Wednesday, November 4, 2026
Subscribe Advertise Donate Advertiser Log In
Support free local journalism for all of Wayland. Donate Now
Donate Subscribe
Try: Select Board School Committee Real Estate Town Meeting Budget

October 21, 2026 – Conservation Commission – Video & Transcript

play-sharp-fill

October 21, 2026 - Conservation Commission

 
LanguageEnglish
Okay. All right. So we have a quorum, right? And I think, Luke, if I'm correct, what Sean usually does is just read the top part of the agenda as we introduce the meeting. So I will go ahead and do that. All right. The location for the in-person meetings is wheelchair accessible. If you need other accommodations in order to participate in the meeting, please contact Wayland's ADA coordinator at 508-358-7755 at least two business days in advance of the meeting. While the municipality will do its best to accommodate you, certain accommodations may require the hiring of outside contractors who may not be available if requested immediately before the meeting. This meeting may be recorded, and if recorded, it will be made available to the public on WACAM as soon as possible after the meeting. Public will be excluded from executive sessions. Pursuant to Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2025, this meeting will be conducted in person and or via remote access in accordance with applicable law. If this meeting has only remote access, no in-person attendance by members or the public will be permitted. If this meeting has remote access, one may watch and participate remotely with the meeting link that can be found on the agenda. When required by law or allowed by the chair, persons wishing to provide public comment or otherwise participate in the meeting may do so at the meeting location in person or remote access as applicable. Public comment should be limited to two minutes. If the meeting is recorded, the meeting will be recorded at 632 minutes per person. The meeting is called to order at 632. I think we'll go right into public hearings, yes? Yes. All right. The first item on the list, and again, Luke, correct me if I'm wrong, but we usually read the entire filing, right? Yes. So it's MWRA, Interconnection and Happy Hollow Water Treatment Facility, DEP file number 32. 322-1068 continuation for notice of intent filed pursuant to whalen's wetlands and water resource protection bylaw chapter 194 and the wetlands protection act 310 cmr 10.0 submitted by the whalen department of public works for the construction of new water infrastructure in whalen the proposed work includes the connection to the mwra water system construction of a pump station and water treatment facility and replacement of a water main the project area is within 100 feet of boring vegetated wetlands and bank boring land subject to flooding and the 200 foot riverfront area the project shown on the whalen assessor's map 42c 42d 42b 43a 37 38 and 33 excuse me don't don't we have to open the meeting didn't i open it well i i didn't yeah i thought we don't we normally um say that we're all here no we should take attendance did we not oh sorry i did it sometimes i wrote it down i wrote it down my apologies but yes so we have we have uh luke legere we have cliff lewis we have shannon fisher john store barbara howell uh and lisa aubin uh sean fair not present sorry i do i've been doing a lot of these lately no that's okay this is my first time so i appreciate it so we've done the roll call we have a quorum i've introduced the meeting and uh the first item on the agenda and we also need a vote from the commission because the mwr would like to continue this meeting until november 10th which i like to bring to your attention is a tuesday night because the wednesday is veterans day so we cannot we're not having a meeting on on the 11th okay so okay so the applicant has requested a continuation yes so i move that we continue this hearing under both chapter 194 and the state act to november 10th 2026 after 6 30 pm and do we have a second second okay roll call uh john yes cliff yes barbara yes uh luke yes shannon yes all right and lisa is a yes so we will continue all right next up uh agenda item 2b west massachusetts central rail trail dep file number 322-1069 continued notice of intent filed pursuant to whalen's wetlands and water resource protection bylaw chapter 194 and the wetlands protection act 310 cmr 10.0 submitted by the department of conservation and recreation for the construction of a trail on an inactive railroad right of way beginning in sudbury and extending to whalen the proposed work is with unharmed the project is shown on whalen assessors map 22 23 26 and 27 linda well let's start with amber i see her on from dcr and uh if she wants to start it off and um let us know what's what what's new and different from last time yeah um i'm joined by my colleague linda and i'm joined by my colleague linda and i'm joined by my colleague linda and i'm joined by my colleague linda and i'm joined by my colleague linda and i'm joined by my colleague linda and i'm joined by my colleague um our consultants from vhb um our consultants from vhb um our consultants from vhb marissa wanna say hi marissa project manager marissa wanna say hi marissa project manager marissa wanna say hi marissa project manager well everyone good evening marissa gets well everyone good evening marissa gets well everyone good evening marissa gets awfully asked project manager from vhb awfully asked project manager from vhb awfully asked project manager from vhb um and then we have casey who's standing um and then we have casey who's standing um and then we have casey who's standing in for dan who was with us in our last in for dan who was with us in our last in for dan who was with us in our last hearing hearing hearing i'm pc bardier environmental scientist i'm pc bardier environmental scientist with vhb um and so what we have done is we had sent two memos in a week ago one memo was in response to the dep comments that we received and one memo was specifically targeted to comments from the commission we did put together just a handful of slides about those comments from the commission um particularly the one about the overlook and the wetland replication have a visual component but happy to take your lead linda and how you want us to go through those i don't know startup um we're here to listen yep okay great
so yes so i'm going to first just address the um commission comments and if there's anything that needs to be discussed regarding the dep ones we can do that next
okay so this is the same cover slide as last time i did not repeat the whole presentation this is really just about the specific comments so this is a photo of the rail corridor looking west toward sunbury and this is the crossing at the sunbury river okay um marissa do you want to take the first one about the wetland replication and restoration yeah that sounds great thanks amber so just the next few slides i'm just going over um some answers to comments we got on the replication area from both the commission and dep um we know that the rep was mentioned at the first leading meeting um so we are just confirming that the replication area is designed at a one to one and a half replication ratio um it was stated there were some inconsistencies in the narrative and while we did not resubmit the narrative in our comment response in our memo that we submitted last week um we are confirming that it is a one and two one and a half replication ratio um i showed on the plans there are a hundred one hundred sixty nine square feet of impacts um and i wrap that up in a comment following that there was no replication area is designed at 255 square feet. Thanks for next slide. So this is just a snip from the plan showing the updated replication area. It was redesigned slightly to continue along the existing wetland for a little longer to provide more hydrological connection, but still the same area. So it's a little longer instead of before you saw it was a little wider. And that's just some updates we made to the planting schedule to more align better with what's out there today in the existing conditions and just the cross section of the replication area.
Okay, the other question that was asked of us was why the contours and the grading details were not shown on the plan for the sake of simplicity. And ease of reading the plans, they were not included, but we did include quite a few cross sections along all the stations. And this is just a sample of two of them, not represented with the whole corridor, but just showing that we have done all the cut fill calculations that have the topography. The bottom cross section does show the location of the overlook, which we had a few questions on. So I have a few slides about that. You usually contours are topographical. They're not cross sections. Right. We didn't resubmit all the plans with just topography on them. But so Cliff, one reason I think they did this is because of the Amber and I talked about the direction of flow off the the rail trail, you know, whether it should be crowned in the middle or or sent away from the priority habitat, the rock washbrook area, you know, and direct more towards the northern side of the of the trail. So I think that's that's partially why this is done this way. It's to show that, you know, we really want the flow to go towards the landfill and not towards the washbrook area. Okay, sure. Understood.
Yeah, any questions here at the end, we can we can go back to these. So the timber overlook, this is the same slide as last time. And since we last met, we went out there and just took a second look at exactly where it was located, and provided some rationale for why that location is where it is. So you know, I'm actually going to just go to the aerial first, because I think this better explains or shows where the overlook is in context of the plan. Rather than the plan documents. So this is the landfill site. This is the crossing of the Sudbury River, the access point is over here at route 20. So this overlook is approximately a quarter mile west of the Sudbury River, and between these two Eversource towers. So let me go back to some of the rationale around this is this spot provides a unique view of the marsh that's separate from views that's found on the bridge. And it is clear phragmites and tolerant vegetation. That was a question because there is some phragmites on the north side. So I think folks just wanted to make sure we weren't putting it in a location that will be blocked. Having been out there and spent some time out there, it is a lot quieter, as far as the noise from the road, which I think is a good location. Again, the area is accessible from the route 20 intersection and both the path and the bridge can accommodate emergency vehicle loading and with requirements. It also maintains a visual connectivity to future the future landfill redevelopment site with sufficient separation to support wildlife viewing. And then there were some questions about just general safety and who might be accessing it. You know, this area has relatively open sightlines which supports passive surveillance and overall user safety. It's not hidden away. Even though it is kind of remote from an access point. The design is consistent with DCR's public access amenities, including decks, docks, across our parklands and does not enter, would not cause an issue with operational or safety hazards. These are amenities that we're used to managing across the entire state. So I would say it's consistent with that. So yeah, so this is the location in plan view. And then this is just a quick diagram kind of highlighting the specific view to the marsh, as well as where the path and the overlook is in the context of the redevelopment site here and the towers on the left hand side. So hopefully that provides a little more sense of where this is beyond the previously submitted plans. That's it. I'm happy to go back to any slides or answer any questions. And then there's also the memo responding to DEP comments that we can talk through as well.
So I know, if I recall correctly, from the last meeting, Linda, one of your concerns about the location of the overlook was, you know, teenagers, you know, how in a way is it and, you know, causing a little bit of a ruckus. How do you feel about the location now? I mean, the location hasn't changed. I mean, are you guys providing, are you providing garbage bins and collecting garbage from this area? Or it's just... No, we actually find that that creates more of an operational issue because there's sometimes dumping and DCR's policy... Yeah. ...that is a policy that is generally carry in, carry out. Even if a facility like this, we actually have no trash cans on any of the Mass Central Rail Trail. Mm-hmm. For better or for worse. Yeah. Yeah, no, I mean, I didn't hear back from the police chief. I just wanted to see if he had any input on this, you know, how easy it would be to get to that location. I mean, I know at some point in the near future, they're planning on putting a trail through that lower part of the Route 20 landfill with the... Yeah. ...where the gate is at Route 20 that would allow people from across the street and the apartment complex to be able to access the trail. And so, it looks like it's a little bit closer to that, to where that entrance would be than to any of the other access points. But I think one thing, one critical thing is that we still need natural heritage. Did you get a letter from the... Yeah. Did you? No, you did get a letter? No, no. They're still in review. Okay. I'm just agreeing with you that that... Oh, okay, okay. I just remember when you said yes, I thought, oh, did you get something? Oh, yeah. No, no, no. Like, what we talked about is beyond some of these more user needs or operational decisions with the overlook. Concurrence from natural heritage, that it's okay to put that there is important, so. Okay. Yeah, the only other... That was one comment I had about asking about natural heritage. The other thing was, there was a lot, a huge table for cut and fill, which... I think is beyond anything that I really need to absorb. But... So, can you give me, like, the total amount of fill that you guys... That the plan is to put in? Do you have a number like that? Yeah, we do. Separated by town, right, Marissa? Yes. So, Linda, that table included in the DEP comments was showing that we are creating storage. Storage is going to be created because there's more cut than fill throughout the project at each elevation. Okay, okay. Yeah, I forget what the total number was. I think it is summarized somewhere. Yeah, the very last page by each elevation, we have the total. The very last page? So, I could... Oh, yeah, okay. It goes on for pages, that's why. Yeah. That's why. Okay. That's why in the narrative, we tried to present it in a more... Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And that's why in the narrative, we tried to present it in a way that was more digestible, but we wanted to now provide all of the backup to show how we got those numbers. Okay. Okay. And that's just mainly for the path itself, right? Before you put the asphalt down? Yes. Okay. All right. I mean, that's similar to what you did before. So, all righty.
And I know we have a couple of people that are participating that may want to chime in. I don't know if I saw... Who did I see? I saw, who's the host tonight? Do you know who's the host? I don't know. Any? On my team? It looks like Luke is according to what I'm seeing. Oh. Okay. So I don't know if- I didn't realize I was the host. Yeah. Okay. Okay. don't know well i just wanted to ask right it looks like it looks like i am uh but stephanie tom are on attendees i didn't know if they wanted to chime in um on on this uh if anybody wants to raise that okay yeah um so at least i'll defer to you when you want to take public comment if you want to do that now or hear from the commission well the commission might want to chime in first possibly so do we so one question is do we want to go there they also responded to the dep comments so do we want to focus on the response to the conservation commission comments first so are you posing that question to the commission oh it's proposing it to linda so oh oh i'm sorry the commission which was the replication they corrected that and then there was a discussion about the observation deck and then the the dep comments was about storm water and cut and fill and what else was there um i think that was it wasn't it the um wetland replication cut and fill and then storm water so i think i think we've done country drainage on the other on the other part on the other portion of um of the rail trail i think doing any other sort of storm water management is really going to cause a lot more destruction than is necessary for a path of this size and and the usage you know it's just pretty much walkers and bikers so when amber and i talked it's like it makes more sense like i said just to pitch it more towards the the landfill side and you know have have the drainage pretty maybe just mostly in one side you know a set up for that and um try to leave the other side alone which is you know right next to the riverfront right next to the bank and also you know within a priority habitat area where we find nested birds for both songbirds and and um the rare and threatened species so um that i mean i think that's what we had talked about and i think over the phone was that amber i forget yeah and we also went to sudbury concom on monday so it's been a bit um for the same project and that was when we with looks a little bit and that's what i mean i don't know what's going on in the league currently uh but but even though a number of our product the last few years and other projects oat have been street you Okay. The landfill reclamation that's just to the north of this includes a path which was going down to the rail trail. Is that integrated into your plan so that those two things actually connect? Yeah, I spent a little bit of time with, I forget who's the proponent from the landfill site, but I did receive the concept design that showed the path on the west side of the landfill site. And what we talked about is that seems so far down the road that I think the best approach is that we would build this and then ensure that access can be made. There might even have to be a small structure just to go over the wetland area. And so it kind of felt like premature to pick one small access point and hope it aligns with where that will be. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That can be accommodated over time. Most access points kind of come after the fact. Yeah. Two nice trails. And then when you get in the middle, you have to wade through the muck. Yeah. But it would be great to have that site as a complimentary public open space.
Any other questions from the commission? Yeah. Where is exactly Washbrook in relation to the platform that you're going to overlook? Let me pull up this diagram again.
Okay. So this is Washbrook, correct? I can't quite see it on there. It's the dark blue or blackish? Yeah, where it goes underneath. It's here. Right here. Yeah. See where the word overlook is, Barbara? The K is probably where it looks like it's right in the stream. So between 104 and 105 is under the or does it go under Yeah, this is the very large culvert right here between 104 and 105. That's where it goes under the railroad track. So is this development between the river and Washbrook? No. Looks like it's a little bit to the west of both. It's hard to figure out. Is it having no impact on Washbrook? No. In fact, we have this cross section here that shows that we're using helical piles, which is the lightest touch possible for structure. So you limit the amount of fill in an environmentally sensitive area. So. Yeah. This is just 10 feet out. But that is in the 100 foot of the riverfront, though, right? Yeah. I think so. Right, Marissa? Yes, I believe so. Yeah. To pull up the EV plant. Will that have a slatted, it'll have a like a like a wood slat, water will be able to get through or will it? Yeah. Okay, great. Yeah, they're kind of similar to this.
Well, that picture west of bridge with the arrow.
It looks like it's between Washbrook and the river. Yeah, that's not entirely accurate. I think I was trying to show it in perspective. Like this is the best. That picture. Yeah. Not real. Can you zoom in on that a little bit? Maybe Barbara could see it better. It's the yellow rectangle is the exact thing. Yeah. Oops. It's way down the path. Yeah. Okay. I'll have to walk it somehow to see where it is exactly. It looks like it's right near 103. Like just a little bit to the right of 103 there. Yeah, I think it's 125 feet east of 103. So I had to go out there and find it. Yeah. Okay. All right. Anything else related to this view or questions? No. Okay. Lisa, would we like to hear from the public? Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Okay. Okay. Lisa, would we like to hear from the public? Yes. Yes. Yes. You have a I have control. Yes. Access. Yes. Okay. I see one hand up here. Hi. I'm Tom Sciacca. And I have some material I'd like to share. Linda indicated I could do the share screen thing here. So I think that may mean you have to do something at your end. Tom, I think you need to turn your video on potentially. No. I think it looks like you've got permission. You have to move him over, don't you, I think, Cliff? He's moved over. He has moved over? He is, Cliff. I think you have permissions, Mr. Sciacca. I'm used to participating in these meetings as a panelist. And the screen I'm looking at is not what I'm used to. All right. Do you see him now? If you move your mouse, there's a button. There you go. Now you're a panelist. No, I did. I think we've got it squared now, hopefully as a panelist now. Let's see. I just turned my audio and video on, which indicates me as an Energy and Climate Committee member, which I am. But all right. Now, oh, and here's the share button. Okay. System. And now I have to find the... Okay. Can you all see my screen at this point? Kind of. There's just a bar. Yeah. Just a bar. There's the white stripe and the white field. Yeah. Just a bar. Just a bar. Oh. Well, my thing says I am screen sharing. Okay. I was afraid of this. Linda, you indicated you could share from the emails. I could try, because I only have that on email. So, let me see what happens if I do this. I think, Mr. Siecka, you're going to have to stop sharing so that... Yeah, because it says you cannot share while another person is sharing. Okay. Okay. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. Now, I'm going to try and stop sharing, but I'll try and start here while another participant is sharing, so... Okay. How do I... Let's see. You are... Oh. Stop share. I see. Okay. Okay. I used to make my living basically doing presentations, but that was in the days when it involved overhead projectors and transparencies, so... It was easier in those days. I agree with you, Barbara. I thought you might remember that. All right. This is actually, Linda indicated she sent you all a copy of the first email that I sent her before your first session when I was in Ireland. So all I could do was write some text. And I, too, most of you know me, some for many decades, but for the state people, my name is Tom Sciacca. I'm a retired engineer. I, for the last 27 years, I've been Wayland's representative to the Sudbury-Asmut and Concord Wild and Scenic River Stewardship Council. That's the group under the National Park Service that administers the outstandingly remarkable values of our wild and scenic rivers. For the last 17 years, I've been a member of Wayland. I'm on the Wayland's Energy and Climate Committee, trying to deal with the climate change issue that I tried to stop 35 years ago when I founded a company to try to address climate change back in the day. I obviously failed. So now I'm focusing on adaptation to the climate change that we have, in spite of my best efforts. Okay. And the issue that I'm addressing here is the primary climate change issue that Wayland has is flooding. And this is a climate change issue because of the fundamental changes in precipitation that have occurred as a result of climate change. And the climate action mobilization plan from 2022, which I quoted in the first message that you got, has specifically an item to address river flooding as a result of bridge obstructions. You guys, along with all the other town boards, signed off on that. And the selectmen made it official town policy. So it is, in fact, your responsibility to administer that. So the issue is explained here in a document from 2019 Town of Wayland flood study. Linda, if you could scroll down. a little bit here i'm hoping you can do that i wish i could let me see if i am not having any luck with this either oh geez is this the email that you sent like if i brought that email up is is that that material well i i know the first email i sent linda uh distributed but this oh uh okay she's all right stop there for a minute linda okay all right so um the fundamental issue uh is illustrated here this is a picture which happens to be all over the internet of the center of town uh in the 2010 flood and uh the critical point here is not only uh is was this a major issue this is upstream of route 20 hydraulically uh this what what runs under this this center section is millbrook and millbrook and pinebrook meet and and connect to the river uh right by the pelham island road bridge and um that's of course a bit upstream of the railroad causeway the trestle and route 20. so uh a hydraulic restriction at route route 20 uh increases the flood levels here uh very likely enough to make the difference between this intersection flooding and not so this is a significant issue um the uh problem i want to address okay linda if you can scroll up one more a little more to the next one uh jeez uh okay don't suppose you could oh wonderful okay this is uh a picture from 1882 of the railroad trestle when it was built originally it was much wider much more flow area under it than is now now the case and uh the picture here is looking to the north west that's the uh esker by by the you know by the road leading to the landfill in the background there so um this this open area is now focused right towards where the route 20 road bridge is it's it's obvious that the hydraulic restrictions here are much much much lower than the there are now um okay linda if you could go up one more notch okay here is a picture from 1936 uh by this time the causeway had been built um i haven't found any definitive documentation of exactly when but uh i think it was probably in the early 30s um now now I've studied all the floods in Weyland for the past 400 years. But in the past 100 years, the three largest ones were 36, 55, and 2010. And all of which, by the way, were a result of multiple storms. This notion of 24-hour precipitation levels, that's not the issue in Weyland. The issue is having multiple storms a few days or weeks apart. And that was the case in 36. And what's interesting here, of course, was the height of the flood. And the floodwaters reach up to the top, but not over the causeway. In other words, the causeway is acting as a dam. Tom, what was the situation with the Saxonville Dam at that point? Because that's really controlling the amount of water here.
The Saxonville Dam dates to the late 1800s. So it was there, but it was being overtopped at this point.
Okay. I mean, it's not a flood control structure. So the issue that I think needs addressed, the reason why the causeway is especially egregious as a restriction is that all the other bridges in town are either overtopped or the roadways around them are overtopped. In other words, there's a relief valve when the floodwaters get really high. That does not happen with this causeway. So the entire flow is restricted to what is now that very small trestle area right over the mainstream of the river. Tom, if that were a real severe restriction, the height of the water on one side would be higher than the height of the water on the other. You're right. And we can't tell from this picture. Yeah. We can't tell.
There, well, it's by first principles, you go past a restriction, you get a head. Yeah. I mean, you have to. Yeah. Yes. Right. Can I move on?
So, yeah, if you move up one more, Linda.
There are many indications on websites for the state that it is state policy to deal with climate change adaptation. I found one reference here, Executive Order 569, that directs state agencies to include climate adaptation in their, in their planning. And I'm hoping that the state agencies we're dealing with here will conform with that. And what I suggest, I've been suggesting as possible ways of doing that as being culverts through the causeway for a long time. And that remains a possibility, but it strikes me, it has struck me, it has struck me lately that an even simpler way to handle it might be cutting down the height of the causeway. After all, the problem is not flow under, you know, nominal conditions. It's under flood conditions. So the causeway had to be the same height as the surrounding tracks when it was built originally because trains can't navigate hills and valleys. Very well. But people and even trucks certainly can. And so just chopping down the height of the causeway by a few feet in the middle with some, you know, reasonable grades approaching that from both sides, I think might do the job very simply and economically.
And I throw that out as a possible. Is there any other way to deal with this? If you lowered the causeway down so that it was below the water level in a flood, the force on that causeway would be so massive in the flow that it would probably wash it out completely. That's normally what happens when water rises above the deck of any bridge. Well, that's where you use riprap. And other... I want you to know you're not going to use riprap. You're going to have... The forces are so massive. Okay. I'm not proposing a design here, Cliff. I'm proposing ideas. I'm proposing ideas, too. Okay. So if you agree that action here is reasonable, if you agree that action here is reasonable, I think the next step is hiring a civil engineer to look at the situation and make more detailed proposals. I'm not prescribing a solution. I'm presenting a problem, and the outcome of dealing with it ought to be less restriction at that point under... Maybe... Major flood conditions. Have you talked to the town engineer about this? I have. What's your opinion? Well, they suggest this ought to be looked at as a stream crossing issue. And since... You know, I was once one of you guys, but that was 50 years ago. And so there's a lot of, you know, recent developments that... I'm not up on. And so I will throw those words out and leave it to Linda or anyone else who's knowledgeable about that to respond to it.
So any other comments from the other members of the commission? Is this something that should be looked at more closely before proceeding further? Well, I would be interested, Lisa, in hearing from the applicant in response, if that's okay with you. Yeah. Yeah, I really appreciate seeing those historic photos. And I have heard anecdotally about flooding in the area. A couple of things come to mind, which is one, DCR is very committed to climate, both adaptation, and mitigation. And so this is one of those projects that's trying to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and all those mitigation elements. And we always think about what can we be doing to make the site more adaptive, like nature-based solutions and all these kinds of options. And I think in this case, a combination of permitting and the hydrology and hydraulic study that was done, the idea is less disturbance is actually better for the environment. I hadn't myself thought about cutting down, into an embankment, but generally that tends to be difficult permitting-wise. The H&H study was done with the intent of determining the bridge rehab strategy. And so that was done with MassDOT, because this has been a MassDOT-reviewed project. And I know all of the future storm events have been included in that to ensure that the bridge is resilient in a future climate condition. Now, I know that's just the bridge and you're talking about the wider embankment, but there's always a logical instinct to take a project at hand to solve some larger issues. I feel like this might be outside the scope of what DCR as a proponent could do, but those are some of my thoughts. I don't know, Marissa, if you have anything else to add.
Amber, yeah, I think you hit on all the points and just, I want to reiterate that, you know, the scope of the project is to rehab the bridge. We're not doing any major modifications or updates to the bridge. It's just minor timber work and stuff like that to rehab the bridge. Yeah, and then the other thing that comes to mind is... What Tom is suggesting is that the scope isn't right.
Sorry. What Tom is suggesting is that the scope is not correct. I don't doubt that. That's the scope. Yep. The other thing I'll say, because I'm thinking through, so DCR has 250 miles of greenways across the state along many rivers, the Nashua River, the Mystic River, the Charles River, the Neponset River. So we've seen all kinds of coastal flooding, inland flooding. And generally speaking, our approach to bike paths is assuming there is going to be some level, some amount of flooding that these paths are adaptable to. And there's sort of like assets that are okay to be floodable. There's assets that aren't. So the question of like changing the hydrology in a very large area is a big question. And I don't fault you for considering it. I think it's logical, but also difficult to do within the construct of, you know, a mile long path.
But I'm curious to hear what the commission thinks. And, yeah.
Well, I think the other complication is that the path is actually owned by MBTA. So I guess there's, their involvement I think would be extremely important if they want to make any changes to the elevations or, you know, cutting down the causeway or things like that, right? There's no doubt that what Tom is suggesting is a massive review. It's a massive review of the scope. There's no doubt about that. Is one of the uses of the causeway to access the overhead wires for maintenance? Yeah. So any additional changes of the causeway could affect that for vehicles getting out on it to maintain the wires? Yep. Yep, that's correct. I mean, instead of going, you know, taking off the top, like, I don't, I have no idea. How hard is it to consider putting in more culverts, larger culverts, things to allow more passage underneath? That was looked at as well. And this was before my time, so I'd have to look back at the H&H study, but there is that very large culvert that was determined with DCR MassDOT, you know, six years of review, not to touch it for what I presume, to be a minimal improvement in overall hydrology as compared to the disturbance of the area. That's my guess, but I'd have to look at the study in more detail. If I could chime in here, that culvert is sized to handle the maximum flow of Washbrook, not the river. Yeah. Any addition, I mean, the river will back up into that, but, marsh, you know, it's kind of academic, what's Washbrook marsh and what's river marsh at that point. But I've, I've seen that culvert essentially full with Washbrook water. So that, that would not significantly help the river flow issue that I'm addressing. And if I might add a little more, the, the height of, of the causeway or the damming effect of the causeway is not the only hydraulic issue here. It's the fact that the, the river goes under the trestle and makes a 90 degree turn to the left, and goes through a very narrow channel between the causeway and route 20, and then makes a 90 degree turn to the right. Each of those two turns and, and the narrow channel are hydraulic restrictions. And, and it's the combination of that entire complex. That's really the issue. And either putting culverts angled again to the Northwest as I, I proposed in the first email that I think all of you got a copy of, or cutting down the height of the causeway, which would move the flow closer to the route 20 opening in in the, in the route 20 section. And I assume you all know the route 20 bridge has a lot more open area, just obviously than the trestle it does. And that, by the way, was an improvement when, when the route 20 bridge was rebuilt 10 or 15 years ago, whenever it was the previous bridge had a lot less open area. It had a, had a major pillar in the middle. So opening up that, that area as a whole, not, it's not only, only one element of it would be clearly, clearly, really useful by the way. What I mentioned again in my first email the, the issue of flooding in the river and, and the causes of it have been addressed for centuries, literally.
And one of the major elements of that, that has been the focus of, of that huge legal and legislative dispute is the bill Rick of the dam, which has been blocking the river since 17 to 10. And the river council has been among another among a number of other state and federal environmental agencies has been pushing to have that dam removed for years. And it appears that we are on, on the verge of final success. All, all it needs now is is an order of conditions from the bill Rick of concom and they may impose some things, but they're not indicating that they're ready to try to block it because another bill Rick a town board, the historic district commission, tried to block removal of it and basically had their heads handed to them by the Middlesex superior court, which threatened to hold each of them personally legally responsible if they didn't allow it. So that's going to happen next year. How high is that dam Tom? I'm thinking 110 feet. 110 feet. I'm thinking 110 feet. 110 feet. Yeah. 110 feet. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. All right, Linda, you got it. It's a spillover dam. I don't think it's that high. It's a spillover dam. It's a spillover dam. It's not that high, but anyway, I think we're getting off track a little bit here. The scope of this is permitting a rail trail. And because we do not have natural heritage approval yet for this, I would suggest that maybe what we can do is, we can give some thought to what Tom has introduced and see if there's any, I mean, I think it's really beyond the scope of this to start looking at it. But I think it's, I don't know, Amber, if you agree, I think we really do need the input from Natural Heritage before we can move forward on this. Yeah, our plan was to check in with them this week, let them know about both Sudbury and Wayland progress and, yep. Okay, so you didn't get anything from them? You didn't get anything from Sudbury then either, did you? Oh, no, no, no. Yeah, we talked about having that before the next hearing, so. Okay, okay, so our next hearing is the 10th. Does that work for you guys? Okay, okay. So does that make sense so that we can all think and review the email again from Tom? And I don't know if there's anything we could do for this particular project to make any changes to, you know, to address a climate adoption plan, adaptation plan, but we should give it some thought at least. And then we'll reconvene on the 10th, does that make sense? Yep. Okay. I just have one additional question. I know in DEB comment number four, when they were talking about stormwater management, at the end of that paragraph, it did say a peer review is encouraged, but based on your responses, so I think I just wanted to understand, is a peer review needed? Just because it was a comment in DEP. I think it's up to you, you all Linda, right? That's what DEP indicated to me. Yeah, but I mean, I think the way you addressed your comment was, you know, we really don't have a lot of choices without completely disturbing the entire area, you know, and, and then the maintenance and the, you know, I mean, the overall work to put in something for really, you know, basically, you've got to have a lot of choice, basically a 10 foot trail, you know, and it just seems, it seems a little overkill to start putting in a lot of, you know, subsurface or some other sort of drainage, rather than just have it sheet flow into one side, mainly to one side, you know, the side opposite the washbrook, and to contain that. I mean, there are some wetlands there already. And those wetlands, I think are often fed by the landfill itself, because there's a large slope there also. So we're just we're just probably adding to that. And I think we just have to take that into consideration at some point during the design that, you know, we're now we're adding more water, you know, we have the capacity to manage that, that that amount of water that comes off both the landfill and the paved surfaces now, right? So, yeah, I see. In your opinion, Linda, we don't need a peer review. I don't think so. I really don't think so. I mean, unless you guys, unless you guys want more answers, you know, if you don't think they addressed it properly, and they're comments. One thing I'd like not a peer review, but like, Tom, I can't remember if this was in your original email or not, because I spent kind of a while but like, is there a diagram somewhere that can show like, the flow with the all of these right turns and all of that so that I can understand and visualize it better? Yeah, I was gonna say we have a complete hydrology and hydraulic study of the area that was that was done. Marissa, you sent to me what's the date? Yeah, why don't you just send it to me and I can send it along to the different commission members. So those who are interested, at least have the information in front of them. Okay. Yeah, that's a lot of right turns. I think Tom had his hand up again real quick. Yeah, I'd certainly be interested in seeing that one. And I just want to say I appreciate Mr. seca's comments very much. I certainly agree with the with the thrust of your comments. But my my concern is I think in line with yours, Linda, I just I don't see the level of resource expenditure and sort of effort that would need to go into really getting answers to these hard questions as being really in line with the scale of the project we're talking about here, which, you know, personally, I view as a significant improvement. So that's just my two cents. Yeah, so we can send that around. So everyone can see what was modeled for and how it looks, you know, so how it would work for you. some of those questions so do we want to take a vote to just continue them yes so if we get a motion to continue to tuesday november 10th uh after 6 30. that's so move second second okay all right i'll do a roll call here so we have sorry let me get my order uh john store yes louis yes uh barbara yes luke yes and shannon yes and lisa is a yes
okay great all right thank you all right thank you all we'll send that over and see you next month thank you all good night
all right so we can move on to agenda item 2c 26 rice road in whalen dep file number 322-1066 continuated continued abbreviated notice of resource area delineation filed pursuant to wetlands whalen's wetlands and water resources protection bylaw chapter 194 and the wetlands protection act submitted by adam stack for the confirmation of resource area delineations at 26 rice road and whalen mass the site is shown on assessor's map 48 lot 93.
i believe doug dillon is here is he presenting is he here for this project yup how are we doing everybody um after last meeting i believe uh we showed the latest information after um dave burke had been out there and then you know made some amendments which we provided um and the only real item to follow up i believe when there was a more kind of administrative wherein uh adam had paid the remainder of the bill on that which i understand has been done um i know we were talking about the enforcement order as well which i'm happy to get into but as far as the the orad um or anrad um discussion i believe that's all i had for the my notes so i'm happy to refresh the commission if you have any uh questions
regarding this item at this point as well though
and to confirm that we were waiting there wasn't any new information in the packet correct no nothing new um again the payment was um adam paid for the peer review that was um immediate and um i believe the outstanding taxes have been have been um also paid for his property so those were two of the financial issues that came up i think i have one also one administrative issue that i have a question for and maybe luke can help me with this one but we do i did issue the enforcement order for this property so now that we also have an enforcement order on this property is that something we want to um uh get compliance with first or is or do we consider these two separate issues you know these um the anrad and the enforcement order i think linda we have to consider them as two separate issues okay
that's fine
so i think we all agreed with uh dave burke's um uh peer review um again i've been out there a couple of times also i never saw any hydric soils in the area where the culvert is but i do um and like i said there is it seems to be a gradient there seems to be an area where water would flow if there if there was enough water in the in the pond but i don't think that's cause you know there's no wetlands in that area so then the real question is is at some point is is that stream after three years of drought it's still going to flow at some point when we have a fairly good you know rainstorm or you know have saturated well i did go out there during the very severe rainstorm that we did have in the like actual well it was raining um and they're observed like not even wetness in the actual pipe or even in the um vicinity of it i just the water does not clearly flow in that area so i don't know if that's an issue i don't know if that's an issue but i don't know if that's an issue i don't know if that's an issue i don't know if that's an issue direction any longer um then that you know supported like you said the lack thereof of any hydric soils which would indicate um the presence of water and those are the sort of things that would you know go away sort of even like once they're there they are there relatively permanently you know on the geologic time scale of course so the lack of those just it leads me to state very comfortably and confidently that you know for a very long time um water has not flown there and that is also corroborated by the age of the concrete pipe there as well and the fact that it's just like nearly just it just looks very very aged it's like something from the sort of like 30s 40s 50s almost era um it just has that sort of a level of age to it so um yeah but there was a stream there in 2018. it wasn't that long ago okay well that's that's the intent of this application is i i don't agree with that assessment and my findings are uh counter to that hence my submission of this uh in red as well as the findings of the peer review
i mean there wasn't a lot of flags that dave burke put there before
yeah i mean when i delineated this i investigated the area topped it down and as i said did not find any wetlands as linda just said as well to not find any hydrica soils and there's a lot of wetland sort of uh you know vegetation towards the top but not so much towards that bottom culvert area so it's really a lot of non-hydric soils upland invasives nothing that meets the criteria of a wetland so again i was not present during that uh 10 15 year ago uh delineation so i can't speak to what was going through the minds of individuals or on site but just based on what's there now i flagged as meets the criteria in the bylaw as well as the wpa and per the report of the peer reviewer now in agreement of that i believe we have a pretty complete assessment of the resource areas on the on this portion of the property
so i mean it's it seems to me that we're all wrestling with this uh given the history but it strikes me that you know just speaking for myself all we can really do as we mentioned earlier is deal with this anrad and what we're finding on on the ground now in this context and then we're separately going to have the enforcement proceeding where you know hopefully all these concerns we're raising uh are going to be addressed i think to me that's the way i'm thinking of this for what that's worth um so i don't i just wanted to put that out there for the rest of the commission before we you know move move ahead with the discussion yeah i don't know yeah go ahead sorry i was gonna agree because um we without having a set of plans that shows how the changes are made and what if there's stormwater changes were made that you know weren't approved or were not even installed or something may have changed the hydrology of this entire site and you know once once we get you know we dig deep into what what has been built versus what was proposed to be built we might have a better understanding of why things have dried out or why things the water has moved somewhere else or something like that so i agree with what luke is saying is that i think i think the next step we can issue an anrad but the next step before anything else is done in the property is that we have to you know we have to finalize this approval for that what was built okay so all right but i see you really just so what would are you suggesting is the order of operations
no i just i i think mr dylan what we're saying is we're going or what i'm saying in my view um the proper procedure is for us to close the hearing tonight and vote on your anrad and then separately we will take up these other issues that were you know referred to a moment ago in the enforcement matter okay yeah that's my that's my understanding as well um commissioner would you just want to understand some notes down so no that's perfectly understandable it's a little bit of a thorny situation but that's that's that's the way i see it but the commission hasn't voted yet so we'll see so i would i would agree there's probably nothing further we can do you know under the anrad so i think what we would do right luke is i'd move to close the hearing under the state act in chapter 194 or get a motion right as long as nobody else yeah once we're all once we've all said our peace yes lisa we'd we'd close the hearing and then take a vote okay so i'll open it up to the commission if there's any other concerns and questions before we close the hearing i i just have a question so like if you know some of the issues that were done that the enforcement order would affect um you know caused a change in hydrology that dried that up um and now we're not seeing it's a stream but it was earlier we can't is isn't it the case that you can't declare really a stream to no longer exist or to be intermittent instead of perennial if it was man-made activities that caused it to be such so my so i i think just uh put bluntly that the prior assessment of the resource area was incorrect um is that as far as that portion of it goes i mean just the age or lack of age of any hydric features um if water really was residing in there for a significant portion of time even as recent as 5 10 15 20 25 years ago there would be residual hydric indicators in the vicinity of that culvert area which there are not so again i was not present or part of that initial or prior resource area assessment um so you know i whatever whatever you know was was thought of at that time i can't but just my findings of the field corroborate um you know what the conditions are at the moment and of course the enforcement order is a separate matter which we're fully looking to address and amend and create the correct conditions for so i disagree with that doug because i was out there i 100 agree with what dave burke did back in 2018 so again if you look at our chapter 194 it says that you only need two indicators to come up with wetlands and he doesn't have to use hydric soils he can use hydrology and plants and all that soil down there was sand okay at the bottom that's where that culvert is i mean it's easy for that to dry out i think and especially after three years of a drought i don't think i don't think you can say with any with any confidence that that that delineation that was done in 2018 was wrong i i i disagree with that okay just out there too right yes and though it there was a stream i guess anyone have any pictures of the stream by any chance i i don't think i have many that that for that date that far back that was from an old like check my делать have you on any pictures as well�따 service room for any chance that i have any other questions for you flooded off the room is there everything is real what do you do that just keep me updated and ask any they're interesting things up to you what else is out there um we just should kill you there date that far back. That was from an old, I could check it. I have an old iPad that might have those pictures on. I could go back and check. That would be awesome. Okay.
And is that something that would be discussed under the enforcement order process or before we close the hearing on the NRAD? So I think, Lisa, it would be something to be discussed under the enforcement order. I mean, the way I look at the NRAD is essentially it's a snapshot of the conditions on the property today, right? So I don't dispute at all or disagree with Linda and Barbara's memory of what this was like some years back. And I think to Shannon's question a moment ago, to my mind anyways, hopefully part of what we'll figure out in that enforcement order process is that it's a snapshot of the conditions on the property. process is what happened right you know to linda's point like what was built that changed the conditions in the hydrology out there and then we'll sort of deal with that accordingly based on on what comes out of that process right but i think in the meantime we have this anrad pending we have to act on it it's like i said i look at it as just a reflection of the current conditions at the site um period period i guess i guess my question is how can we vote on that like how could we vote and say yes the conditions are that there's no stream if if if there was if there's good evidence that you know if there's reason to believe that there had been one and that it may have been changed through human action and drought which which aren't reasons to necessarily downgrade um you know a lot of the the the the the the the the the the the the the source? I don't really have a great answer for that. I mean, if we had, you know, if we had evidence of, you know, photographic evidence of something being built out there, which is clearly dunes, I mean, that might be a slightly different situation. But again, I think to my mind, the way the, you know, the way the Wetlands Protection Act is set up generally, the reason that notices orders of conditions and ORADs have three-year lifespans is that wetlands change. And I certainly take your point that we shouldn't be rewarding people for essentially drying out wetlands. But on the other hand, that kind of takes me back to what I said before, an ANRAD is meant to delineate and determine what are the resource areas on the property today. We have a peer reviewer confirming Mr. Dillon's analysis of what the conditions are. Which are that we don't have the appropriate soils or vegetation. So there's, you know, there isn't one. So I just don't know how to handle that other than to take a vote on the ANRAD and then let the enforcement process play out. And we'll learn as much as we can there and hopefully be able to fashion some form of ultimate action for this property that's going to bring back some of what was lost. So if remediation for the enforcement order actually results in a stream flowing again, what does that mean for the ANRAD that was voted on that said there wasn't a stream there? Well, I'm looking to establish a baseline, Commissioner Fisher, and just exactly as Commissioner Legere said, just to establish the conditions on the site right now, today, as they have been delineated and, you know, reviewed in 2026, is the intent of the application. And so there are narrow, no, Shannon, for what it's worth, there are narrow exceptions that will allow you to sort of revisit determinations after the fact, right? So if we were presented with just ironclad evidence that this is a flowing stream now, even though your ORAD issued two years ago shows it is not, well, then we, you know, we're going to have to sort of deal with that when we, we cross that bridge when we come to it, no pun intended. But I think in the meantime, I just don't, procedurally, I just don't see any other way around having to act on this ANRAD. Because we ran into a similar situation on a different property where the commission had ruled one way and then it turned out there was a longstanding spring there. And it was sort of like, well, okay. Yeah, I wish I had some better answer. I don't. Any other questions, concerns? All right, so can I get a motion to close the hearing under the State Act in Chapter 194? So moved. Do I have a second? Second. All right, is that John? Yes. Okay. All right, roll call. John? Yes. Cliff? Come back to me. Okay. Barbara? We're voting to close. Yes. Close the hearing. Yes. Luke? Yes. Back over to Cliff. So what do we have? How many votes in favor? We have four. Four. Okay. We have four and I need to vote as well. Okay. Then I'll abstain. All right. I will vote a yes. So we will close the hearing. And then do we need to? No, we need to make a motion, Nellie. So which I'm happy to do. Okay. Yeah, that would be great because I haven't done the NRAD. Sure. So I move that we issue an order of resource area delineation under the State Act and Chapter 194, confirming the wetland boundaries as shown on the most recent project plans. Is there a second? We're voting for the ORAD now, right? Yes. Yes. We need somebody to second the motion first. Second. Is that Barbara? Second. All right. Roll call. John Stewart? Yes. Cliff Lewis? I'll abstain again. Thank you. Is that a yes, Barbara? Yes, I guess. Luke? Yes. Shannon? Three yes. That's right. All right. Luke, we can revisit this if it turns back into a stream. Right? You can vote however you want. All right. All right. All right. All right. I'm not sure if you feel appropriate, Shannon. I mean, you know, right? But... I'm going to vote no. Oh. All right. And Cliff is abstaining. I will vote yes. So I think that's majority. 411? Mm-hmm. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you very much. Before you move on to your next item, do you want me to Linda, did you send out the enforcement order to Adam via mail? Okay. Could you send a digital copy over? I don't know that he checked his mail or received it. I just want to make sure I have everything to Well, it comes by certified mail. So if he's not home, he's not going to get it. So both of you and electronic. Okay. Awesome. Thank you.
All right. Moving on to the next agenda item, 2D, 61 Lincoln Road. Whalen DEP file number. Actually, we don't have a file number yet. Is that correct, Linda? Yes. So they've asked to continue because we can't do anything without a file number. Okay. So can I get a motion to continue the hearing for 61 Lincoln Road to Tuesday, November 10th? You bet. So moved. Second. All right. Roll call. John Storer. Yes. Cliff Lewis. Yes. Barbara. Yes. All right. Luke. Yes. Shannon. Yep. And Lisa is a yes.
All right. So we're moving on to public meetings. Yes. All right. Next on the agenda is 40 Loker Street, Whalen. Request for discussion. Request for determination of applicability. File pursuant to Whalen's Wetlands and Water Resource Protection Bylaw, Chapter 194 and the Wetlands Protection Act, submitted by Paul McInnis for the removal of five trees at 40 Loker Street in Whalen. Property is shown on Assessor's Map 48, Parcel 89, and is located within 200-foot riverfront area.
Is the applicant on? Yes. So we saw this project as a... Notice my tent. 3-2-2-10-45 for the construction of a new house. And it was also quite a bit of removal of trees and, you know, changes within the riverfront area there. So this is, they wanted to take down five more trees along the driveway. You saw that in your packet. I'm assuming, are these tall white pines? Is that what these are? Highland, it's Paul. Yes, they are. Okay. And the reason for the removal? I do have a slide, if you want me to pull it up, that explains... Yeah, please do. Give me one second here. We also have Steve Overstreet, who is our general contractor on the home build. So he's on in case there are questions about that, too. So, Paul, just introduce yourself. You're the homeowner, I take it? I am, yeah. Paul McInnis, I'm the homeowner at 40 Loker Street. My wife, Jill Carmody, is also here. And again, Steve is our general contractor. And again, Steve is our general contractor on the home build.
Sorry, my slide's not coming up here.
Yeah, well, I can start talking to it, but I do have a slide. And then with the application, I'm not sure, Linda, if you shared it, we do have pictures of the trees. They are tall white pines. They are probably 60 feet tall. I do have the DBH measurements, but there's a lot of deadwood. There's exposed roots on them, and they look generally unhealthy. We did have Steve Overstreet come out and do an assessment that I captured in the slide here, and they agree that they should come down because they are unhealthy. The concern really is a couple of things. One is... They're really close to our new house, so if they fall down, they would fall on the house.
But also with the location of our property, we're directly across from Loker School, so if the trees fall that direction, they would fall across the sidewalk. And Loker Street, we also abut the aqueduct where there's lots of pedestrian traffic, so if they fall that way, they're falling in another dangerous area. So that's the reason for... For removing them, so for, you know, safety of the new home, but also the surrounding areas.
And all these are in the river, the 200-foot riverfront, right? I think just four of them are. I think the fifth one is just beyond the barrier. Are these actually white pines? Because they're listed on something else as Pinus nigra.
I don't know. According to the Save-A-Tree company, they were tall white pines.
You said you have the DBH. I didn't see it in the packet of the total.
They are. They're all between 13 and 18 inches. I don't know. Did you propose plantings, then? I did. Is it sharing now? There it goes. Oh, because I was going to say, do I have that? I don't think I have that in my packet. Yeah, this wasn't in the packet. No, that's not in the packet. Okay. I didn't get any wetlands information in my packet. It's on the riverfront, Barbara. It's the riverfront. That's what's on the riverfront area. The 200-foot riverfront is the dashed area. The plants came through a little. I've spoken with Emily. They were a little blurry in our packet. Okay. Yeah, we don't have a great scanner here, so if we don't get an electronic, we have to use our... Is there a dotted line somewhere? Yeah, so there's a 200-foot dotted line that goes right through, partially through the house. Yeah, if you can see it on the screen, it might be easier. Yeah, if you can blow that up maybe a little bit, because I'm only seeing half of it. The plan on the screen. Here's the whole plan. I did zoom in on just the right-hand side there, so this is where the trees are. That's what I got. Yeah, there's a dashed line on there, Barbara, that shows the 200-foot riverfront.
Oh, I see.
Even with my magnifying glass, I didn't see it, but I see now. Okay. They make it difficult. Yeah, they make it difficult, but they're faithful. Well, Paul, can you go back to your replacement plan for the... Yeah. Okay. Sure. So, based on my understanding of what we are proposing to take down, so the DPH is the 13, 17, 18, 16, and 17. So, based on my understanding of the replanting guidelines, we picked out additional trees that are consistent with what was approved last year when we got the home build approval. So, that's what we have. So, on the right-hand side. Yeah, I can't read that either. I think we have to blow that up, too.
There you go.
Okay. So, if you could send that along, because that was not part of the packet, and usually what we ask for is a planting plan, as before I can provide a permit for that. It was in the... It's... Because you gave me two... I gave you two applications. I filled out two different ones that... And one of them had the... I think it was the state one, had the replanting plan in it. Well, I really don't have that, to tell you the truth. I have it in mine, Linda, but it's almost impossible to read because it came through as kind of blurry. It's on the proposed landscape plan that I have.
All right. Well, if you could just email that to me. That's all I would need. I don't need a hard copy. Sure. Okay. Are you going to plant them right along that same sort of berm?
Some of them, because part of the reason we didn't take these down initially was that we like the privacy that this gives us between the house and the aqueduct, because if we take this down, then it's totally exposed, and like I mentioned, it's a high-traffic area. So, that's why we picked out things like the balsam fir that would give us some privacy along the aqueduct. So, that would be the plan is to put, I don't know if we can fit all the required plantings in this spot, but the idea would be to plant those type of plantings there to keep, to kind of maintain that privacy. You might deer fence those balsam fir. The deer came by and completely took out the undercarriage on mine until I got a fence around them. Oh, did they? Okay. Oh, they'll do that, you bet. Let them get a little taller before you let them, and then maybe put some shrubs next to them, because horseshoot and eat the deer. Okay. That's not allowed.
Why we have so many deer. We can't do that in town, within the town limits, okay, so. All right, I'm not proposing illegal actions. If we were allowed to, we could all have a word here.
And the last thing we had to hear was just, just so everyone's aware of where the property is, the houses. Obviously with the red mark there, the red arrow indicates the trees, but it also, you can see they're pretty much on the sidewalk on Locro Street and along the aqueduct there. So close to a number of different areas.
Okay, well, let's, you send me, if you send me the planting plan, I think I'll have all the material I need, right? Okay. We'll see. It looks like Save-A-Tree listed them on there. Estimate as Austrian pines. So you might take a look at the needles and see what you really have, because one is native and one is not. So it's still good to replant either way, but.
That's all right. That's, there's, there's still trees, so. Oh, no. And they're serving a purpose and you can even make snags and then have like vines go up them. That could be super cool, but I get it. It's right next to the road. Don't you like natives? I'm not. I'm not. I'm not a huge fan of leaving pines as snags. They tend to just, they don't last long.
Yeah.
Anyway, you guys ready to take a vote on this then? We move on. Yeah. So I think it's, it'll be subject to your, you know, receiving the planting plan and being okay with that. Yeah, no, I'm okay with that. I mean, I saw it. I just, maybe, maybe the copy went to Barbara or something because she always gets, she always gets a hard copy from us. So, and I don't know. I didn't, I didn't, I didn't get a second copy here. Okay. Yeah. I can definitely send it. I'll send it over tonight, Linda. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So we don't, so we don't need to close a hearing because it's not a hearing, right? So motion to approve. Negative. So I, I move that we issue a negative determination under the act and a permit under chapter 194 contingent upon Linda receiving a satisfactory planting plan. Is there a second, second, okay. I think that was Shannon and I apologize. I realized I wasn't using everyone's last name, so we'll do a roll call. John store. Yes. Cliff Lewis. Yes. Barbara. How yes. Luke was here. Yes. Shannon Fisher. Yes. And Lisa is a yes.
All right. Moving on. We are on. To. Stormwater and land disturbance. Uh, next one up is 80 Oxbow. That is also getting continued. Okay. Uh, so move. Yeah. I don't think we necessarily need to vote on this one. So I need to vote on that one. Oh, okay. All right. So we'll continue, uh, to November 10th, I assume for now, I guess, um, I, I don't remember, I'd have to go back and look at the email, but I think. I think they just needed more time to respond to the peer review. Got it. Uh, and then the other one for stormwater and land disturbance is 55 Woodwood Woodridge road. Right. So we did get new material for that. Um, remember, I don't know if you remember there was a driveway extension that was added that had not been, um, permitted through the conservation commission. They did use pavers, but again, we tend to call pavers, especially when they have very little spaces between the two. Two papers as, as impervious, as opposed to not impervious. No, I mean impervious as opposed to pervious, I'm sorry, I misspoke. And, um, so the, the engineer added sort of a gravel swale, uh, you know, um, along the, the whole base of the downstream side, basically of that driveway extension. And I think that satisfies, um, what I would want for, you know, addition, because otherwise I think most of it's probably heading towards the. The street, um, was this, the sheet run sheet flow from that. So that was an improvement over, um, uh, the existing, um, project that they had given us before. So.
So I know in the last meeting, we had agreed that we would, you know, wait to receive and review the information, which we all have in the packet. Um, oh, I think someone has their hand up. So Luke. Probably. Oh, is there somebody in there? So what is Mr. Simpson? Who's here? And then the second in the attendees. So, oh, I didn't realize we had anybody here. Okay. Um, I'm Gary Simpson from Stansky and McNary. So, um, you, you already kind of went over the project briefly, but I can share my screen and, um, go over everything that wasn't covered there.
Sorry. I wasn't. Sure. I didn't realize that you had, you know, I hadn't received a zoom in.
Oh, that's totally fine. Um, it was a good intro to the project. So, um, like you said, this has already been brought to the commission. We have addressed some of the comments. Um, one thing that has changed. So there's a drywall proposed in the backyard here. Um, I'm not sure if you can see my cursor. I'll zoom in on it though. So this was, uh, five chambers before. And we've expanded it to seven chambers. It's largely in the same footprint as before, despite the enlargement. And there we have, uh, indicated which area on the rooftop will be, um, captured by that drywall. Um, there's also a cistern in between the drywall and the rooftop. So, as you said that we have added. This infiltration trench along the driveway. So that will account for, uh, some of the runoff in the front yard.
That's the driveway extension expansion, right? Right. Yeah, that's correct. So, so this is existing. That's already, uh, that's already there. We're just, uh, mitigating the runoff from it.
Um, another thing we've added is a more detailed. Uh, breakdown of the increase in an impervious area from each proposed element. And that can be found in the narrative of the stormwater packet. Um, if you would like me to pull that up at any point, just let me know. Um, and then for, in terms of tree removal, we have indicated which trees will be removed. So if you see this, uh, six inch perch here, um, it's kind of overlapping with where the existing driveway is. So that has already been removed. And then there's one here and then some near the addition to the north of the property, kind of near the siltation barrier. We do have a list as well, a table here in the plan that shows all the six trees that are to be removed as part of the project. Um, let's see. Yeah.
So there is a siltation barrier. There is a siltation barrier proposed where the, uh, infiltration trench will be installed along the driveway as well.
And I think that's everything I wanted to cover. So we can open to questions and comments.
And the two pines are coming down because of the, the proximity to the, um, septic. Yes, that's correct. Um, we, we believe that the roots will be disrupted more or less. And that's why we're proposing it this way.
Looks like there's something built on the whole property.
So, um, the addition is sort of a small footprint. Septic.
Um, it's to the, to the left of the, of the house here in the backyard. So, um, it seems like it was sort of like a cesspool system. We have marked these three elements here. I missed it. Yeah. Yeah. It looks like that's a huge improvement, Barbara, over the existing, huh? Yes. Yeah.
Is there a replanting plan? So we were hoping to get approval on the stormwater, uh, without a replanting plan, and then the homeowner could potentially sort of get a better idea of the conditions after the addition is in place. And then decide. Um, what the best, you know, a path forward for that replanting would be so Lisa there, there's six and under, so they technically do not need to, um, replant and two of them are probably taking down for the subject, which is also an, um, an exemption that we have. So I did advise the homeowner that if they took less than seven down that they replacement wasn't a requirement. So, okay. But for, for screening and stuff, I think they have every intention to do that. I think they have every intention to probably putting in a few more trees. So, okay. Just not green giants. Maybe first or everybody.
Any other comments or questions? No, I don't have any
rest of the commission. No, nope. We do have a. Lisa, it looks like Ms. Walters has raised her hand to speak. Okay. Okay. All right. I will.
Okay. Ms. Walters, you should be able to speak. Hi. How is everybody? Can you hear me? Yes. And can you, I think Luke, we have to have her introduce herself and for that. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm Desiree Walters. I'm the property owner. I just wanted to let you all know. I was here and I absolutely plan on planting trees that are not green giants. I'll probably plant some river birches, some spruce it like I'll do some nice things. I, I, I enjoy the trees. We're sad. We're taking, we have to take some of them down and we'll do our very best to, to try and keep the tree line and replace what we can.
Thank you.
Sadly, I just drove by one of your neighbors earlier today and somebody took down a whole ton of trees on their property. So was it the one that just the house that just got sold up the road? They like flattened the whole thing. That's what was it? One, one 32 maybe. Yeah. I think it's like a tear down a house or something. Like it was a hoarder house. We went anyway. No, no, no, no. It wasn't that one. It's across the street from that. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, happy to hear about your replanting plans. Yeah. I mean, so what I'd like to do is plant, like I said, I really am looking at trees that will be not just evergreens, but also, like I said, I'd love to have like a river birch. There's something that's a little bit different. I definitely don't intend on doing a straight line of anything. So like out front, I, you know, like I have a, a nice redwood out front. I have maples. I, but I. I imagine that I will probably do a Norway spruce. I know those aren't native, but I'll probably plant one of those because they'll grow quick and it'll kind of replace that screening a bit.
But it's, it's gonna, I have to see like how the septic goes in and making sure that I'm not too close to those tanks. But that's, and then to have lots of shrubbery, I haven't gotten into the picking of all the specific things. That I'm going to plant. But if you were to come back, like, I like my tree is my whole backyard is like a forest. We do our very best to make it seem natural here. So I'll do everything I can to kind of amend the damage that's being done with this. That sounds awesome. And for what it's worth, even though the Norway spruce are not native, I have read, I think it was in Northern woodlands that in the forest where it's harder to control things like a delgit and scale, it does serve a similar. Ecological niche in terms of creating those microclimates and habitat, which is, which is interesting. Yeah.
Eco lesson for the, thank you. Alrighty. Excellent. So get a motion to approve the project under chapter one 93.
That's Shannon. Do we have a second, second. Okay. I think that's John. Roll call. John store. Yes. Cliff Lewis. Yes. Barbara Howell. Yes. Luke is here. Yes. Shannon Fisher. Yes. And Lisa is a yes. Thank you very much.
All right. So I think we're on to other topics and I know there was something in the packet Linda for the. Weyland-Commons performance bond. And we have Jim Hartford on. He is on the, I don't know what his exact title is. So let me just quickly introduce this. So it doesn't come, you're not blindsided by this, this topic. You know, we have been working for, I know how many years. I probably all eight that I've been here or 10 that I've been here, trying to return the performance bonds that were collected. Pre by my predecessor for the most part. And these were considered compliance performance bond. Meaning if you didn't, you're not going to get the same amount of money. You're not going to get the same amount. Right. Yeah. Yeah. comply with the permit, we would keep the performance bond that you issued. And if there was partial compliance, you might get part of it back and so forth and so on. And we're sitting here with like over $300,000 of performance bonds that I somehow have to give back. And I have absolutely really no way of doing that because we don't have the records. You know, if I don't know who wrote the check and who gave us the money, you know, there's absolutely really no way I can give the money back. You know, I just can't give it to a random person at this point. So, and that's Are well happy to help you out? Oh, of course. You know, I did, I did try to, I did talk to town council about this. I mean, there's a long procedure, writing multiple letters, writing, seeing if you can find even relatives, I guess, I don't know. And it was beyond our ability to do it here in this office with just two people in our workload. But so we do have a senior workup person who's helping with us with this. And we've kind of come to a standstill because all the records are gone. You know, I mean, we've picked it through every single file to see which one had a check. We were only looking for a canceled check from this money. So we knew who to give the money back to. And once we've, we've exhausted that at this point. But anyway, so the one of the bigger bonds is for Wayland Commons, which is the housing development over at Town Center. It's on the Route 27 side. And we have, what is it, over almost $48,000 in a performance bond here. And that was, that was given to us by the previous developer. And the development was then sold to another development corporation called Brendan Holmes, who completed the project. But it was the first developer who gave us money. Also went bankrupt, I think, at some point. Also had a huge lawsuit against him. I actually contacted, the Attorney General's office to let them know that I think we might have an asset. They never called me back. They never contacted me. So we're still sitting here with this $48,000. And what I suggested to Jim, who is on the call, is that if there are some things that the money could be used for on the property that would improve the current conditions and would improve the ability for this, you know, conservation-wise, make improvements related to conservation, maybe that would be a good use. And I think that's what we're trying to do. And I think that's what we're trying to do. And I think that's what we're trying to do. And I think that's what we're trying to do. And I think that would be a good use of the money. And so he came up with some ideas. So, Jim, you want to tell us what your ideas were for how, what might be an appropriate use for this money? Sure, I will do that. Thank you very much, Linda. I appreciate your reaching out to us and letting us know that this was a possibility. So let me bring up, if you don't mind, a little slide deck. And I'll kind of go through the main points. Can you introduce yourself, please? I'm sorry. Can you introduce yourself, please? I'm sorry. Can you introduce yourself, please? I'm sorry. Can you introduce yourself, please? I'm sorry. Can you introduce yourself, where you live? Yes, Jim Hartford. I live at 21 Hastings Way in Wayland, and I'm on the board of directors for Wayland Commons. Great. Okay. Thank you much. Okay. And I just want to remove this. So what I wanted to touch on after, based on Linda's introduction, is just a few more bullet points on the history of that performance bond. A quick introduction about Wayland Commons, where we are and who we are, where we're located. A quick introduction about Wayland Commons, where we are and who we are, where we're located. And then some of the ideas we came up with, which we believe are consistent with Linda's objectives for how this money might be used. And then some questions and next steps that might come up. I have some supplemental materials in here, which is available in the package. I don't intend to go through that unless there are specific questions. But these are available for information, if you do want to dive into it a little bit more. was developed about 15 years ago, 2009 to 2013. The original developer posted a bond. The value of that now, you know, based on interest is $47,850. As Linda mentioned, the property was transferred to a new developer, and then the development was completed around 2014. And there are 44 condominium units there. We received a certificate of compliance in November 2014. And at that point, you know, the units were sold and people have moved in, and I am one of the residents and on the board. And Linda and the conservation department has indicated that the funds could be available to address compliance issues with the order of conditions, or some of the other areas or other opportunities. To improve the property consistent with the Conservation Commission's objectives. So again, just by way of introduction, this is the road going into the south side of Andrew Rav. This is the Hastings Roadside of Wayland Commons. And this is an overview of satellite picture. This is Route 27. This is the east end of Andrew Rav coming into the town center. This is where now the volleyball is going to be. And this is where the volleyball is going to be. And this is where the volleyball is going to be. And this is where now the volleyball is going to be. And this is where the volleyball center is. This is the wastewater treatment plant. And Wayland Commons are these units on both sides of Andrew Rav. This is Hastings Way. This road is River Rock Way. The property includes the units that are here in the abutting property, but there's also conservation easements on a substantial part of the property. So the property line behind these units on Hastings Way is going to be the property that is going to be used for the conservation of this area. And on the River Rock side, there's a property line about here. So there's a little bit of this field that is part of the Wayland Commons. The rest of this field area is, again, town property conservation land. And conservation land behind these units all the way up to Route 27. And on the River Rock side, there's a property line about here. So there's a little bit of this field that is part of the property line about here. So there's a little bit of this field that is part of the property line about here. So there's a little bit of this field that is part of the property line about here. So that's kind of where we are. And these are the projects that we came up with, we hope, again, consistent with Linda's objectives. So one project is to repair the water overflow area on River Rock. This is an area, and I can show you on the picture. It is right in here. And this is a water overflow area that actually does not drain. And it just has stagnant water after large rainstorms that linger for a certain amount of time. And it's not filtering correctly into the ground. And it becomes a nuisance because of insects that can then grow and proliferate within the wet area in rainy conditions. We have another overflow area on this side that actually works well. But this one is not working. So one of our projects that we're proposing is to repair that. And we have an estimate from an excavating company as to what would be involved in that. And we have an estimate from an excavating company as to what would be involved in that. Second area of improvement is we have a substantial amount of invasive bittersweet growing into vegetation around the various vegetation areas on the condo. And we think it would be beneficial to use some of these funds to help remove those vines from our area and also to help mitigate the spread of those vines, you know, from other wildlife and so on. A third possibility is we have some bread from the river. We're talking about the the Redfoot pears, which the original developer had put in. These are now invasive species and they tend to propagate and we have some on the property that actually do seed. They also are fairly fragile trees. We've had breakage with them. So we're proposing to remove a selected number of those and replace them with native trees. We also thought another area of improvement would be to develop, and it'll go back to the satellite picture here. At the end of river rock where the property line is right along in here and right now it just flows directly over into conservation land and i believe conservation would like to actually see that land be left more untouched to you know uh facilitate the growth of uh shrubbery and you know and support pollinators and so on so we thought one thing that might be beneficial is you know just to delineate the properties just to put it like a landscape strip in here just so we can visually delineate and make sure that our landscaping activities are restricted to the wayland commons land and then make it easier for whatever the town wants to do with that other land make it much more obvious as to where that land is uh and then the final one our final area we thought that could be beneficial is all throughout the the conservation easement land there are invasive vines and greenhouses there's a lot of growth of invasive species all throughout those areas and we thought we could be useful to use some of that funds to just go in and clean out a lot of that invasive vines and let more of the natural vegetation uh re-establish and hopefully become more prevalent in those conservation areas and again those areas would be behind these houses just north of the royal trail which would be down here and also on the route 27 side where that primary is so those five projects i put together auto chart with the benefits to the town benefits to our whalen commons to our association and we did go out to contractors to get uh pretty good estimates on the level of effort and work to do this and so this is the cost estimates for these different projects now linda mentioned that there is about 47 48 000 this is a little bit over that I'm assuming we could be selective in which of these projects would actually, we would do based on approval within the available amount of money. So that's kind of where we are in terms of what we're proposing. And by the way, these estimates do not include any permitting fees or other requirements that Tonmay has. So again, that might adjust a little bit which of these projects could be complete of the scope of what we're able to do within the available funds. So kind of we have some next questions about, you know, can this be approved? And if so, logistically, how do we actually do this work? Who do we coordinate with? What other requirements are there? What time frames and so on? So we're just kind of at that point looking for feedback now from the Commission and the Board as to what would make sense here to go forward. And just finally, these are the points of contact within our association. So there are three Board members. This is me, Nella, and Jeff. I just were not able to make the call tonight. And we work through a property management company called Dana Management. So if we're going to actually proceed with activity, the Dana Management team would get involved in the execution of some of these project ideas. So I'll pause there and see are there any questions or comments. Well, let me just clarify what I think the next steps are going to be, which is I wanted to introduce this to the Conservation Commission and see if they thought that these seem like legitimate projects to pursue using this money. What I do have to do is I need to consult with the Town Council about whether or not this is something that can be can be done. But before I did that, I really wanted to talk, I mean, talk with the Commission to just the if this passes a you know does this make sense kind of test you know as far as as one use one way of using this money if if for some reason we have no way of giving it back you know then um i was looking for a you know a good sort of second option for this you know of how would we how what would we do this performance bond basically so um i think i think jim came up with a nice list of things that are beneficial to you know both the town and the the um the housing development over there so anyway i wish every project was like this everyone came and said we wanted to fix all of these invasive plant things for free the water we all have 50 000 just that we had to spend for uh good goodwill projects but yeah i know i you know linda in response to your your question question all of those initiatives make sense to me as logical ways to spend the money yeah we really do need to hear from town council i have no idea whether this is even legal
i mean i hope it oh jim you're muted if you're saying something yes you know i was just giving my wife an update i'm sorry i i have hearing aids for my audio so i couldn't switch back and forth i mean i you know i agree with with cliff i mean i i you know i definitely need and the conversations i've had with town council was like that at some point we might have to just advertise that as found money you know it's stuff that we're never going to see it's never going to go to any beneficial use it's probably just going to go to the general fund eventually if it doesn't you know ever get used so i i would much rather see this you know get used for a really beneficial way and um yeah for sure yeah for some observation yeah there's light man would have like to have money and you know it's uh it's- money in the general fund is a beneficial way i can tell you that oh don't worry that's uh all our penalties go to that all of our filing so it's not you know um i really hope this is legal because i'd love to see some of these done i will say just as a comment um when you're dealing with those bittersweet vines i mean i i have to do this at my house too it is you are going to get a thousand times more efficacy if when you cut them you just use a little marker buckthorn blaster is what i use and just paint that stump with with like an herbicide like triclopyr otherwise they will just re-sprout and you'll i mean you're already going to have a forever battle like we all are forever from now on but like you are just actually going to kill the vine because if you just cut it it will just grow right back so don't broadcast spray you just like your landscaper could do it any side of the vine but if you just cut it it will just grow right back so the pest i mean i i do it on mine it's like a little magic marker that you fill with triclopyr you cut it you paint it it dries and then it's gonna die and fall is one of the best times to do it because they're all pulling in for the season too you're about 10 steps ahead of us so shannon okay she usually is all right well that again with my vines yeah i mean i invited jim to come here tonight to provide what you know all he's done a lot of research he's really looked into this he's looked at costs and i really appreciate all that because i think i think this hopefully might set even if it's if it is allowed i think it might set a precedent on how maybe we could use some of the other monies you know that are just sitting there that we have no way of giving back um so uh let's hope we uh the next the next step will be me i'm discussing this with probably town council okay
sounds good all righty thank you mr harford and thank you for putting this together you're welcome and thank you for your time all right all right i just had a quick question uh oh no we have a cpc project ideas sorry yeah so cpc is due in november i forget the exact date anymore um typically we throw in a bunch of projects um i think you've seen them on town meetings floor before what we've asked for um and so we were brainstorming the last couple days one thing is is that um our um our tractors on life support right now um just just as back in john deere headquarter or service um bae trying to get fixed again and we we were trying to do some restoration at sedge meadow we have a lot of invasive mustard out there we have a lot of invasive um bittersweet and other things kind of a more of a monoculture out there so we did have jim henderson out there and try to do it take out a lot of the invasives and we'd love to continue with that project and and do a little bit better restoration so my the application would be restoring you know parts of said sedge meadow but we would we're hoping we could purchase um a bigger um more labor less intense labor intensive um brush hog and there's some equipment that we could get for that it's about 14 000 so i'm just waiting to hear on seat from cpc whether or not we can buy equipment from cpc but it would be that would be incorporated into that project of restoration we did sink the tractor out there a few years ago so none of us want to bring the tractor back out to sedge meadow so looking for something yeah looking for something smaller with like more of a skid row on it or something um to help us with that i thought and something we could even leave out there and use for mowing and you know and and for future future use of the um you know just dedicate it to sedge meadow for the most part so that was one idea another idea was 27 sherman bridge um we wanted to put in uh ada trail and so the cost of that was 17 000 which was really only for the materials needed to build that but i think we've come to the realization that we just don't have the manpower i mean we'd be doing this trail using like shovels and rakes and i think what we need to expand on that particular um project that we was funded like two years ago i think and just have a contractor do it you know just get a get a cost for a contractor to go out and probably maybe dump some millings you know smooth it all out you know spread it out smooth it out flatten it out a little bit it's not a huge amount of distance maybe 100 yards of even maybe 80 yards so and making a five foot path or something there i think it wouldn't be a much a huge cost but it's just really beyond our our ability to do anything you know our with hand tools basically so that was one the other idea we had um and i'm willing to uh listen to come up with some if you guys want to think about that that's fine you can always email me um i just have a question on the um the sherman bridge the adh rail you said you already had previous approved funds but it was only enough to cover the materials so that hasn't been spent yet right so you know we have we haven't in fact i think that i think the materials were like for p stone which is never going to work for an ada trail so we i was kind of curious why that was actually put into the project costs so i think we have to really revisit this because what we have is not going to is not going to ever develop into a trail so um and again i think it's really important that we get some real professional help for this so and i'm not i'm not as familiar with cpc so if you don't use it within a certain time you're going to have to fund some as you go along but yeah this project so it'sano we have to we have to definitely change the state and make sure that of water processes that we have um i'll do that um i'll take what we're offering is like how do i do the向force facility continue does it go back into the fund? Okay. Got it. So your, your proposal would include all the original estimates for materials. Sounds like you need to change the materials plus also contracting it out. Yes. Yes. So Linda, when you say, I know for Sedge Meadow, like I live, you know, right behind, it's right behind my house. So, you know, I probably can't be partial, but yeah, the, the invasives are pretty bad there. They are. You can't bring the tractor in there. You can't really mow it down. So we really need another piece of equipment for that. So. I'm in favor of Brian having the best equipment he can, because, you know, he's doing so much out there. So I'm sure that anything we get there, but I, you know, I'm like, I'm like Lisa, I can't be completely impartial since I'm it's right behind me too. I would be careful about just leaving the tractor out there. There's a lot of people who like to steal. Equipment. And if you have a key to one tractor, you have a key, like a lot of them, they transfer from like, if you're in the brand and you have like one key, it'll. So I have a question here. I mean, we set up the DPW to have facilities and capabilities to deal with equipment, but conservation really doesn't have facilities and equipment and capability to deal with equipment. Should this not be something that we give to the DPW to do?
I don't, I, you know, they've never showed mechanics on our staff. We don't have any garage space on our staff. We don't have any, any way of taking care of any kind of a major piece of equipment. Well, we do, we do. We actually have a service contract with a small equipment company. So they come up twice a year in the, in the fall and pretty much clean everything up and put it to bed for the winter. And then they come back in the spring and fire everything back up again. And they, and they are also on call during the summer if things go wrong, but the John Deere is, that is not that's an electronic problem that I think is inherent with this machine. I think it's just, it's just a lemon, I think at some level. And it's also possible that the mice have eaten through a lot of the wiring at some points. So, you know, that which is on us, but no, I mean, we do have the ability to do that. And, and Larry over at, at the DPW has been super, super helpful to us with it, with the tractor it's, you know, so. Why don't we just give it to them? And we have a beautiful garage over there. It doesn't have mice in it. It's designed for keeping equipment in good shape. We did ask about storing the tractor there, but they said they didn't have room. So that's why we ended up buying, we bought a metal garage and that's over at cow common, but it's not, it's not a road free. It's not, it's not mouse proof. That's for sure.
But anyway, those are just a couple of ideas. You know, to come up with a, to, to do something better at projects for and well in conservation land. So. I think that's great. But again, if you have, you have other ideas, or if you think of something that you think is, I mean, it can be something small or something large, you know, I mean, the, the, the, you know, this is, this is a great source of funding for us to really do kind of fun projects for the most part. So, yeah. And we have an awful lot of trails in town that, that don't get the kind of maintenance that they really should have. Is there a way of dealing with that? More staff? More money, more money. So yeah, let's get money from CPC. Okay. But they won't, they won't allow us to hire staff though. We can't, we can hire some contractor, right? We could, we could, I mean, we, we already use Henderson Stryker for a lot of our stuff, you know, for, for helping with the mowing and restoration and things like that. But, you know, we, I think, I think Brian does a fairly good job considering, you know, that he manages pretty much 12. I'm not demeaning Brian's effort. He just has a lot of area to cover and I don't think any one person could do it or two or three even, but we have to rely on volunteers or residents or, you know, people, visitors who, and so that's how we hear a lot about things like if there's trees falling or things, you know, something's happened on the property that we hear from, from people who, who use those trails and, you know, so that, and then it drops our attention to that and we go and fix it and deal with it. But yeah, cause I mean, you can't be, he can't be everywhere at once. So we could focus on one area, do an assessment of it, figure out what it's going to cost to do what we want, hire a subcontractor to do it, fund it with CPC.
Well, we do have land management plans. So on, on four for four, the big four properties that we have. So the, we do have recommendations. Yeah. Yeah. So we've, we have that process started, but it doesn't make sense to do land management plans for all the tiny little properties that we have. Well, no, let's start, just start somewhere. Yeah. Yeah. So we have, we've started that process. Yes. Yes we have. So. Well that, I mean, that would be a wonderful idea. Take one of those land management plans and implement it and just say, okay, what's it's going to cost to do this and hire subcontractors. Do it. And if CPC will fund it. And we have been doing that. We definitely have been doing it. Yeah. Well, that's another idea. Yeah. Thank you. We used to have more volunteers that spent a great deal of time. Most of them lived near the
conservation area, like Pat Patterson on
Oh, he's on Plain, isn't he? Yeah. He's on Plain Road. And he would do a lot of work and, and Nicky Patterson,
people like that. And where, then they don't exist anymore. That's right. It wouldn't be a bad idea if in some, some. We had a former state representative that lives in a corner of Sedge Meadow and she'd get out there with her lawn lawnmower. And she, you could see her going around doing the trails. I mean, we used to hit, people did this in those days.
I mean, it's a goal to hopefully like, you know I've talked about this with Lisa, like how do we get more volunteers? How do we start creating those? And I think just getting a foothold in some way. I hope maybe there's folks out there who'll want to. That would be good. People today don't like to volunteer. No.
And it's, yeah, and consistency is another thing. I mean, that's one reason why I gave up on even seasonals because, you know, we would get a seasonal, it would take them weeks to figure out where things are and how to do things. And then they go on vacation with their family and then they come back for a couple of weeks and then they go to school. And in the end, we spent more time training them than getting any work out of them. So I converted the two seasonal positions to a part-time job. So that's when we hired JD. He works part-time with Brian right now. So we do have one and a half, you know, full-time equivalents sort of for doing the land management stuff. And he's been a real help, you know, with Brian, you know, especially taking on things that really are two-man jobs. You know, even like, you know, chainsawing, I won't let Brian do by himself. So it's really nice to have, you know, a second person there available to do that. But yeah, I mean, that's why CPC is helpful because sometimes we can take on projects that, you know, require a little bit more effort and where we can hire a contractor to do. So, but anyway, if you think that's something, if you guys have a, you know, a great idea or something, just let me know, okay? So take one of these land management plans, figure out what it's gonna cost, let's go. That'd be great, it'd be fabulous. We have been doing that. We definitely have been doing that. And so, you know, we're working on restoration over at Heard right now, you know, doing the, taking out one of the hedgerows and stuff and restoring that. So that was part of the, one of the recommendations. So, you know, anyway, another thing, update 17 Gleason
did turn in an application last week. However, they just, they forgot to include some very pertinent information, which is how many trees they cut down and what the diameter of those trees were. So that's why it didn't end up on the agenda tonight because they only just turned that in today. So you will see that on the next agenda, the 10th, I will include that application, that chapter 193 application on there, okay? So is that sufficient for us not to impose the penalties that we started to last time? Because we did say that if they didn't turn, if they weren't responsive, but if they're leaving off, the main information that we want. No, I got it today. I got it today. So, okay. I mean, again, you know, Pheasant Run, Shannon, a zip of crickets from him too, you know? So I guess, I guess I get to be bad cop again for that one. So, and then, like I said, there was a brand new tree removal project on, I discovered today on Woodridge, you know, lots and lots of trees taken down on the property. So it just continues. So, you know, and I mean, well, at some point, I guess I just have to, you know, just start sending them the penalties because, you know, if we'd be nice to them, they just, we'd never hear from them again, you know, so. Yeah, I think we need to start being some hard asses on this stuff. We're getting a lot more people asking for forgiveness than permission. And I think we need to make it very inconvenient so that we put an end to that. Yeah, I mean, on the contrary, we've probably had, I guess, probably like six or eight phone calls or emails in the last couple of weeks of people wanting to take down trees, you know, and so, you know, that, you know, that's, yeah, more trees, tree removal. So, you know, if, if they're within wetlands or they're hazardous or something that just requires us to go out, take a look, evaluate, you know, either decide whether to go permit application route or go with administrative approval route. So, you know, it's, it's time consuming, but we do have, we have quite a bit on our agenda. Right now are my, my list of things to do that involve trees. So, oh, and one last thing. So, my, my senior work off person who we use, I don't know if you can see what that is, those are arrows, right? So, one of my senior work off people is an artist. So, she did the mosaic over at COA. If you ever walk the COA trail, it comes off the parking lot and heads towards Kyle Common. She made a mosaic. So, it's a big like welcome mat in the ground, which is a mosaic. And then she also made us a really cool sign that says conservation, whaling conservation. I think we're going to have to work with John to figure out how to mount that somewhere. This year, she made about two dozens of these. They're, they're the arrows with a mosaic pile on them. And so, Brian has been putting them up on the, all the trail heads that we have. And, you know, the direction of the trail. So, we like the idea of sort of melding arts and, and open space. So, she will be working with us again starting January 1st. So, here's another idea, you know, something fun for you guys to do. Come up with some ideas for an artist or with some, something artistic we can do in our properties. She's, she's open to all kinds of ideas and projects. So, those were the, those were the two from the last two years. So, and we got year three coming up. So. That's great. Well, we can, maybe there's cool educational stuff. Like point out like an awesome rare tree or a vernal pool with a little input on, you know, that could be cool. Yeah, like a turtle. Yeah. Yeah. Like a turtle or something. Seriously, like, you know. I love that. That'd be so cool. I'll put a big fat turtle somewhere. Yeah. That'd be really cool. Yeah. So, anyway, that's, that's all I have other than, oh, we have minutes. I have a, I have a quick question. Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Shannon. Oh, I just wanted to ask. So, I'm, I'm arranging a talk in, hopefully, January with the Dark Sky International to just come and sort of give a presentation, hopefully, at the COA building on light pollution. And the, if I can have the blessing of the CONCOM or have it be sponsored by CONCOM, then that takes care of, I guess, the insurance they need. So, the COA building needs me to have a certificate of insurance. And if it's going through CONCOM, then I, then I have it. Then I'm covered, she said. So, I'm just, I guess. Yeah. I, I guess asking for the okay on that to, to have this talk be sponsored by the Conservation Commission. Yeah, I don't understand the whole insurance thing, but I'm sorry. I don't either. This is, this is news. I've never, I've never tried to reserve a room at the COA building before, but if I go, I can find the little, the little thing here. I just felt like I should ask. It says, Shannon, would it be easier if I just reserve the room? Yeah. Sure. I mean, yeah, I guess that would work too. I can give you the information. Yeah. From time and stuff. Yeah. Yeah. From our dark sky guy and the day that we're planning. And then, yeah, that works even better. Yeah. Good idea. Send out invites to the Conservation Commission members. How does that sound? Yeah. And you guys should all come. I heard, I heard him talking Wellesley. It was super awesome. And then there's been a resident in town who's really passionate about light pollution and, you know, asked if, if we could do something. So, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, yeah. And I thought we could, we could have a talk by him. He's really smart and engaging. It's a great talk and I highly recommend it. That's great. Thanks, Shannon. We'll be sure to invite the planning board too. Because I think their, That's their Jurisdiction in Site Plan Review is. Are these the seniors? No, no, no. It's just going to be held at the COA, Barbara. They have really nice meeting rooms. Oh, because, yeah. I thought you better meet the younger people. Yeah, we, I really congratulate everybody. Yeah, And then hopefully, the resident and I can do some like. like pre-talk stuff, like have an article in the newspaper, put it in the newsletter or something like that and just try to garner some enthusiasm because people need to know. So I'll send you the materials, Linda, and then you can make the reservation. So thank you. Do we have, will we have the first half of the year meeting calendar soon? Yes. 27? Okay. I will put that down.
So I think we just need to see if there's any other attendees for public comment. Although I can't see anything on my screen, but maybe I'll ask Luke if he's the... Yeah, there's no one. No one? Okay. So yeah, we're on the minutes.
Any comments on the minutes that were in the packet from last meeting? I think Barbara gave your comments to Emily already. Right? Yep. And I made maybe two or three editorial changes, nothing of substance. So I think there was a, I added an S or something to one of the words. I think that's probably the extent of what I did. Got it. And the last meeting was September 30th, right? Yep. All right. So can we get a motion to approve the minutes from September 30th, 2026 with revisions as discussed? Moved. Is there a second? Second. All right. So roll call. John Storr? Yes. Cliff Lewis? Yes. Barbara Howell? Yes. Luke Legere? I will abstain. I was absent. Oh, that's right. And Shannon? Yes. And Lisa Aubin is a yes. And I guess we can adjourn. So can we get a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8.50 p.m.? Yep, you got it. Second. Second. All right. Roll call. John Storr? Yes. Cliff Lewis? Yes. Barbara Howell? Yes. Luke Legere? Yes. Shannon Fisher? Yep. And Lisa Aubin is a yes.