e let's get the record all right it's 702 on March 13 2025 and I'm calling this meeting of the shutesbury Conservation Commission to order this meeting is being recorded we've got mayor and Jan and Bob
I don't see Scott is he not coming let me look on my phone oh I think I just got a text from him oh he says he's waiting to be let in Matteo is not here there we go all right yeah Matteo's not here um
tonight but he's still gonna do the minutes from the recording so that's good hey Scott hey there hey Jam and hello um all right so I already call the meeting to order first thing on the
agenda is comments um from me and the only thing that um I was thinking what to talk about and the only thing I can say is that I'm part of a regional group that's working on a MVP Municipal vulnerability preparedness Grant um it's
a shutesbury palm ammer Bel town and Hadley it's it's it started with a group called Fort River forward so it's all the towns that that feed the the Fort River and it is for Culvert assessment
um they we're asking for funding for basically hiring and training college kids UMass kids mostly but from the other colleges too to um train them and do the uh cul assessment that's the
North Atlantic conductivity Cooperative it's a it's a assessment procedure that I think was developed that UMass that's become a big thing there's a big database where you so you learn how to assess covers based on that and then you you also take
that data and you enter it into um a database so anyway the grant is for that for funding for that um now shutesbury already had assessments done um but I what the way I understand it is that the
data wasn't entered into that database yet um so part of this money would be going to taking those assessments that were done and adding a bit to them I think and then updating all the data into the database
so we'll see the grant applications due April 4th and that's all I have for comments from the chair if anybody has and we haven't met for a bit so if anybody has any questions or comments or
anything let me know um next on the agenda is to review and vote on the February 13th um minutes so does anybody have any changes or additions to the minutes from
February 13th no all right I'll take a motion to approve those minutes I motion to approve those minutes oh the second great um Fox hi con hi Rowan I
Douglas hi and Wilson I great actually before we move on from General comments and stuff Bob do you have any Bob or mayor both of you guys went to Mac right there anything you want to
share um I I'd like to say it's a always a u tremendously reinvigorating uh thing to go to with a you're you're in rooms in entire campus with uh other conservation agents and environmental
folk it's a it's a great experience um I guess my takeaway was uh in one of the classes I I took there's a new Grant out there that provides seed money for uh other grants because often times to get a an MVP Grant you have to show research
already this new Grant gives you that seed money it's not very much $3,000 or so to be to begin that process I thought that might be something that would be helpful for different things that are are coming up in shutesbury um mayor what was your impression oh I I thought
it was so interesting I I went to um a lecture on um beavers and um because I thought that was something that continually comes up yeah and then I went to the legal uh the
one on like up like recent uhw changes in the case law um and then what was the other one that was kind of memorable um oh shoot um well they handed out all kinds of chachkas I love that too I mean I got a calendar I got like I can
identify every tree out there it was just the energy like these people were just nice people that really like care about the environment so it was so it was so nice to be in that um in that uh um crowd you know it just it was it was
really cool but um yeah so there was something else like oh vernal pools oh my gosh like I learned all about the vernal pools and that was so interesting and then I did one of the basic um like kind of like what it would be the basic training that I should do next next so
um yeah it was great can't wait to go again next year good oh that's Al good I'm so glad you guys went and that you mayor for your first time you enjoyed it that much and I haven't been for a number of years so I bet it's even bigger than when I went like three or
four years ago so that's great um all right number three site visits update Jan do you have anything I do not I suppose uh we should probably get out to the library here uh
if not this week then next week after the rain see what happens yeah that would be great if you could get over there and just let us all know the date and hopefully maybe some some of us can join I think I sent you an email about setting up another visit
somewhere where there had been some erosion no I don't I didn't see it oh all right I better resend um and then so I'll resend that and then we did um I don't think it's been sent around yet but we're GNA have
another a notice of it's an RDA um that's been the electronics been submitted but we're waiting for the hard copy but that'll come to our next meeting and we'll need to do a site visit um for that too so maybe we can do
those both on the same day but I'll I'll forward that what was the last one it was it was a erosion sedimentation situation that we were going to check out I can't believe let me see my
scent maybe I overlooked it I don't know that's not anyway I'll find it if I didn't if it didn't get sent I'll resend um anyway that's two site visits it we should probably do before our next
meeting okay okay and then item four Land Management update Scott well I'm actually not sure I have the latest you that's you covered us for the presentation on the Brant
applications and it seemed if they were appreciative of us putting in we put in three right one for top of the lake and then two for Southbrook both a full and a partial but um I haven't heard
anything more since the presentation had been made it seemed like they were appreciative of having to choose from yeah they like they they specifically mentioned that they appreciated us um putting forward that
second option for Southbrook that basically was you know saying we'll do some of the construction this year and just because we know it's such a large budget we'll put it off so yeah they appreciated that sort of like just
effort on our part they also for both projects seem to be they they like that both projects were continuation of previous MVP grants that were issued um that sort of helped to
for them to think that you know we should continue with the work that we're doing on at both locations because they're both sort of based on um plans that were funded you know by MVP previously so yeah no it went really well it was fine there weren't that many
questions um and and I guess it's the 20th yeah a week from a week from today vote do they need anyone from do do we need to go there bre for the vote for
the 20th or I mean I'll be there anyway um I can't vote on ours but I would be voting on the others but no I don't think there's there's not really another chance for applicants to present it's
more you discussion by CPC and voting good well fingers crossed I know right definitely but that's all I think that we had for the Land Management part so end of
report okay great all right what time is it oh we actually had two more minutes before we can open the public hearing Madam chair yes well I've got
you all here and especially Scott um I think it might be fun to do a um uh mayor mayor took the Vernal pool class to do a u you know invite people to a Vernal pool certification um where we kind of can teach people about vernal pools and I
was wondering if you had any knowledge of a Vernal pool that might be on public land or land that's easy has easy parking and we could set something like that up oh yeah you're asking me or Scott me uh both of you well start with you
Beth right I think I think you emailed me about this and um and I was thinking Southbrook must have in there somewhere must have some um I see Miriam has her hand up I think she had
asked yes so yes there is a large Vernal pull on Southbrook um because we had talked about rerouting a Trail to go by to go away from where that little um bridge is down low there's like a a
bridge and we were talking about rerouting a trail um uphill past a Vernal pool that we looked at but I also um just wanted to share with the commission that I have a beautiful Vernal pool that I'm hoping to certify
with NH ESP this year I've been collecting data for the last five years and um I would love to have the commission come and look at it and um certify it as well and I would be happy to um arrange that with
you great um I will reach out to you offline on both of those Scott what's the um what's the the parking like in that um could you say Southbrook yeah I think where maryan is talking about you're talking about the one close closer to the the town beach
aren't you Mar like down from from there well it's uphill from the um the beach so you know that you know when you uh you go down that steep hill and then you go over a little Bridge do you know
what I'm talking about if you take the trail that's coming off of um lock Pond Road do you know what I'm talking about that trail we we had uh looked at a bypass for that and I'm sure we have it
mapped um I'm sure that it was in our emails there was a a map that Liam KGAN had suggested um a bypass for it that went by a Vernal pool and I think he even located the um exact location of
that veral pool but you know that certainly is one um so to answer your question Bob I think you know there there isn't great parking off of flx pond but there is
good parking down towards like with the town beaches and that all connects together but I might do a little thinking on it there might be some closer to some parking there I just have to I walk that all the time I just need
to pay attention to where where they may be so think certainly a beautiful spot yeah that that one of my faves all right great thank thank you everybody all
right now it is 716 so we can open our public hearing for uh bundled noi uh for the shutesbury highway department and I think there's a few
people here to present so whoever would like to go first go for it all right hi everyone um I'm Megan rhods I'm the planner at the Franklin Regional Council of governments I'm joined here with two of the colleagues that'll introduce I just want to note I did talk to Dave the
highway super and he said he would be here um but I'm not sure where he is so hopefully he will join us before this is over um but so I am a planner of the Franklin Regional Council of governments um and I'm joined here with Andrea Donan who also works at the Franklin Council
of governments and Angela panon from the Pioneer Valley planning committee our counterpart in the Pioneer Valley Regional planning agency um we have a MVP grant that we were awarded through MVP to do a gravel roads uh manual
toolkit to help our local towns here in western Mass figure out ways to better maintain their unpaved roads um and so as part of that we have been working with partner towns to test out elements of this unpaved roads manual um to make
sure that it's working that it's doing what we're supposed to do and what that goal is is to um create a manual and tool kit that the towns themselves the highway supers can do the maintenance themselves without having to go get engineers and do expensive work um that
better maintains the road keeps the dirt on the roads and not into our streams and wetlands um and so as part of that um work to dat we have already identified mapped the most vulnerable Ro unpaved roads in shoot space and we're going to be going out this spring with
Dave and his crew to assess those most vulnerable roads and identify ways to make them more resilient and and less um conducive to erosion um and using practices that he can do with his staff and with the resources that he has in
town um and so as part of that we wanted to file a bundled note of intent to make his job easier but also to in for future all maintenance work um not only to make his job easier but in streamline his work but to make sure he's doing in a way that is protective of our natural
environmental resources here in town um so uh we filed the bundle notice of intent on behalf of the highway department and as one of our partners Angela from pppc she is an expert on bundle notice intense and so she's gonna
walk us through really the details of what this is for um and what we what Dave and his crew are going to be doing um angel I know we only I think we have half hour on the agenda so we don't need to go into too much detail unless the the commission would like to hear as
much as they want answer questions but um if you would like to give them an overview that would be wonderful yeah I can cut some of my slides um Beth am I able to share my screen let's see this
all right I made you host that seems to be the only option so then when you're done you can make me host okay let me pull it up all right everyone can see yep all right
excellent um so again this is a notice of intent for routine maintenance repair um and it should also say Improvement so under this permit work can only occur within the
riverfront bordering land subject to flooding non-jurisdictional drainage channels ditches and water conveyances and the buffer zone it may not
occur within bvw uh Banks land underwater or any areas that have priority or estimated habitat the last part should not be a problem for shsb cuz there was only one
section of road that showed up in that polygon and after talking with Beth I believe it's actually a trail so again just some general information from uh MC's buffer zone
manual what we're talking about of course you know land underwater the banks so nothing can occur in there but when we get into the buffer zone Riverfront area bordering land subject to flooding
on the bottom work can occur in those uh we went through it we addressed the storm water management standards so as this is maintenance and
improvements it does meet the majority of the standards one two three so there will be no new untreated storm water no new point source discharges
um follow the recommended bmps provided if the highway department does then you will achieve lower postd development Peak flow rates than pre-development groundwater recharge
will be accomplished accomplished um everything we are designing will meet the 80% TSS removal no work will occur in land use
with higher potential for pollutant loads or critical areas um the big one is the Redevelopment that I will get into next so to meet the criteria of
Redevelopment it's limited to replacement retrofit Improvement of existing structures so examples of that would be grading and resurfacing within the existing roadway
uh they should say drainage Culvert replacement catch Bas and cleaning uh rep player of SES and ditches retrofits to existing storm water that
would essentially remove a point source discharge and replace it with an infiltration BMP and any new bmps to mitigate storm
water uh will solely be to improve water quality reduce Peak discharge rates and promote infiltration and recharge um the final standards erosion and sediment controls are included in
this we do not currently provide an operation in maintenance plan but that is being developed with the unpaved roads toolkit so that will be provided to the towns that are
participating and of course there are no illicit discharges um this is just a kind of General overview of projects to be conducted grading rotor pairs fixing potholes ditch maintenance whale
maintenance mowing uh installing check dams maintaining existing ditches and sailes cleaning catch basins planting native species removing invasive
species for culverts that are designated as a road stream Crossing and not solely for storm water DPW could do minor repairs such as fixing the head wall or
flared ends and also cleaning them out and maintaining any Beaver deceivers or water level control devices that exist within the Culvert or in proximity of the Culvert placements again the cleaning of
the CTS maintenance of all sorts of storm water detention basins catch basins four Bays uh does allow Road signage and
guard rail replacement removal of debris maintaining turnouts maintaining splash pads maintaining rip WAP channels uh again I have the beaver deceivers vegetation management
embankment stabilization planting of natives pruning grading especially as it relates to unpaved roads
um limited work on Bridges Focus specifically on maintaining the existing deck in a butt mins but nothing that gets down into the water or the water course any stone wall
repairs jup mats level spreaders water buts projects not permitted um would be those that are in uh area with a high potential for pollutant
loads and any New Roads um conversion from grass to Stone anything that may require bypass pumping also any road stream cul
replacement that is on a perennial or intermittent Stream So jurisdictional cul Replacements cannot be covered under the bundled permit but drainage cover Replacements can and herbicide
treatment um then we get into the work protocol so this is the process DPW and the Conservation Commission uh should follow it's purely
recommended did um you could establish your own work protocol with the DPW but typically every year between March and may when they have an idea of the project they will be
completing the next fiscal year they would provide a list to the concom typically the concom would do a Desktop review of sensitive areas and again the highlight of that one is
just ensuring that the work is not occurring in a perennial stream or priority habitat so those are the big evaluation things because that would
make it not permittable then you would have an onsite meeting it could be with the whole commission a member staff if applicable just to kind of go over what
is being proposed and discuss with your gpw on where to install erosion controls when they begin work they will provide 48 hour notice to the concom
Via I believe we specified through email CU that was easiest when they start the project a member Andor staff can review the site but doesn't
necessarily have to if they're familiar enough with the site and the project already um then of course DPW would install erosion and sediment controls during your site review at the
start of work you would want to make sure that you specify areas of where they will be stockpiling any material and make sure they're providing you with information on where said
materials will go after so for instance if they clean out a beaver deceiver and leave a pile of debris on the side of the road in close proximity to the
stream that is not ideal so we want to make sure that they're aware that those materials need to go in the back of a dump truck to somewhere that is not resource area or buffer zone and then at the end any site
stabilization that's required then there would be sort of a informal project completion review approval by the commission since it's a bundled noi and encompasses many projects you
want to issue your traditional certificate of compliance so it's recommended that the Commission in its meeting minut um formally approve and have documentation that the
work project was completed in accordance with the bundled notice of intent this goes over the minor exempt activities for buffer zone and Riverfront so vegetation
cutting uh sign installation and oh excuse me sorry um work having to do with flood control sorry I went too quick um and I also included an ecological restoration
limited project because there if you are doing invasive removal without herbicides so either hand pulling or a different mechanical
option that would fall under the ecological restoration limited project so it does allow the removal of invasives as long it is strictly mechanical and that's only limited to
roadways so I'll specify that I'm going to skip all this because it kind of goes through just standard operating procedures for the various tasks um they are provided in the notice of
intent but quickly typical maintenance activities that were covered include mowing catch Bas and cleaning swail ditch and drainage Channel maintenance repair in maintenance of splash pads Rock aprons and plunge pools
repair and maintenance of turnouts uh drainage covert cleaning and replacement check Dam construction and maintenance uh vegetation pruning and removal street
sweeping roadway grading and Bridge Main to ensure the project is being performed to meet the interests of the wetlands protection act we have included these
mitigation measures they mostly deal with making sure erosion and sediment controls are installed and inspected if DPW is Contracting
out to a different firm say they use Palmer Paving to redo a road or Mike Callahan to install and maintain Beaver deceivers we would
just want to make sure DBW is aware that the contractor needs a copy of the order of conditions it needs to abide by it um again any Disturbed area should be
restored the commission has the right to require additional erosion controls if needed again the work is limited to buffer zone blsf Riverfront and any non-jurisdictional water course
uh the project does meet all the performance standards and there's no potential for any sort of adverse impact and again any project that they do as
specified in section 12 the Conservation Commission will be notified by email 48 Hours Pride so in conclusion there will be no alteration or impacts to Resource
areas some of them may be very temporary in nature due to the limited project provision but nothing will be permanent there's no increase in Peak
rates of runoff no fill uh no changes of flood plane elevation no new point source discharges site work and construction plans do include erosion and sediment
controls there's appendix at the back that has generic conditions and generic bmps on how to install them and all work is to improve the existing
roadway and maintain and improve the drainage on the roadways to meet the interests of the Act and the overall goal is it will help
build relationships with concom and DPW and help protect resource areas in the future by allowing more oversight collaboration and cooperation between
the two departments and I'm happy to answer any questions I flew through it so thank you that was good um I'll I'll start off sure the
commission has lots of questions um one thing off the bat is that um the resource areas so we have we have What's called the the aura the adjacent Upland resource area which really is the
100 foot buffer and we we consider that resource area so the 100 foot buffer to bank and to um land underwater um and that but so what but I'm just I just want to clarify I guess that that that
would be in this situation that would be treated similar to the buffer zone so it would be sort of on the list of areas where work can occur um so there so there's that and then I think I saw Mark's comment and
I'm sure this comes up a lot with other towns is sort of the definition of of a stream for you know like of a a drainage sale versus it being a jurisdictional stream um similar to other towns our
definition of a stream under our local bylaw is simply um a channel something that moves in a a gradient within a defined Channel it doesn't have to originate in a um jurisdictional area or you know flow into or out of a
jurisdictional area it's just simply um which I know other towns have that kind of definition too so that makes it a little trickier to I think Define what is um sort of a man-made drainage sale versus a jurisdictional stream um again
I I I love the bundled noi and I would I want to move this forward I these are just sort of like little questionable areas I think that I'm that I'm bringing up um so that's yeah I have a question for
you um so typically if Mass do would submit something to you they'd give you the whole Spiel right like we don't have to follow your bylaws I was kind of going under that assumption and I apologize so if you
want me to rework it a little so the town has to follow bylaws I can do that um yeah I mean I guess I was considering this as a bundled noi that was being filed under both the wellness
protection act and and the bylaw um so yeah that would that might make sense to to almost change the narrative part of the of the bundled nii to reflect the bylaw a little bit
would be helpful I think and it's really just that the sort of the beginning part where you're talking about resource areas the rest of it um I think most a lot of it can stay the same but that would that would be
helpful and part of this too is we do have funds set aside to go out in the field with DPW and a concom member to review and address some of the key
concerns such as what would be a jurisdictional stream and what wouldn't and also what would be a jurisdictional covert and what wouldn't be great
has Megan when furog did the Culvert assessment did they produce a map of all of them or just the report we have a map do you think it would be good if we shared it and included it as an
attachment to This n because it should clarify right which ones are just drainage and which ones are actually stream Crossings as a starting point so we mapped anything that has a
pipe with water in it uh on a Town Road we um we'll have to go so it depends on what everyone's definition of a stream is um so we can classify it um but we'll need to figure that definition out because
right now it just shows any pipe with water under a town town on Road thank you Beth would you prefer we just include that that has any pipe under Town Road so we're aware of
them yeah I think that would be great for the coverts I guess I have a question about that um if if what we're really talking about is you know like the pipes under driveways and things like that is that what we're most worried about when we're
saying a drainage Culvert no we're more worried about cross culverts in roads that may just transport water through a sued
or that would potentially connect Wetlands on either side but isn't officially a culvert for a stream channel or a hydrologic connection so it's not a perennial stream or an
intermittent stream or a hydrologic connection but if you're connecting a wetland on one side of the road with the other it's still a hydrologic connection no yes but if you have a dra so I guess it comes to how you define a drainage swell
and I think what Beth was implying is that as long as it's channelized it's jurisdictional locally maybe this isn't maybe I don't know what I'm talking about so we can go
right to that if we have to uh but I thought you said that that you couldn't make the pipe smaller and you couldn't make it bigger right no you can't make it smaller but you could make it
bigger the goal is to write size it okay and that typically means an increase in diameter yes I just want to make sure I understood that because I yes absolutely
it would seem nowadays we do want to make them bigger if we can as long as it doesn't screw up whatever the ecosystem has going on you know okay just to clarify what a cross covert is so sometimes on an unpaved Road you
have a ditch um on the side of the road and particular if the the hillside goes upward in elevation um you're going to be gathering water in that ditch and at some point you you want to just disperse
the water off the road but not into a stream or Wetland so sometimes there are um it goes into a Culver and Crosses underneath the road and then goes into the wood Woods on the other side where it's maybe lower elevation that's a
cross Culver and those may not be streams they're often not streams they're just um storm water drainage cver okay that's helpful but I I think what Beth is
getting at is they protect up gradient stream channels so under the wetlands protection act a stream is jurisdictional if it comes out of a wetland but in
shutesbury if it is like a groundwater seep to like a rocky waterfall down and then hits a wetland that upgradient portion is still jur dictional
locally and wouldn't be considered a typical trage Channel under their local bylaw it would be a stream Crossing yep
y um yeah I think if so you said you you would kind of look at the bylaw and things I guess something that I want to check in with the commissioner if you're going to I don't know re rewrite that section A little bit is that I I'm all right with adding the
aura as a an area where this work can be done similar to the buffer zone and I guess I want to see what other Commissioners think about that so that Angela has some direction in that in that respect how do other Commissioners feel about
that yeah I'm on the same page okay good yeah you know certainly um I didn't see the BW mentioned in in the document and I think that that that is key yeah again I was kind I apologize I
shouldn't have assumed but typically local bylaws tend to not apply to local departments and if you don't have that as an actual like exemption that's my
fault and I just went on the Assumption and had it meet the performance standards of the Welling protection act yeah no problem um why don't we um just move through I have just a couple
other um one area that you know it's in here a couple times is the Wetland delineation part there's one section that that says uh that section seven work activities proposed under this B on
future projects require formal field determination of wetland resource areas um then later it talks about having Conservation Commission do the delineation
um and I was I guess wondering what other towns do with that with that sort of need you know you You' you want the highway folks to go out but then you also want the the resource areas delineated um I guess what's kind of the standard for small towns that don't want
to spend a whole lot of money on Consultants typically it would be commission or staff that goes out with the DPW and it doesn't even necessarily need to be super
formal like these are your vegetations these are your soils but just you know showing where the line is throwing up a few flags and making sure that that area is protected by erosion controls during
work that's the main goal just to make sure it's properly identified because often times the Wetland layer Maps Miss jurisdictional areas so always having that nocal local knowledge and
eyes on the ground so what I used to do in burnfield and Palmer is I whenever they'd come up with a project I'd hop in the truck with the DPW guy go down the road and sort of stop and be like okay Wetland get
out flag the extent around it it's easier if there's a defined Channel and then you know be like be sure to put erosion controls 30 ft up Road and 30 ft down Road and Encompass the area to prevent
any sedimentation or erosion into jurisdictional areas so that was my process yeah so that's I'm thinking that's something we could write into the order of conditions that this is sort of
the standard way that we're going to move forward I just yeah saw it a couple times in here here worded differently to give flexibility some commissions have much more knowledge and
understanding of the requirements of the wetlands protection act and what a wetland is than some other commissions and the focus of this
project being really small rural towns that aren't as privileged to have ammer DPW staff as their chair who is very familiar with all of it and they gotta go out and do it on their own so
that gives them the ability if they need to to bring somebody in to properly delineate it if the commission feels it's outside their capacity good sounds good Megan has her hand
up oh you're muted Megan you're muted sorry how many times do I do this a day um and I just want to clarify for this so you know if the highway comes and says that they're going to be grading a road and they're staying within you know the road surface um and would the T if
the con if they give 48 hours notice to the concom they're going to be grading such Road in the they say okay we probably don't need to delineate for that project that's an acceptable answer to for that like a mowing if it's within a certain feed in a certain area they don't need to do
this at every project is that correct oh yeah that's 100% correct I skipped those like nine or ten slides just because I wanted to power through in my half hour but they are available and Beth has the PDF of the PowerPoint
to share that goes into more specific details of the standard operating procedures for many routine tasks mowing cul cleaning turnout cleaning catch Basin street sweeping all that
stuff um yeah and we've we've over the years have thought that the best idea would be to get out there and um the concom to help sort of delineate different areas of the town you know basically near the roads for d for DPW
so that they'd have that already on hand you know that's that's a goal and I think that's a great goal and I wish more conservation commissions would do it because you should be working with
your different departments you're all part of the town and even though have different mandates if you actually sat and talked to each other you'd realize you have a lot of the same similar goals and missions it's all about how it's
framed so I love that there's other towns I know that are like no we will never delineate for anybody and they have to get a professional one even Town Projects and just me from my years of
being an agent think that's a disservice to the town but I can also respect the commission's stance on it if they don't feel that they have the capacity to do so okay then my other questions
um so under the suitable projects um the first one the road surfacing the road surface grading and resurfacing including change of surface from gravel dirt to oil and stone or pavement um so out of
this big long list of suitable projects I just have a couple circled where I'm sort of like and that's one of them because to me if you're G to change a road from um from dirt for example to
Pavement um to me that's that's going to change storm water drainage quite a bit um and I feel like if that was to happen it would be a pretty large project in
shb and I would think a no a regular noi would would be required for that um I don't know one of the other Commissioners think I'm on page eight page eight of the noi got the
suitable projects under a bundled noi and it's got a bulleted list do you have the ability post it on the screen Beth um I made you host again you did
okay if you want to make me host again I could pull it up I don't know um I think the solution to that is just removing or pavement yeah yeah I
agree so I will do that in the revise narrative but I do think it's important to keep in going from straight
dirt to clean layered properly installed gravel if that makes sense would there be waiver exception for uh small patches of asphalt where you're just doing a
particularly vulnerable section you know you're not doing the whole Road system but just a small patch it dep Culvert or something maybe so honestly that'd probably be the
worst thing is to pave over the Culver because that will just increase the rate of erosion so it's like it's move moving slowly and eroding the dirt road but if it hits a pavement area it's just going to go
right to the stream if it's over the culber paving could be and I've seen it done often on unpaved roads is they will pave very steep SL
slopes but stop before they get to the bottom which is typically where you have your covert or bridge and those are the areas that would be prime to
install some of the green infrastructure bmps that are in the back of the noi and they're all designed purely for infiltration whether it be one BMP or a chain and we're talking to
Mark he was okay with it as long as there is if you have a stream have a 50 foot setback or a wetland a 50 foot setback so it's not like right in the
Stream yeah you start to look at the new regulations it's going to put a 100 foot setback to any critical resource um and one of the biggest ones in western Mass is cold water fisheries
and they are most impacted by the total suspended solids which is the dirt so stopping wash outs and all that dirt from getting into those streams is the overall objective
it'll keep them cold it'll keep them deep it won't kill trout because the fines get into their gills so that's kind of the overall objective all right well I think it might help to bring up that um the list
of of suitable projects I'm gonna let you do it Angela oh you got to turn I guess we have some exceptions in town where we've paved the the drainage path straight to the
stream um so that puts the question forward like if they've got to do something to it and it's already there are we going to object to that kind of work if it's already paved
yeah no so that would be continued on without already paved in you're maintaining the existing pavement then yes they would just kind of carry on status
quo assuming that does less damage than mucking around with it yes well and then it's it's just it's just at that point it's like right now it's just really maintenance of it but eventually something like that is a great
mitigation or restoration project that could be associated with something else like say they had to do a culvert or some they had to do some work that needed restoration we could say oh taking out that PVE sale and you know replacing it with a
vegetated Swale or something as a mitigation or restoration but but just maintaining it at this point like changing it at this point there's no requirement for that it would be a good idea but that yeah you know I mean that's where the
water is really shooting into a stream and you're causing erosion where it lands as opposed to necessarily conveying a lot of sediment although that may may also occur yeah so you wanted me to bring up the suitable list
correct yep might make it easier all right so then the next ones that I that again are a little questionable are is the third and fourth bullets because again they're talking about
um stitches and so it comes down to sort of that definition of of what is is unjal what is jurisdictional and what is not jurisdictional and what so we can you could why you you
could look at the bylaw a little bit and and then maybe we can it's like we're probably going to continue this to the next our next meeting we can talk about that again um then the next one I was wondering I questioned is
a few bullets down drainage covert replacement within constructed drainage system where the covert is designed primarily for the convence of storm water yeah what was I wondering about that I guess I
just feel like covert replacement no matter um if it's for more of just a storm water you know sorry it's right I have my dog over here
wanting to go in and out um yeah so we're placing a culvert whether it's for a jurisdictional stream or just a cross covert um I feel like that's a large enough type project where there could be
erosion and things that I I feel like a full noi would be required for that can I just a scenario what we often see is that a lot of towns have like a 12 in metal covert that's just rusted out um
it's it's just a for drainage um and then they want to replace it with a plastic one that'll last another 15 or so years um is that a situation that you like that's where you would think this would fall and that they would need a full noi
I'm just asking for clarification typically what we see that's fine I I feel like I feel like there should be yeah um but I'm happy to listen to what the Comm rest of the commission thinks I'm wondering Beth if there should be a
size that we allow versus one you know anything above a certain size might be more concerning yeah that's an idea um just so you know those are the only bullets that I have questions about or kind of concern about that's that be might be a
good approach Jan that yeah that allows you to take care of small drainage culs that aren't going to have a huge impact on anything versus you know the larger ones that do are going under roads are doing something more significant we so what if I added with a
diamet less than 18 in I feel 12's too small and 24 might be too big that's I was going to suggest 20 or 18 18 is 18 would be okay with
me I I wonder if that's a question we should ask Dave what uh the majority of ours are if they're all twelves and he thinks they should be 20s or you know what I mean if they're all 20s already Maybe maybe he could provide some feedback on that size
issue yeah I know when we did the assessments that the vast majority were under 20 probably 80% of them were I guess you maybe a different opinion on that
I I am wondering my experience with culbert say I think you hit on this in in the presentation are many of them are undersized already um for passage of storm Waters especially
in life of climate change and or for aquatic organism passage like fish and salamanders that you have referenced there and so I I I just don't want to create an incentive to are we saying
that you'd have to replace it like kind because I I think oftentimes when we look at it through a different lens we want to increase the diameter of these um conveyances and I to me I don't
have concerns about the replacement of a culbert because it's just you know it's just conveying the water through the road so I I don't I'm not sure that I'm as concerned about that part I think
my concerns in read were more about I think was the second about ditch maintenance engraving and cleaning and mowing that that can have a bigger impact on uh trust
resources in in the Stream So maybe I'll I'll stop there but I I didn't have the same concern with this I just wouldn't want to see us require like kind replacement with undersized calverts and that is a good point
because because the unpaved roads storm water toolkit does have a whole section on right sizing drainage culs that we're hoping the town would be able to use putting the 18 inch that could
restrict right sizing yeah I I guess maybe I I I might have a contrary view to my fellow Commissioners but I'm not sure I I think I don't to me it's
more about how we would apply those right sizing tools to the Culvert more than restricting it with a diameter or if we're going to restrict it to anything and we're worried about kind of
you know uh storm water then we could talk about the you know the the intermittent stream or whatever this going through and try to to to get a that way versus the size of the pipe because often times the the Culvert may not be indicative of actually what's
flowing through it yeah I think are we saying though here that anything that's under 18 inches and also is carrying only what's been sort of considered non-jurisdictional
um those are the ones that that can be done under this bundled noi we not necess necessarily um saying here the size of whatever the replacement pipe is you know we're just saying if it's under if
the existing one is under 18 it can fall under this bundle noi um if it's over 18 it needs its own noi it needs its own individual noi also if it's caring a jurisdictional stream is that what we're saying
here that also would need its own noi I'm fainting back to what Scott just said um I was sort of thinking about just driveway covers you know as a standard but in reality if we're talking
about the expectation of greater flows whether it's in streams or the ditches uh you're looking at needing oneir to a half again the size to be able to deal at all with climate change um so maybe I just
retract what I said I I I I'm trying to find a way not to have to always do an noi to you know replace a driveway kind of culbert I would hope that when we do it we put a bigger one in that's certainly what we see on locks Pond where you know the Upstream side of the
ditch flows across the road because the driveway CS can't handle the flow yeah well I think in this that's what I'm saying in this bullet we're not anywhere saying what the size of the replacement pipe is we're just saying if currently it's under 18 inches we can it
can the work can be done under the bundled noi um and also any of these projects according to how this is all going to happen is that the Conservation Commission will be notified that the um
DPW is planning to do this we would do a site visit and during that whole time we can have the conversation with DPW about what size they are thinking of replacing the existing um covert
with I I hear what you're saying I I I like the idea of being able to have a discussion my fear is if if we put an artificial 18inch limit on what they can do that we'll have one hell of a lot of 18inch coverts when we might need we're
not we're not putting an 18inch limit on what they can put in what we're saying is any existing pipes right now that are 18 Ines or smaller can be replaced under this bundled noi you can replace them with whatever size DPW wants or even
whatever size we sort of advise DPW that they should replace it with that 18 inch is simply saying anything that's 18 inches or smaller right now falls under the bundled noi you see what I'm saying
yeah all right like yeah that could work that doesn't say anything about what the size of the replacement you're staying under a certaint you know like the the bigger ones we're not talking about them yeah bigger ones would need their own noce 71 even if even if they're not once
we figure out jurisdiction if it's bigger than 18 inches it needs its own nli I I had a question just to go kind of just jur um globally um you you said that you had
kind of got is it my understanding that you went with the town to map out areas already we oh sorry did you mean culverts or Wetland areas mayor no I meant this just
like all these things that are listed as the work that can be done have have there are there areas of the dirt roads that have been identified where with with the D with I mean the DPW is not here so like did did
furog and um and Angela did they go out with the DPW to figure out already where the problem areas are so we've identified on a map using GIS the most likely roads to be most
vulnerable for unpaved roads right um we are going we're waiting for the snow to actually then go walk the roads to identify potential projects um but the bundle notice of intent will does pertain to any road side any road within
shuberry whether it's paved or unpaved and whether it's highly vulnerable or not so if it if a road needs potholes it's p if it's paved and needs some pothole patching or some mowing along the side or invasive treatment along a paved Road this under notice attent
would still apply whether or not it's been identified as a highly problematic spot okay so similarly under under these these areas like have are there how many have you
identified so far as uh culbert replacement or um for repair for the this project um so most of the work is not going to be cette repair or replacement
a lot of it is more designed to slow and capture water so they're making sure the ditches are properly functioning making sure that they're sloped um appropriately to not just make the water shoot down to the stream but to slow it down maybe installing some check dams
within the streams to slow that down um potentially adding more frequent turnouts so that the water disperses more frequently off the road rather than channeling all the way into one big cul and going into a stream or other uh uh Point location so most of the work is is
designed with that in mind and not necessarily replacing CTS because part of what we want to do is make sure that this is something that the town can do on a regular basis with their own staff and so replacing culs even smaller ones drainage ones is expensive in a big
project so we're trying to do this more of a pce meal like what can they do in the little baby steps that really improve a road okay and what is the time frame for all this I understand that you're going to wait till the snow is gone um but
what is the is it everything going to be it is it your hope that everything would be done by the Fall or or is this multi-year our project so this part of the project wraps up in June and what we'll be doing this spring with the crew
is is looking at those highly vulnerable roads and doing some assessments and conceptually planning out improvements so they can then work on that at their their own time with their own resources so we'll kind of get them teed up ready to go and then they can do it on their
own when they have time and ability okay thank you um all right do Commissioners have any other questions about this this the
suitable projects we could move on to just taking a quick look at projects not suitable under the bundle noi which is below this one I wonder if I could uh ask Megan um
so uh you've worked with the the dpws and have come upon a a list of appropriate sites is that correct uh We've mapped the roads that are most likely to have erosion problems and most likely contributing a sediment to your
streams and um that's provided to the commission as um uh as as a a site of approval so X Y and Z Road it breaks it's already on the list and they can immediately prepare
repair it is that kind of after they notify us is that kind of how the process would work so this is the the list we're giving them is kind of a priority list for them to do work um but Angela correct me if I'm wrong but the bundle
notice of intent is for any road that as long as it's with a not with not in a jurisdictional stream or in a sensitive environmental area and so it could be on just a one of your paved main roads or it could also be on these highly vulnerable roads it it's really the
extent of the work so if they're just doing basic grading on that highly vulnerable Road making sure it's red properly to shed the water correctly um then it would be included um but if they're going to be doing a big project if what we if we go out and assess that
these highly vulnerable roads and like you know this really needs a whole lot of Culver Replacements and X Y and Z then that might be just determined to be a really big project and then they would come to you as a separate project but if um if it's just these basic maintenance
projects on any of the roads uh that would be included here and are these btle type of notice of intents are are they fairly common yeah yes yeah they're pretty common they're pretty common for dpws
they're also pretty common for example Amis has one for UMass UMass put together one it's sort of is this idea of um often it's it's lists like this of this work this work is is approved under the
bundled noi this work needs a complete notice of intent this work only needs you to check in with the concom it's a way for large organizations that do a lot of work in and around resource areas to kind of be able to get work done um
by categorizing you know it's I don't know that's that's how I think of it and I think this is a this application is for a fiveyear order conditions right y so it would be basically five under for the
next five years DPW would follow this procedure for coming forward with different projects that um they have and if you read Angela presented it but I I like the idea of them you know coming to
us between like March and may with a list of what projects they want to do for the year um and then doing site visits to go look at those areas and then it sounds like having concom kind of delineate uh for them
um that's the idea maybe just to clarify um I could see how this would be confusing that we burog has the project on unpaved roads and um we're as Megan said we're we're evaluating um the roads
picking uh highly vulnerable areas disc identifying bmps that might work on those roads and then teeing them up the bundled noi is kind of an umbrella that this falls under but it covers other work too
that the town is going to be doing routinely it's um something that Angela's done in her region and you guys might be the first in Franklin County to have one for roads I don't know if
that's true but I think so um so it it just seems like a good system for um establishing like a standard operating procedure
between um town road maintenance and the concom and wetlands regulations I don't know if that helps but great thank you and and who is the applicant for this um notice of intent DPW
okay yeah I think it would be worthwhile having them come if we're to to meeting if we if we're going to discuss this again um and last question um what kind of comments did uh D have related to
this this application uh they were limited and I believe I addressed them all I could p up that document if you want do you want to look at these projects that aren't
suitable yeah let's take a a quick look um to me it's it's mostly you know things that are are are new new culs New Roads um new ditches um and I can remove this whole inner
50 because of your bylaw if you want me to do that yeah I think that would be good anyway that's just just so folks who saw what was uh what was suitable then this is sort of a list of what would would still be requiring still
require a full n and then Angela what are you calling a road stream Culver not a drainage culbert okay so it should say Crossing Road stream Crossing that was how I was trying to
differentiate the two so you have a road stream Crossing and a drainage CT even though they're all coverts but it makes it easier to understand if you can kind of set seate
them that way why is this doing this sorry all right so I I thought we could bring it up but I I don't have any comments I do have one comment if you go down into work protocol it is under B
where we've got uh Conservation Commission shall review the project sites and applicable documentation to verify that the project is not within I just thought there should be another bullet there for um sort of bank and land underwater
bvw ivw for that good I didn't miss one did I nope that's good oh you wanted me to add uh isolated vegetated
Wetlands yeah what about isolated lands subject to flooding um would that be the same as with bordering land subject to flooding and you would allow work to happen in that area yeah I think so and I think you
kind you referred to it as just land um subject to flooding at least that's where I saw it so I thought it kind of encapsulate both of them with calling it that so my the only other spot where I really was
trying to figure out what was going on is way at the end under mitigation measures getting there um let's see erosion control shall be installed as shown on the plans so it's like in this
the second sentence starts and the second sentence goes into the third sentence I'm wondering what what plans are we talking about some of this language in this section makes me think it was for an
actual project but I maybe I'm just not read so let's say they go for chapter 90 funds to do a like something and they actually have it designed but it meets the bundled then a why you would
have site plans but I could you could just say rosion controls shall be installed as shown on the the project the specific project site plans it's just the way it was written made it feel like there were some plans that went with this noi and I was a little
confused what if it says a erosion control shall be oh I have to keep it installed as evidently needed to control runoff from the site
sure that make sense and then was I looking at the next paragraph and I'll clarify that too that if the town uses a contractor the contractor is responsible
um in the next paragraph where you've got natural heritage yeah that's exactly I was like why is that in there miss thank you and then you do have bordering land subject to flooding there so you might want to just take out bordering so it
includes both isolated and you could just have land subject to flooding um and then the it there and sort of way in the beginning is where I think we should
also just list our um our Aura our adjacent Upland resource area as some as another area where we would allow use of the um bundled noi it's
Au a a so it's adjacent Upland resource area okay all right any other Commissioners have any other sort of specific comments uh MD's had his hand up I don't
know if MD is a commissioner or not yeah I think that's that's Miriam she's public we we'll get we'll get to public comments in a few minutes um but it sounds like in general you guys are going to kind of take another
look at it in our regard to the bylaw and you know so we'll probably end up continuing but um Scott yeah thanks I the going back to the section on things
that were not covered uh here in the bundle DOI I I'm wondering the creation of new storm water detention ponds that that's a common
need at some sometimes um here at many of our gravel roads so I'm just wondering how is how are the creation of nor of I saw the cleaning of existing ones as I in the bundled in draft but
for the creation of new ones how is that being handled is that part of this or is that not yes hold on oh where' it go one second please yeah well I see under not
suitable we've got new stone rip wrap ditch Swale is that what you mean Scott I saw this is different you know what I'm thinking of like the you know the the detention ponds that we have adjacent to roads where you know the
settlement washes down into them so I saw that is different but maybe that's what's intended I'm not sure so working with Mark um you will notice that there are approved plans and
documents so Mark gave the okay for DPW to use these green infrastructure BMP design standards for paved roads and then the unpaved roads specs for unpaved
roads um and this is the one pvpc did I believe Beth is familiar with this from ammer uh but it does have a bunch of green infrastructure how to use it guide sizing
locations um and they're all you know tree boxes bio swes things that just promote infiltration and don't have a point source discharge that will be permitted
under this bundled notice of intent and allow your DPW to install them in accordance with the plans and the specs in the back uh
both documents the unpaved and the paved are meant to be utilized and installed locally with local staff to reduce
costs so you have your conceptual design your tables on how to size it the n y covers the installation it covers the work and then you
have a lot more storm water mitigation that is infiltration and removing both Total suspended solids as well as reducing phosphorous loaded does that make sense
so those installation of those as an as something new is under suitable projects under the bundle and I where as long as they have the 50 Foot setback it falls into the storm
water um number seven Redevelopment so yeah all um all retr fits and Improvement shall follow the green infrastructure and storm water bmps for dirt
roads and then the setback of 50 ft except for BLS and ilsf yeah I guess I just don't see anything under the the suitable projects under the bundled
nii that talks about this stuff oh you're the first person to raise that we add that wording to the suitable profits okay I could put it as
um uh any storm water uh retroit in compliance with approved plans of documents or you want me spell them out that's yeah Pro plans and documents
that are attached attached to the bundle yeah attached I put attached BMP designs and it is critical to note that the PVC PVP DC Green infrastructure one
can only be used on pave roads any sort of green infrastructure will fail on a dirt road and I have a whole another PowerPoint all about that that I'd be happy to present on a different
day yeah I think I think we're ready to take uh public comment um Miriam hi thank you um oh there we go hi I'm just gonna read through some comments and um I'm sorry
if they're a little out of order because I was editing them as you guys discuss some issues this is Miriam defont 74 pre Corner Road and I am making comments only on behalf of myself so I just want to make a couple observations one that we know that there are many resource
areas that are crossing roads and shsb as we know from The Experience on the Conservation Commission I mentioned I noted that there were some discussion about a mapped um or a inventory of Crossings um
as part of the noi I didn't see it in the packet maybe I overlooked it but um if it isn't included it would be really great if that was available to the public so that we could comment on it if we had um concerns about any of those Crossings and whether or not they were jurisdictional
um and as has been discussed um you know I was concerned that the notice of intent did not mention any of the resource areas that are protected specifically under the bylaw but not under the ACT um it didn't seem like there was any discussion or recognition about the bylaw and the regulations but
it seems like that's going to be getting addressed but of concern is um the fact that the bylaw protects both intermittent streams and isolated vegetated Wetlands but also seeps and Springs and the aura as a projected resource and
I'm concerned about what Provisions um in this notice of intent are addressing those resource areas um under the section around delineations and site visits um I'm concerned because the procedure involves possibly a springtime
site visit um but also perhaps site visits before work is going to um commence and some of the resource areas such as intermittent streams and vernal pools really are seasonally dependent for their delineation so if work was going to
begin let's say in August a Vernal pull or an intermittent stream might not be evident um additionally if the commission on a given site visit was might not be equipped with enough data in order to make a determination about a Vernal pool or an isolated stream which
ideally should be documented and observed over time um I'm not sure how this would work in practice particularly during dry periods um the other question I have for delineations and site visits it sounds like possibly a single commissioner might be making a final
determination and um I don't think all Commissioners would have the same level of expertise and identifying delineating complex Wetland delineations it would be ideal if we had an agent but we don't um and if two Commissioners were present
and they were making a final determination during a site visit I'm wondering whether or not that might be an open meeting law violation um in addition um in the discussion around some of these adjustments about what might be an
allowed project or a not allowed project one of my concerns about tying uh what's allowed to the size of culverts and to whether or not it is just a drainage Culvert is that it may lead to isolated streams being
underestimated because the work might be done during times when there uh is a dry period or um you know there may be a tendency to underestimate it and um regard more of them as drainage channels
rather than intermittent streams or to undersiz culverts as was brought up before in order to stay under that threshold so I would really encourage the commissioner not to have it tied to the size of culverts because um you know
yeah I think it's enough said um in terms of the aura and vernal pools I'm also concerned that there's no modification in terms of performance standards or procedures for the aura vernal pools although they're a
sensitive environmental area and I would recommend narrowing the list of permitted activities if they're in the aura of a Vernal pool in order to ensure that those sensitive areas are more protected under the DP comments and I'm
almost done I know there's a lot of comments here um there was a mention about flow protection devices and the maintenance summary for them um to be included in the documents but those were not available to the public so if there is a maintenance manual um that's going
to be included for Beaver flow protection Beaver Dam flow protection devices I'd like to ask that that be made available before the next public hearing um there was also some discussion among the DP comments about the maintenance um of storm water features
that might involve the removal of sediments however as we know on the uh unpaved roads many of the country drains require uh maintenance that does involve the removal of sediments and Stones so I'm not really sure how this could be
conditioned in a way as to not result in removal as the comment suggests the this comment said that um well you can go back and look at the Deb comments this was in com the comment number four um so I think that there
needs to be some greater clarification about what kind of alterations in a resource area would be permitted um on unpaved roads where You' have um it's not just cleaning sediments out of a paved Channel or an armored Channel you
just have Cuts in the bank or of the road or um in the ground um in terms of that list of allowed work the other comments I had were um you know there's some discussion about mechanical mowing being a part of the um procedures that are allowed and I
just want to make an observation that we know that mechanical mowing does spread increase the risk of spreading invasives including invasive not we and we've seen issues where the highway department has pav um mowed and has led to an
entrenchment of not weed patches um the other list items on the list of allowed work that I had questions about one was the maintenance of head walls um which to me sounds like alteration of bank usually repairs to um head walls is
considered to be Bank um and it seems like that should not be included in the list of allowed work it should require noi um Additionally the grading of slopes is not really well defined and changes in grade is considered an alteration under the bylaw so I'm not
sure how this could be allowed without a permit uh because there would be a need to determine whether or not the grading changes are going to affect hydrology um to just give you an example of how this can apply in real world
conditions I just would like to share with the commission my own experience on my own property on PRACK Corner Road where um we have a Vernal pool that exists on our property and the edges of the Vernal pool are outside of the right
of way so it is totally within our property and does not um come under the jurisdiction of the Town however in the spring of 2019 when there was a some storm water erosion on our road and the highway department was repairing a Swale
they decided to bring in heavy equipment when my husband and I were not at home and they dug a channel from the Vernal pool to the road and took out part of our stone wall and completely drained the Vernal pool
during the breeding season which led to uh the Vernal pool being empty of um breeding species for two years it's finally rebounded um for whatever reason the highway department believed that that veral pool which was holding back water
was somehow contributing to erosion on the road um the concern I have is that we weren't notified and it would be nice to have some notification procedure for land owners if there's going to be work in resource areas or near resource areas so land owners could be aware and could
communicate with the highway department before the work happens um if there's some concerns we have put up signs and we have asked the highway department not to mow in that area during the breeding season um for that reason um I think the
problem is that um there are a lot of resource areas it's difficult for the highway department to know uh when they're out there doing work when they're jump when they're encountering a resource area um and um they need guidance but um I'm a little concerned
that this NY may not identify all of the possible areas where um some guidance is going to be needed so okay thank you and um I'll leave it at that okay thanks Miriam um
I guess I feel like on that note um I think you guys have a few things to look at with with the bundle noi and um if you're in agreement we will continue the hearing until our next meeting which is in two weeks on
the 27th does that work for for you Angela and Megan and Andre let me check quick Bob you got your hand up yeah I just wanted to say um you know I
certainly love the idea of uh fast tracking and working closely with the DPW um but I think it's important that the DPW be represented at at these hearings well that's I was gonna say he I talked to him earlier and I thought he he said he was going to be here um so I
just want to make sure that he's here for the next meeting so we should I'd like to check with him to make sure he's available thank you we're back to having meetings every two weeks um so we have two in April also if you can't make I am
available on the 27th but I would not be available April 10th if that is when yeah that's our next yeah that would be our next meeting would be April
10th yeah I'm unavailable that evening so I can do the 27th I'm not available on the 27th but I I I don't think that should stop you guys but let's make sure Dave is
available I think that needs to be here all right well we'll continue the hearing to the 27th officially at this point if you guys need to change it you know just get back in touch with us but um so I think
just as a backdrop so um the concerns that we heard I think the the the benefit of the bundled noi is that you'd be establishing a routine thing that's happening each year and so you'd have
idea of the work that's going to happen you'd be able to have that list possi potentially publicly available and there would be more consideration before the work happens um of
impacts to resources and stuff and I don't know how you've been doing it now but in most towns the sometimes things just happen like um that Resident described and hopefully
this would set up uh a a better line of communication yeah I would 100% agree the the whole idea is a move in the right direction just in terms of communicating with the PW and having a routine of them you know submitting a
list to us and us doing the site visits and and looking at the sites it's just that is going to be Improvement so um so anyway I need a motion to can I have one quick thing yep um the head wall
question is covered under the limited project provision that are included so that is the minuscule work that could happen in bank but but in theory it's NE
NE I'm tired I can't get the word out negligible because it's very temporary okay and that's why it falls under the limited project provision because that does allow you to work in
resource areas and not meet performance standards for very specific activities As Long as You Follow the provisions and then the D comment um that she had brought up Mark's
comment specifically had to do with cleaning CTS and not swailes so that was addressed by if you're cleaning the Culvert yeah remove like the sticks and leaves but don't remove the
natural sediment because you want that continuity yeah yep that is what Mark was talking about all right well thank you very much
um thank you so I need a motion uh to continue the hearing until March 27th I think we have something at 7:15 so why don't we say 7:45 pm. the hearing
7:45 March 27th okay second got okay motion from mayor second and by Bob great um Douglas hi Fox hi
con hi Rowan hi and Wilson I all right great well we'll we'll hopefully see everybody in two weeks if DPW can come that' be great thank you thanks all right I just have to let my
dog in sorry I almost just ended the meeting for everybody because I'm still host could you make me host I'm working on it right now one sec says I'm host thank you all right awesome you are very welcome thank you
having a wonderful evening you too bye all right next on the agenda is to talk again about um Mark Mark Whitman's um conservation restriction for lot
h151 um and I hope everybody has gotten the latest version and so there's a Redline version that was sent around and then also a word version that was a clean copy and a PDF I think I sent those around just this afternoon and
then also Donna McNichol had made comments and I sent those guys those to you guys too so don is here to uh talk to us about her comments and unfortunately Mark was
gonna come tonight but um he can't make it so let me get my Donna do you want to um just quickly review your comments sure um so a lot a lot of my comments
were somewhat generic and making sure that this becomes a final document when we're ready to get it signed um title conservation restriction needs to go at the very top the comments on taxes
um instructions comments on um links and the watermarks model CER Watermark you know somebody needs to get rid of all those I mean certainly my Legal
Assistant can do it but I'm assuming there's somebody that's working on it that can but if that doesn't work we can do it at the office but the point is is just to sort of get rid of all the Superfluous great stuff when you're filling them out but that needs to be
taken away before they get in the registry of deeds but I also will note that um EA asks that if you make major any sort of significant or material changes to the document that you do
leave that redlined when it goes to EA for um signatures so that they know what changes you made and I think the two places that that may be important or at least two of the places that I think is
a great example of where that would be important is what you decide to do on forestry practices and what you decide to do on solar installations so when we get to those sections you can talk about it but if you're going to make changes from the CR
that's drafted in those sections you'd probably want to leave those red lines in so my understanding we now have a survey of the property that'll be attached as exhibit B um we did get meets and Bounds descriptions the only thing that we need
to do is compare the meets and Bounds with the survey to make sure it's they're consistent um sometimes just typos and stuff happen and one doesn't match the other and so just a quick I can do that in my office unless one of
you wants to do it just let me know you know if you have a to-do list for me on it but make sure that the meets and Bounds that Mark sent match the survey that's done um a lot of the generic town mayor
language that kind of thing's been cleaned up thank you very much but just one quick one read final read through to make sure all of that's dealt with would be great um there were a couple typos I noticed that um spell check didn't catch
until when it should be unto kind of thing so but those have been taken care of although I did find another typo that I'll point out while we're doing it exhibit a will specifically be the meats and Bounds of the property so it's just
going to say you know the property on um whatever the address is I can't remember what it is leverate Road bounded and described as follows and then the cad meets in bounds as long as it matches we'll just be put into exhibit a after
that langu um Baseline report they're still working on that is that correct yeah all right so the only thing that I would point out is you're when you're approving the document it says right in the document
that the Baseline report the Conservation Commission um states that it's accurate and complete so just make sure you know you give it a good eyeball to make sure you really do feel like like it's accurate and
complete um so then the only the things that I think still need discussion are um section 3B 11 we can start there um 3B 11
is um permitted activities of forest management and I don't know what you want in paragraph 11 around it's going to be 14.7 S acres and I don't know what you want about
Forest management practices on those 15 Acres yeah this is so we've looked at the CR a number of times um and actually I can't remember in the end what we all decided about this last time but I'm still I'm a little I'm opposed to it a
bit and then I actually looked at the deari one and under forestry the first statement in the deari one is um something similar to with like with with prior written approval from the grantee
which in this one it doesn't have that as sort of this the start to this description of four so if we're going to if we are going to go with allowing forestry I I think I may even want that to be the first sentence so that there is approval from us because that that's
the first sentence for the solar part which is uh number 13 the first sentence re prior written approval of the grantee umit I think I have a deari one here somewhere yeah that's perfectly legitimate to add and that can just be
added to um I don't know whether you're going to pick permitted activities no Forest activities or requirement of a forward or requiring a forward Forest stewardship plan it's getting late um so
you know I think you all just need to decide which of those you think is appropriate I don't know these 15 Acres I don't know you know what's around them I don't know how you get into them or anything of that nature so um you know I
think that that's specific to all of you whether you think um Forest management should go on on the property whether there should be a requirement of for Forest stewardship plan or whether there shouldn't be any given the size of the
lot it's just up to you and what you think is best for conservation purposes my reflection of our conversation with Mark and we would just need to follow up with them I I thought when we had talked
about this we did Express concerns over how that was worded and the size of the lot and I my recollection Beth is that he had indicated that maybe that provision
was not as important and um I so I I guess I left that feeling that in the next revision that probably wouldn't read the same and wouldn't um that we wouldn't have the
provisions allowing it that being said I'm I would be okay having it if it was you know subject to the review from concom um and approval that way but it's a pretty small lot so I just I kind of
wonder if it's that the juice isn't worth the squeeze on this just to you know to to entertain you know logging plans for such a small property but I don't even know I don't even know I don't think
Forest stewardship plans are required are they on 15 Acres on on a lot that size yeah I don't know I thought it was 20 acres under the forestry management plans yeah I think think you're right
God I thought we we talked about allowing uh some take of trees for person personal use separate yeah that's a separate that's c um you know there's three different
parts to the forestry SE forestry section of this and C is harvesting for personal use um the sustainable cutting of trees only for the granter personal use not to exceed and then they there's where you can fill in the board
feet um or records per year i' i' say that I'd say that' be fine and not have a you know a forry component then so delete A and B and put
um with the approve written prior written approval of the Conservation Commission under Harvest for personnel use and then have a discussion mark my understanding is Mark's going to be at the next meeting um with with how much
board feet or cords you're talking about which would need to be filled in is that so I I you know I think that's what I would tell him we're doing with 11 and have a discussion on whether he has any
issue with that sounds good yeah seems like that's what the consensus is all right so A and B are gone c will just be there and it'll say with the prior written approval of the
Conservation Commission the sustainable cutting of trees only for granter personal use blah blah blah yep prior approval from the grantee that seems to be who they keep referring to yeah we can say granty instead of Conservation Commission that's fine but
it says all over the document all right all right um so then the next section all right that takes care of Forestry is section
13 in the same um section B about permitted activities and that's the one on green energy yeah that one I like that it starts with with prior written approval of the
grantee um it's such a small parcel again I I can't imagine that they would want to put up a big solar field in there um then that there's this weird capacity
limit at that's the last sentence that I didn't actually quite understand what it meant it says shall be limited to a capacity not higher than that necessary to meet or exceed up to 20% at the time of installation the power requirements of
the permitted ax and uses so does that mean the energy the only energy that could be produced within the CR would be for activity that are being done in the CR because but you can have that 20% that can go to the
grid right so in high capacity times you can have a 20% additional power being produced and if you do then that can go to the grid and on the property I'm trying to
imagine what what permitted ation uses would require any energy this is like Forest land right we're not we're not allowing them to do anything on it so that seems kind of weird I I I guess for me on this one I'm I'm just
trying to think about the intent here and as I understood it I think the intent is to set this aside as conservation land to protect it as Forest land protect the forest protect the wetlands um so to me it just doesn't
make any sense to have a provision in here for this type of activity if you know I'm trying to Envision some you know some future requests where we would be allowing for that in such a
small parel any type of solar field would be I think pretty impactful on on the lot as small as it is so I'm just kind of thinking if if we're trying if the highest and best use this would be for
energy project then it's not a very good foit very good fit for a CR if it's a if it's a good fit for the CR then it's probably not a great fit for this so I would get rid of that provision but well and I think the other issue is is my
understanding is he's got a um carve out for residential that's a fairly nice size lot right it's about four acres is that correct so I mean if he wants solar for a house it's certainly there's more than
enough room in that 4 acre parcel and and then of course you go on the roof and all the other options so I'm I'm not convinced that a solar array is necessary in the conservation area um
given the size of the property and that it'll be a residential use but it's it's up to all of you yeah I'm fine with that I so delete 13 yeah sure yes am I getting yes is all
around here yes I mean what I'll do is I'll email Mark or you can however you choose to let him know that these are what was determined on these Provisions that I raised in my comment period um
then in section nine um I wanted to make sure it was changed to 60 days for municipalities given that you're a municipality so you don't have to give the notice provision isn't um 30
days so the 30 days comes out and that becomes 60 yep that was changed in the red line version okay yeah I've got the my older version I was going to ask that um and then like they said I really need to
make sure you review the Baseline report and then the only other thing I found getting ready for tonight is in 14 B I think a effect is supposed to be effect but but I'm not positive liberally construed in order to
affect the purposes right yeah I think it's effect all right the effect is the what happens effect with an a is a verb I think something like
that you get the diagram that sent for extra credit we don't do that anymore do we no they don't no extra credit well no one diagrammed sentence it went away with trying to figure out how to calculate
square roots right yeah it's gone it's not in there anymore that's just curriculum not the way it used to be in cursive right I was just gonna say who's old enough to remember
cursive me sad but true um so did anybody have any questions about it for me other than these basically sort of talking points concerns things they thought should be in here that
aren't did we ever uh put in writing what type of payment will be involved in the beginning there's sort of a generic thing yeah it doesn't say I mean it it appears that there there won't be a
payment don't we want a pay be a gift to the town and the way that works out is then he gets an appraisal of what the CR is worth all you have to do is sign saying that you receive the gift you do
not agree to the value that's between him and the IRS we have nothing to do with that um so he would gift it to the town you would sign off that it was given to you as a gift and then he would get ano and deal with his taxes on what
kind of deduction he gets for that gift to the town well we had talked about um and and and he Mark had been kind of I think on board with this or at least he understood why we were asking for um sort of an
endowment um and this that's for doing yeah down doing uh future inspections annual inspections that are typically required of all CRS um and I think we had thought about $10,000 because I
don't know we saw somewhere similar numbers it's 4% interest a year which is $400 which typically can cover a um uh monitoring um so I don't know where that language goes I don't know if that goes
into the in the statement of the grant it would go in the statement of the grant um that in addition to the gift of the land Mr Whitman will be pay paying to the town Conservation Commission
$10,000 for the expense of monitoring the conservation restriction um so yeah we can put that in if that's what's agreed to and I'll add that to the list that I'm going to send him on what we discussed tonight
that that would be added to a statement of Grant sounds good Mark say Mark had asked to come to one of our April meetings just so you guys know so we'll we'll be talking about this one more time
um and that would be perfect we can kind of go over the final things did we get a response on whether there's a mortgage on it or not I didn't see anything okay because that's another provision that
has to be addressed anything else so I'll send an email to Mark tomorrow saying that the Conservation Commission discussed the the CR that we agree with
the CH Redline changes that have been made in addition to those we want Forest management except for for personal use to be stricken and then um do you want
to propose cord feet or do you want him to propose it the the endowment yeah you know no how no not the endowment the um cord feet because remember that's blank in there how many
board feet or how many chords he can take out sorry I was yeah yeah yeah um so that's something we we should talk about for a few minutes I saw that in the deari um CR he they sort of isolated a section of
that of the CR area that where there could be any personal forestry and then they said four chords A year um but then in this draft CR there's this little calculation that says like what did it say half half of
the half of the half of the Acres so this is this is 14 acres so half would be more like seven cords a year but I'm not so familiar with you know how much is an
accord maybe uh Scott do you know a little bit more about like what if if we' said four cords a year for example like how many trees is that I'm trying to think I think a log truck I want to say has like seven
that's my guess right it's like a a logging truck full is about when you cut up I think it's suppos to sevenish cords all right well that's that's more than anybody with a wood stove would need a
year depends on how efficient your wood stove is but yeah I I mean that's so yeah you don't have to worry about that I think for personal use I mean it seems like half that would probably be pretty
reasonable so if we went with four like what's in the deari CR four chords a year that seem I'm happy to go with them propose that to Mark and see if he says something
different okay did you want to designate somewhere in the um survey where it could be taken from or from anywhere on the 14 acres 15 Acres I guess I just want to well I mean
obviously there's Wetland areas um so maybe we do want to take a look at the map of the 14 acres um yeah we might want to designate or at least at least include language in there
that you in compliance yeah in compliance with the uh watland protection act and you spraying by law I just Googled it it says H if there're straight logs it's eight chords
if it's kind of a mix it's seven and a half good to know all right so we're forestry personal use only four chords strike remaining sections A and B and the removal of the four cords in compliance with the
Wetland protection act and the bylaw yep with with written per notice to the prior written approval of the grantee yes do you want to be involved in that you know like when he's gonna go
cut whoever is gonna go cut trees yeah do we really want to be involved in that is it going to be Scouts Honor that they cut four chords or not um let me see do what how about with
prior written notice then you want to be involved you can and if you don't or if you or if you suspect that more than four cords are being taken out you know then you can go investigate yeah that keeps them half
honest yeah okay and then on green energy take out remove completely and then in the grant one statement of Grant add
$10,000 contributed to the concom yes yes anything else I don't have anything else be good to get this finally done this has been on our plate for a while
I did I did just want to say that um you know having look at many conservation restrictions this is is quite a good one um it's a we certainly got a lot of bang for our buck it's a beautiful piece of land and its
preservation is is really a great gift that we're getting from Mark in this case good yeah I don't think the planning board does this very often so I'm just I'm gonna ask him about the mortgage because we still don't have an answer to that prior
written notice of for forestry personal use four cords um in compliance with the Wetland protection and by and bylaw green energy takeout completely um in article one statement
add $10,000 contributed to the concom fix the P typo effect aect clean up the document and I'll just you know I don't know whe they've been doing this I believe so I'll mention that at least
that what we would like that done and then exhibit a will be the meets and Bounds and exhibit B will be the survey and we're not going to require them to do anything about forestry in the survey because of the minimal amount
we're allowing to be taken out sounds good yes yes it's getting there it's getting to a final document y all right I will um I'll copy of Beth so you can get it to the commission I'll send that out to Mark tomorrow and say
this is our discussion and um any issues he has can be discussed when he attends the meeting but docent that we're that we would like to go with that's yeah that sounds great um he he he said he can't come on the 27th so
it would probably be the first meeting in April that we we'll put him on the agenda for which is the 10th just so you know Donna because he probably want you to be there hopefully it can come on the 10th yeah I don't know my calendar in
front of me but I think it's fine okay I'll let you know if it's not okay thank you Donna anything else for me no we're good oh yeah great thank you so much all right um I'll get the email out and we'll see where it goes
great thank you all right have a good evening you too all right uh let's just move a few things really quickly I know it's already 9:25 um numbers seven on our agenda is the Army Corps of Engineers soiling groundwater testing at the
library site um and this went through uh where they they asked us what to file Mato and I told them RDA they were on their way to do an RDA and then all of a sudden we got an email from which I
think everybody's seen from Army Corps saying that they aren't required because they're a federal agency to um file anything under well protection act or under local bylaw kind of things and I did email the woman back and asked for
the actual um sort of provision or or policy and she didn't send anything I again I think you guys saw that email what she say
Hy just a general rule that and local regulations don't apply to Army Corps because it's a federal agency you know I it's hard to argue against these kinds of things I I've gone through it with state agencies like UMass and do and
they'll just come straight up and say nope we don't abide by local bylaws because if we did we'd be spending all of our time doing a butter notifications and stuff like that and um so you can only push them so far and so I gave it a shot to try to at least get the policy
from her and didn't even really get that but um I don't know that didn't bother me very much um because she did seem willing to share what their intentions were and you know what they were going to go do
no um yeah I mean she she gave I don't know if that was in some of the emails that people saw but I think there somewhere she they gave a little bit of a description of what they're planning to do
um so if that doesn't that if that doesn't answer our uh our you know what whatever whatever we would obtain through an RDA can't can't we just go back and forth with her a little bit and get our
own questions answered don't don't you think she'd be willing to do that I mean she doesn't have to have a gun to her head e no I just it's hard to um just with questions back and forth to really get
an idea if you know you don't have a a plan in front of you a map sort of showing you where exactly they're they're putting the wells and and also just access um they're going to have to go through the construction site which actually is a good thing because the
road is so um reinforced at this point because of the construction site but then as you go back on that road there definitely are some pretty wet areas last time that I think it was last time that they were doing
this kind of stuff they rded up the road a lot um you know yeah we can basically have a conversation with her and try to get some good talk about kind of things yeah you know they may be more flexible than they
seem they might I know there was some email where or I don't know if it was a conversation where they told talked a bit about what they're going to do um so anyway I'll try to get more information more of a description and and send it to
you guys yeah I know it's getting late um and then the only other thing is a more exciting thing is um so the eversource work on the on the
power line did you were you guys part did you hear about the meepa application for that no so work along the power line the power line that crosses cck Corner Road
um eversource is is proposing um to do a lot of vegetation removal along the edges to almost open it up a lot more part of the part of the whole big project they're doing is is maintenance to the Tower it's building of access
roads it's a giant project and it goes through a bunch of towns so they submitted to meepa um and I think we talked about this because I think we talked about this at the last meeting because Michael deir was kind of
asked by the select board to put together our our comments um on the enf that was submitted to meepa and so I did work with him about you work with on the comments to include things that had to do with the commission and then Miriam actually
submitted her own comments as a resident she just created comments submitted them to the state which is great um so that was that the the meepa part of it and I think I did share with you guys that eventually the
whole project will come to the concom as a notice of intent I think the date that they had in the enf was like sometime in 2026 so it's not we're not going to see it for a while um but it will eventually you know come to us and so then we'll
really have a good chance to look at the impacts to Resource areas from it but meanwhile just last week I get it we got an email from them about this project saying that in the end they're going to be looking for mitigation large amounts of mitigation
and so they're asking towns for ideas what what does what does large amounts of mitigation equate to it equates to things like my two ideas so far are there's this property on on Wendell road that came forward a bit recently where
the homeowner is wanting to protect and preserve the Land There was a little bit of a few emails and Mato lives right across the street so he was interested in it you know that's just a resident coming forward and saying this very large wonderful piece of property they'd
like preserved but they haven't talked to anybody like even kestal about grants or anything so that's a real beginning of a project this is the kind of thing where we could take a project like that and fund it um you know buy that piece
of land for the town so that was one I was thinking of the other is is just Southbrook instead of asking for more MVP funds for the construction the second year you know we're kind of in the process now for the MVP application this year but say we don't get that mvp
I mean I'm sorry I'm getting my grants mixed up CPA we're we're talking CPA for Southbrook and what if we don't get it um for you know say the construction portion of it um that this would this would that would be a I feel like that
also would be a good um project to propose to them so that's the kind of things that we're talking about another one might be that Culvert uh on monteu Road below the dam we removed yes Dudleyville Dam we've got
that weird little Culvert still there under the road yeah that would be good too because with that I think last year they applied for an MV Becky applied for MVP funding and didn't get it for that cover so that that's a good one because there's probably a little bit of research
already done on it yeah I wonder on the requirements for the mitigation path if we know more about like what it would have to be because you know like what you said the Southbrook project is Recreation but I
don't know if Recreation improving Recreation is good mitigation for what they're doing maybe it is I'm not sure um the property in window road is already protected by
conservation easements and so I think our purchase and I think the East open it to Public Access is my understanding too so our the town's purchase might be a
really good thing it might be a good fit for the mitigation but I'm not sure again exactly what they're looking for if it's additional protections it probably wouldn't be because I think the land's already
protected um but it would just be good to know more about like what the mitigation is so we can think think about some might because I sounds like a great opportunity I just don't know fit yeah I can read you what it just what it says I think you guys I
hopefully I always forget what I've sent to you what I try to send you you may have emailed it Beth I I but I don't recall seeing it but I'll I'll take a look yeah she's got um she talks about the project and then she just says um in the meantime we're seeking opportunities to provide Wetland mitigation for the
forested Wetland conversion that's what they call it and are looking to the conservation Commissions in each Town crossed by the project for suggestions on possible projects SL land in town that may provide such an opportunity for
example and then she's got culbert replacement daylighting projects land preservation um then she just put Etc so that's that's what they're thinking um so she does say what Wetland
mitigation so yeah but if you know if you're buying land that where you're preserving Wetland but also a covert which is certainly a wetland project but even even the work that we did propose in Southbrook a lot of it was had to do with kind of protecting wetlands in
terms of bridge bridge replacement and bog bridging and stuff those are good another one might be and I and I don't know I have no idea where they are on this but some of the dam safety requirements uh at the end of Lake wyola there they've
got a they've got leaks on the dam you know that's another CPA from Mark Rivers yeah so I don't know you know what progress where they are and all of that but that might be one and then another one might be some further work on the North
Cove where we've got sediment out the yinyang coming in there and it's a multi- gazillion dollar gorilla that I I don't know if they have enough planning done to then you know flag out portions of that like
like also they need to to if if they're going to fix that problem they need to get land above it you know that even goes into wendle so that might be something that the two towns could work on where some of that land is set aside to take some
of that water and get rid of the sediment before it hits the lake so I don't know something there maybe yeah that sounds that that sounds interesting I'm sure Wendell's part of this this whole where power line goes I'm pretty sure
um okay those are all good I can I can you know just respond to her with a very general email just listing all of these things and we can spend all their money yeah right right no
problem their money yeah we we'll take it all if the other towns aren't jumping on it I wonder just looping back to the conversation we had earlier about the town's interest in you know doing work
on some of these Perpetual these Perpetual problem gravel roads that are impacting resource areas and we have I think they are forested wetlands I think about monu road is being one I think about wendle road is being one
there are others to BR Corner would be another um and so I wonder if are there some mitigation measures that could be funded this way to protect those resources and help the town with some of their You Know lesson
their maintenance cost for these gravel roads I think that could be a a real win-win yeah we could have we could talk with the other group that was here earlier the furog people about all the places they identify
right if we could fund some ways to make them more resilient because right now they're I mean I just look at what you know I drive window all the time but it's you know a large part of the road is washing into the wetlands as we as we
speak just because it's you know our Winters have changed so much and it's raining it's just amazing the erosion taking place down some of those deep slopes but it would be I think there are some things that could be done done that would keep that from occurring or at
least minimize it yeah just just on that same note uh uh Scott the uh Town Lake waya erosion subcommittee is looking at a lot of different things on that uh different types of gravel crowning the road to get the water off of the road as quickly as
possible so it doesn't become a corridor of uh uh where it picks up speed and sediment so um there should be some conclusions coming out of that sometime in the next two or three months yeah so taking some of that work that Bob is mentioning combined with furog I bet
there are a suite of things that could really help the town and and actually you know protect forested Wetlands here too in in addition to all the other suggestions that were there so yeah well what's great about our list
is it it covers everything and I think maybe that's good because they can look at that and and sort of pinpoint what type of project makes more sense as mitigation for what they're doing you know is it land acquisition
and preserving you know a wetland area or is it more like helping with road road maintenance and stuff great thank you people that's very helpful um right I hate to say it but I don't think we're
going to get to the bylaw the regulations tonight thought we were but it's 9:40 at night um so hopefully at our next meeting we've we've got yeah because uh the CR
is not even coming back to the next meeting so I think our next meeting will be a little lighter we'll be able to get to the regulations all right anybody have anything else yeah while we were on the subject of classes earlier related to MCC I was
wondering um our our circuit writer had had offered to do some like an in-house training I was wondering if it had a chance to hear back from him yeah that kind of fell apart because he couldn't come that night that we were
gonna do it and um yeah I haven't gotten back to him I think I think I asked him if he could come not on a meeting night and do just a special training yeah and and he said he was going to reach out to some other towns and do try to do like a
training that would he'd invite U you know a few different towns concom to come to a night that was that would just be training um but I'll check in with them Okie do would that be in in person or or uh via
Zoom he likes in person but um I don't but I can tell them that maybe it would be easier for our folks if it was a zoom kind of thing yeah I mean I'm okay with in in person too if if that's what's done just so just put that out there
okay all right I'll email them all right looking for a motion to adjourn I'd like to make a motion to adjourn second a second great
con hi Fox hi Douglas hi Rowan hi and Wilson hi all right thanks everybody great thanks commissioner good night good night