightforward. Yeah. So pretty much the north side where all those bridges are. >> Yeah. They're the north side where there are some kind of random br it seems random bridges, right? Like the um if
you look at you know if you're looking at those pictures I think like photo 4, photo three, photo five that that location those bridges. Um, and some of the bridges are I mean there's no I mean
you have to hop up. They're they're a good foot and a half plus off the ground. >> Um I I do think that we're pretty open to like what's the best way to get through there and there's private property. It it kind of hugs the line
right now um in some locations. So that's the other thing that we need to be conscious of. >> Yeah. So I I think clarifying or refining now what I'm asking is that um how much construction of new trail and
elimination of old trail would be feas would be palatable I guess or is that something like oh no we we want to it is what it is or you know% change or >> what I would say maybe on I think the
connections are important you know the fact that these like any trail right it's all about the the connections of the network. And so the fact that this does have a couple of loops that kind of go around and they're connected to one another. I don't think we'd want to see
we wouldn't want to lose that element. I do think if you're talking about rerouting in that northern part to get out of especially getting out of resource areas and make it, you know, more right right now there are big times of the year where it's wet where you
really can't use that trail because it's just, you know, so wet, muddy, it's going down along the lake that that would make sense to to look at possible reroutes there. any considerations with trail tread as
far as bench cutting or um adding materials or things like that. Um, I I I mean I don't think that's something that we've thought about doing other than just being aware that there are I I
don't know if there are any locations here that are really eroding because of steep trails or anything like I'm not familiar with that even where it is super steep. I haven't seen washing or erosion on the trail itself
um to any but I do Uh but what what I do know is in locations where it's standing water and people are, you know, walking through it, um we're riding through it, they're starting to get, you know, to, you know,
be damaged there. And you can see that in some of those photos. Um so if what you're talking about would help alleviate those problems, I I think that's what we're looking to solve. >> Okay. Yeah. Yeah, I guess I was thinking
more just user experience of sides slope and um which kind of leads me to my the LA or well this next question is around accessibility and obviously this is not there's no ADA there's no FTAG requirements for this either is that correct like forest
service trail access guidelines it's not mass trails so you're not required to do that sort of thing >> yeah I don't believe so >> so it's just Al although we have I'll say we have talked about before
there are elements you know like to get from like the um to get from where the boat ramp is like out to that gazebo area like that's a very short section and if something along that line could be made to be
accessible I think that would be fantastic but I don't think we're required um under the grant itself to do that >> but it did look like those those types of upgrades were desired in the plans where it's just to make the whole thing more more access not
>> maybe not accessible from an ADA or ABA standpoint but just from a regular >> you know people that are are getting out and about >> having it more desirable, more enjoyable, less treacherous type of thing. Um yeah, because there's like two
access points. There's like an access behind that shack too. There's that spray painted shack there. There's like >> the access onto the trail system >> is actually better at that location, but it's a horrendous entrance point.
Whereas the other entrance point that's closer to the water is a lot more desirable, but the then the rest of the access is horrendous. The rest of the trailer off of that is horrible. >> So, yeah. >> Yeah. Um, okay. I think
that's the questions I had for now. for the uh design phasing portion of it. Is the expectation that any of these plans are going to be stamped? Would it be by a landscape architect or an engineer specifically with regard to you know the bridge designs?
>> I don't believe so. That might have come up in one of the questions before, but there's no um I think what we were thinking of these are standard designs and wouldn't need, you know, PE stamps associated with them.
>> Thank you. >> Yep. And is it true? So it looks like in the question answer the the conservation commission is going to be doing the permitting aspect. Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah.
Um along those lines, um as the the NOI effort, uh with the conservation commission, uh putting together the actual actual NOI, what do you anticipate, um the plans to look like?
Is is locating the flags with GPS and putting those on a on an ortho figure sufficient? Uh you're not anticipating a survey for this, are you? No. Yeah, that's fine. What you what you
mentioned is that's perfect. And the uh the bond payments, you're looking for a performance bond. Is that on the full cost and then a payment bond of 50%. >> You know, Matteo, I know that the
bonding question had come up before, but do you have that handy. Or was that in there? >> It it is in there. Um the the bond information, that's what um the town council sort of reviewed and and signed
off on. >> Okay. >> Was this one this one? There was a bid bond. I don't remember seeing that there was a performance and payment bond. Is that true? It's just a bid bond. No, it was a bid deposit and then a
performance bond and a payment bond. >> Okay. >> And if I'm correct here, the bid deposits 5%, payment bond is 50% and the performance bond would be for the the total estimate. Correct?
And then I think I saw in the question answer. So the the plan because you're because you're giving 60 days to award the contract rather than trying to tighten that up, the plan is maybe extending out the first deliverable to June 1st rather than May 1st.
>> Yes. That's all I had. I guess just um for the sake of um having the accurate scope uh lining up with the budget uh it looks like there's somewhere around 759 in total um
contractual for this although it says up further uh towards the front that it's 729 just looks like 729 in the CPA funds plus another three uh and the other funds it looks like the 5704 for is um
largely for elements that the concom will be uh responsible for. So the delineations, the blazing it says establish new blazing and um so
is is the commission going to be actually doing the blazing as well? I thought that was part of this this scope. It is not. Yeah. So that was part of all we had to do a match for the CPA grant and so >> the things that are that are matched
that the Congom then is going to do included blazing and delineating and doing the notice of notice of intent. Was there anything else Scott that was listed for the match? Um I think the signage was signage was
>> there like signage painting bridges. Um so so as part of this um budget we have uh picking up the flags on the delineation. So GPSing those assuming
submeter accuracy would be okay for that >> on on the GPS units. >> Then we have uh design design and layout. Then um actual construction and I'm assuming with the actual construction that
includes all material in that budget. >> Okay. >> Correct. >> Okay. Is there anything in that budget that I didn't mention? >> I don't think so. >> No, I don't think so. I mean, when I think of what the design is going to
entail, it it is mostly going to be um sort of, you know, design sheets, >> we're not looking necessarily for any kind of narrative necessarily to go with the design. Um, and we'll take those
sheets and and build a notice of intent off of them. I don't know, Scott, were you thinking of anything else included with the actual design? maybe, you know, some I'm thinking sheets that are sort of mapping like a site plan um and uh
locations for the work and then also uh cross-sections or of the actual bridges and more details on the actual bridges and B bridging locations. >> Yeah. >> Okay. I think it's also the it's better laying out the I mean this is what we
have is conceptual right and it's like this is the existing trails we know some of these elements are not in good shape we know we're seeing resource damage in these areas and I think the design is you know what specifically would you do
to to either reroute or uh put design elements in the trail to address those So it improves for the user experience and lessens the impact on resource areas >> uh with enough detail that then we can you know uh do the the permitting as
well. >> Yeah. Okay. And so going back to the trail reroute question, um it seems like um upland uh trail reroutes are more feasible and it sounds like because of
the logging roads down in the wetter areas, it it may not nec be necessary at all. But um if we do find an opportunity, what is the commission's um
I don't know uh how would you consider um a more extensive NOI process because obviously the commission may have you know a certain latitude but also uh with an NOI circuit writers going to be
looking at it and when Mark sees it you may not be necessarily an agreement if we're talking about uh you know fill or or other disturbances in those in those wetland areas. So um I mean obviously as part of
the design um we'll be in communication we we would be in communication with the the commission um on that process and see what those tolerances are. Should we just assume that resource area, unless it's an improvement to remove trail out
of resource area, that we wouldn't be looking at a reroute that could potentially, you know, have bog bridges through a resource area as new impact. Yeah, I think I think in general what we're almost looking for in terms
of r-rooting would always be coming out of resource area from where the trail is right now. You're going to be you're going to want to to move a literally almost away from the lake kind of to create it. And then I'm thinking, you know, where where the
bigger bridges need to go, which actually happens to be more in the U southern area. There's an area there where the where one of the larger trails go through a very wet area. Um, you know, there's already a bridge in that
area in general. Um, I'm not seeing a lot of new impact to resource areas. That would be a real issue with with Mark. Um, I'm I think then in general we we can almost paint this. I mean, I know it's going to be you guys designing it,
but what what I picture is whatever you produce, I think I'll be able to spin an NOI that's saying this is improvement. You know, overall this is improvement and and if if we have to talk to Mark about, you know, what's
mitigation and what's whatever, we we can certainly do do all of that. But um yeah, I mean when when you're looking at the mapping and and whatnot, if you if you see an area where you feel like new bog bridging's going to go and you
feel like it really would be impact, maybe we we talk about that. But in general, I feel like you're going to look at it and it's going to be improvement more than it's going to be new impact to areas. >> Yeah. Well, it sounds like Scott was saying that there are some areas that
some trail segments that are pretty wet um for a good portion of the the season. So um you know could certainly look at opportunities to you know improve those situations because
you know if people can't walk through it then obviously then that people cow path it and things like that. So >> yeah. >> Um okay thank you. I think that's primarily what's going on Tony and some of those where you know there were you
know it's on the road on the road bed things over time the road bed has been kind of worn down people put rocks in there um the rocks are sinking so people are cow pathing it outside along the stream
edge so I think whatever we do in there to help stabilize it and lessen the resource impacts um including rerouting it. But I think in some of the cases like what Beth are saying on that southern part, it's just really hard to
reroute in there. There's kind of, you know, the the road kind of, you know, is already crossing the resource area. So keeping it to the road seems like it makes more sense than trying to write
rewrite it off into, you know, another resource area. Sure. >> Um, one one other question from me. I'm looking at Mass Mapper right now and it looks like like Lake Wyola itself is a NHGSP priority habitat of rare species
um, an estimated habitat of rare wildlife. And it looks like that that area that the shape also encompasses a small piece of the existing trail like around around photos one and two on the on the map that's included. Um has has
there been or do you anticipate coordination like an info request with the NHGSP to uh verify that they won't consider this a take? Um, we haven't gotten to that point yet. We
should probably reach out to them um ahead of time. Yeah, we we can. I mean, if the trail is already there, this type of trail work isn't necessary. I mean, I would think if, you know, the trail's already there, so we're just improving it. We're not
necessarily, but >> right. Um yeah, I can um I can reach out to them. >> Okay. But you don't anticipate any uh the consultant to have to put together the info request or do a >> Okay. >> No, I think all the permitting is going
to is definitely going to be done by the conservation commission. So, you guys are really just coming up with how you you feel like um you can make improvements to to the trail system. Um >> Okay. And certainly, you know, with with
the eye of wanting to avoid resource areas in the, you know, um, like Scott said, there's there's spots of this trail that that go right next to a definitely a perennial stream. And in and in that particular area, which is
more south, there's really not maybe a rrooting way to get too much further away from what is a resource area. Um but in other areas I think we can we can make it improve make improvements get a
little further away from the the lake um bank itself and >> Okay. Great. Thank you. >> Sure. Anyone else? All right.
Um, Matteo, was there anything else um questions or anything said that come in afterwards that didn't get posted that would be good to talk about or um do we need anything else before we cut people free? uh to to add to the
list of the questions that we had received. >> Uh there were no other questions that came in. Um if they if more questions do arrive, I'll end up putting them up on that on that document along with these. >> Well, I don't know. Beth, did you have anything else or anyone else want the
last word? >> No, I'm good. >> I'll just say thank you for making the time. We're super excited about this project. the town. You know, when this had come up for vote, um, a lot of people used this, um, and are really
looking forward to the improvements that would be, uh, made here and, um, I appreciate your willingness to kind of work through a strange process of this design build, but um, I think I'm I feel really confident it's going to end up with a better product of getting your
ideas of, you know, how best to design something as you said. Um and we have a lot of expertise here on this call. Uh the expertise that um Beth and I don't possess in terms of trail design. So we're really looking uh forward to to
hearing your great ideas and looking forward to working with you. So thanks again for your interest in this. >> Yeah. Thank you. Have a great >> Have a good weekend. Thanks all. Bye bye.