[Speaker 1] (0:00 - 4:40)
comments in a March 31 memorandum and an April 5th addendum. Again, this has been posted on the town website. Lyndon had the opportunity to review Nietzsche's response, the town consultant's responses, and submitted a report this afternoon which addressed those responses as well as proposed a number of conditions should a permit be issued.

Those will be posted if they're not already up, I'm not sure, because they came in this afternoon. Just to summarize, Lyndon's report finds that Nietzsche's response addresses its original comments on the NOI with one condition on one of the items, which I'll get to in a minute. They also, as I mentioned, recommended, as the commission had asked for, a number of conditions should the project be approved.

Lyndon had recommended 22 general conditions and 52 special conditions. A lot of those conditions mirror ones that the Swampscot Conservation Commission would normally include in an order of conditions. I'm using the word order of conditions and permit interchangeably, it's the same thing.

The majority of Lyndon's comments concerned clarifying, expanding, or correcting certain items in the town's NOI, which Lyndon found had been addressed in the town's response to those comments. There were two issues of more substantive nature which we received further documentation on that I'll just mention for the record. One issue was whether the notice of intent form that the town submitted needed to be signed by the Unitarian Universalist Church as well as the town, given that the easement proposed as part of the project is on church property.

We received from the town's legal counsel, KP Law, on March 24th and another letter on March 31st, letters that provided a legal opinion with supporting citations that the town acquired a legal interest as an easement holder in the relevant portion of the church property when it recorded its order of takings at the Registry of Deeds on or about March 17th, and so the KP Law's position is that the town had acquired a legal interest as an easement holder in that property and that a signature by the church was not necessary. So we have those documents also should be posted on the website, the letters from the town's legal counsel. The other issue of concern was whether there was a small separate wetland located at the bottom of a long narrow island on the church parking lot which was adjacent to some wet sumps and Lyndon, the peer reviewer, had felt that that should have been delineated as a jurisdictional wetlands.

We received a correspondence from the town's environmental consultant, which is LEC Environmental Consultants, on March 30th memo in which they informed the commission that they had called and spoken with Pam Merrill, an environmental analyst at the Mass. Department of Environmental Protection's Wetlands Program, and that she had confirmed that it was LEC's determination that the area in question was not subject to protection, was not a wetland subject to protection under the Wetlands Protection Act. So they had provided some documentation on that.

Lyndon, our, the commission's peer reviewer has recommended that we get not just LEC's memo, but also get something from the DEP to put into the file. And we will, we are looking into that, I believe.

[Speaker 2] (4:41 - 4:42)
We can speak to that, yeah.

[Speaker 1] (4:43 - 5:25)
Okay. So that is a rather lengthy history of where we're at, but the long and short of it is there's been some back and forth between the commission's peer reviewer and the town's consultant regarding the proposal. All of the issues have been addressed and the peer reviewer has, as I mentioned, submitted or proposed for the commission to consider a lengthy number of special conditions to be included, which we could go through, but they are posted, are they posted yet?

[Speaker 13] (5:26 - 5:27)
I did, I did post them before the meeting.

[Speaker 1] (5:28 - 6:11)
They are posted on the website if you want to take a look at that. But at this point, we can open this up for comments first from the commission and then open to the public, both people present here and people on Zoom. I just want to raise a few of the ground rules.

People, especially the public, should raise your hand or use the raise your hand feature if you're remotely participating when you want to speak. State your name and address prior to speaking. I believe these mics work, Marissa, so you could pass the mics around.

[Speaker 8] (6:13 - 6:18)
Should this monitor be on? Yours? This monitor is not on.

[Speaker 1] (6:20 - 7:00)
Please be brief. Avoid repeating remarks that have already been made. Direct all comments and questions to the commissioners.

And keep in mind, too, that the commission's jurisdiction is limited to work within or within 100 feet of a protected resource area. So there are certain issues that we cannot, you know, address here. So at this point, maybe I'll ask Meech to just, you can fill us in on the request to get documentation from the DEP on that one issue.

[Speaker 2] (7:00 - 7:40)
Right. So I spoke to Andrea Kendall this afternoon, and she can forward the memo to Pam Merrill. It's hard for us to promise something from someone else.

Yep. Okay. Andrea did have a, and she did, you know, speak to Pam, but she did have a suggestion of if the commission was to forward the memo to DEP for their comment, we might be get, definitively get a response.

But we could both do it. But it's just, I can't promise two people away will reply.

[Speaker 1] (7:41 - 7:44)
We can do that. I will do that. But you should do it also.

[Speaker 2] (7:45 - 8:05)
Yeah. I'll have Andrea do it. She just was, she just couldn't promise me that she, you know, that someone else would do something.

But in the memo, she clearly documents everything and clearly states what Pam Merrill stated. So there's no, you know, it's very clear. So if she has issue with it, it will be brought up.

[Speaker 16] (8:09 - 8:15)
I don't know if the commissioners have any specific questions. Feel free.

[Speaker 5] (8:16 - 8:30)
Yeah, I just have one specific question. The wetland at the end of that island really was not a wetland and it was a flooding. It was determined it was not.

[Speaker 2] (8:33 - 9:20)
Yeah. So it was originally an upland area that was created for stormwater management. They gave guidance a while ago and they cited the 1997 stormwater regs and the guidance.

So a lot of people read that and say if it was created before 1997, it doesn't count. But DEP has clarified that. No, it does any stormwater, any upland.

So, you know, you can't take a stream 50 years ago and call it. But any upland area that was created for stormwater management and then starts to exhibit hydric soils, as long as it's documented, and this is documented, the plan showing what it was built for and the order conditions documenting it is, you know, considered not a resource area.

[Speaker 1] (9:32 - 9:43)
So I can open it up to questions from the public. Yes.

[Speaker 13] (9:56 - 9:57)
Sure.

[Speaker 3] (10:00 - 10:25)
My name is Angel Fagundo. I live at 184 Forest Avenue. I guess my question in general terms is, so there's a requirement that you can't build within a certain number of feet from a wetland.

Is this, Council, can you explain how the school is violating that setback requirement? Or are they violating it? Or why are we meeting with regard to this project, if that's not the case?

[Speaker 1] (10:26 - 11:42)
Well, first off, it is a clear-cut prohibition against building in a resource area. It just, you can if you meet certain performance standards that are in the statute. Here, there is no construction that's going to be done in any of the wetlands holding this one issue about whether this little area is a wetland or not aside.

It's all within the buffer zone. The 100-foot buffer zone, if a project occurs there, the concern is to make sure that the work that's done is not going to somehow harm the resource or the wetland. So, for instance, if they're stockpiling dirt in the buffer zone, you want to make sure the sediment's not going to flow into the wetland.

So they have to take certain precautions. So when I mentioned the 52 or more conditions, special conditions, they're all designed to make sure any work that's done, and all of the work here is really done in the buffer zone, will be done in a way that does not harm the resource.

[Speaker 3] (11:43 - 11:49)
So the building itself is not going to be in violation of any of the setbacks for wetlands?

[Speaker 1] (11:49 - 12:17)
There really isn't a setback. There's no prohibition you can't build within 100 feet of a wetland or anything like that. The 100-feet buffer zone is jurisdictional.

It means that we, the Commission, have the ability to look at the project and make sure the work that's being done in that buffer zone is not going to end up harming the resource.

[Speaker 3] (12:17 - 12:23)
And your conclusion to that is, is that based on, if assuming they enact the 50 items that you mentioned, it will not be?

[Speaker 1] (12:25 - 12:38)
My reading of it is, yes, they have taken all the precautions and fulfilled, you know, taken the necessary steps to protect the resource.

[Speaker 3] (12:39 - 12:53)
Okay. I mean, with all due respect, it's hard to believe, considering the size of the building that's going up and the land they're taking, that it's not affecting something directly. I'm a little surprised, but you guys know more than I do.

So thank you. Appreciate it.

[Speaker 1] (12:53 - 13:18)
Yeah. I mean, take a look at the, you know, the schematics and maybe the town's consultant can speak a little to this, too, about where the work's done and the precautions that are, you know, taken to protect the resource areas, which would be the wetlands and the church forested area on the lower parking lot and Ewing Woods.

[Speaker 3] (13:18 - 13:25)
And does that include wildlife, too, wildlife or no? Do you guys include wildlife in your consideration?

[Speaker 1] (13:26 - 13:26)
Habitat.

[Speaker 3] (13:27 - 13:27)
Habitats?

[Speaker 1] (13:27 - 13:28)
Wildlife habitat.

[Speaker 3] (13:29 - 13:35)
So did they explain to you what impact there might be to the coyotes, to all the different animals that have habitats in that area?

[Speaker 2] (13:41 - 13:59)
So we're not taking any habitat. We're developing the previously developed school site. And so the project was, you know, we're not extending out to Ewing Woods.

We're not extending out into the undeveloped area of Forest Ave. So there's no habitat taking.

[Speaker 4] (14:02 - 14:52)
Thank you. Okay. Betsy Burns.

I live right next to the church. And it is going to be disturbed because the building is going to be dug up and a new foundation and everything is going to be put in. And so it isn't as if it's not going to be impacted.

But the Vernal Pool in the Ewing Woods is only 35 or 36 feet from where this is all taking place. So, I mean, I don't see how you can say that that's not well within the buffer zone, even though it's in the Ewing Woods. It's just across the path.

And I believe it's a certified Vernal Pool.

[Speaker 1] (14:52 - 15:14)
It is not a certified Vernal Pool, but we do consider non-certified Vernal Pools important, too. And we're not saying it's not in the buffer zone. That's why we're here.

That's why the commission is reviewing this, is because most of the buffer zone work is in the church parking lot. There'll be some on the side, I guess.

[Speaker 2] (15:16 - 15:26)
The northwest corner of the school where there's a soccer field? Yeah. And then, to speak to the Ewing Woods wetland, a portion of the school's in it.

[Speaker 1] (15:27 - 15:33)
So that gets the project within the jurisdiction of the commission.

[Speaker 4] (15:34 - 15:49)
I don't see how that's possible. I thought it was a law that you had to be 100 feet from where a new construction would be. And this is a new construction.

I mean, it's not an old construction. It will be a new construction.

[Speaker 2] (15:49 - 17:05)
The buffer zone's the trigger for the filing. So it's not an exclusion zone. It's not an exclusion zone.

It's not a new work zone. So any work within 100 feet of one of these resource areas triggers the filing and triggers the public process. So that's the process we're going through now.

Now, the buffer zone, the 100-foot buffer zone is the buffer zone from the resource area. So that's the wetland itself. And under certain circumstances, work's actually allowed in the resource areas.

But in our proposal, we are not proposing any work in the resource area outside of possibly the small area. But we're not. Our convention is it isn't.

So it's really just this process is triggered by the work within the buffer zone. If the existing school was to repave their parking lot, that would be work within 100 feet of a wetland resource. And they would have to go through the same process that we're going through now.

Less work, so probably less of a process. But it's any work within 100 feet of these areas. So it's not a prohibition on work in those areas.

It's just that's the trigger.

[Speaker 1] (17:05 - 19:03)
In fact, we've had, I think, at least one, I recall. Is it Laurel Lab that runs? We've had someone come before us because they wanted to do some work.

I don't remember exactly what it was. Yeah, they came because they had to because they were in the buffer zone. So they had to come to us and then we look at the work that's proposed, the type of resource, each resource.

First off, let me step back. We're implementing a state law. The Wetlands Protection Act is a Massachusetts law.

The local conservation commissions, we implement that. We're the administrators. So that law lists the various resources that are protected.

One of them, the popular one you all know, is the wetlands. Beaches are another resource. Coastal banks are another resource.

There are lists. And each of those resources, the Wetlands Protection Act, or the regulations under the Wetlands Protection Act, lists a bunch of what are called performance standards. So if you want to do work, either in the resource or in the buffer zone, you have to make sure you conform to those performance standards.

And a lot of them deal, if you're on a coastal bank, they deal with issues of flooding and storm surge and things like that. So there's no prohibition in the Wetlands Protection Act that says you can't build something new or redesigned just because you're in a 100-foot buffer zone. The only thing the 100-foot buffer zone does, well, not the only thing, but what it does for us, is it gives us jurisdiction.

If they were doing the work, you know, 150 feet out, we wouldn't be sitting here.

[Speaker 4] (19:05 - 19:14)
I hope that's clear. It may be very clear. I don't quite understand it.

Yes.

[Speaker 9] (19:14 - 20:18)
Ted Smith, Coyote Law World. Um, the 100-foot buffer zone, from what I understand, is to try to have the habitat for the things that live in the wetlands. So down at Ewan Park, where the wetlands is, you talk about working out in that area, but that 100-foot buffer is where the things are supposed to go and live and go back into the wetlands.

Um, UMass Lowell Amherst did an extensive study, and it shows all the salamanders and the different things that live in there and how close they live to the wetlands. So the 100-foot buffer is the habitat that they need. And when all that construction or the road going out the back there, you've now covered their habitat.

You're only looking at the water. But the 100-foot, they need to live there. They go out of the water, they go up there, they feed, they come back down in there.

[Speaker 1] (20:18 - 20:30)
Well, just to clarify, just to clarify, there's no paving or construction that's, I mean, the road and the easement by the um, vernal pool, where the salamanders are.

[Speaker 9] (20:30 - 20:34)
So there's 100 feet from the vernal pool to anything?

[Speaker 1] (20:34 - 21:26)
No, what I'm saying is that there's no habitat that's being destroyed. It's already there. The road is already there.

And the Wetlands Protection Act is not, it's not saying what you're saying, that they've created a 100-foot buffer for the purpose of protecting the wildlife's habitat. That is not the purpose of it. The purpose of the 100-foot buffer is to give us jurisdiction to make sure that any work that's done there is not going to adversely affect um, uh, the resource.

So, you know, we are, we have looked at that, as has our peer reviewer, who is not personally here, but um, uh, so If they don't have a place to live, you've affected it.

[Speaker 9] (21:27 - 21:42)
And there isn't a road there now, because that road that's all just the gravel road, when it rains, the water runs from there all the way down to the end of the forest extension. So you walk through there, and the water's actually running there.

[Speaker 1] (21:43 - 22:01)
But there's no There's no work proposed where you're saying that the passage from the school out past the vernal pool in that area is already paid.

[Speaker 2] (22:01 - 22:17)
They're not You want me to share my screen? I'm sorry, I don't have the Last time we met, we had a really nice graphic that showed this. I don't have that tonight, but I can share my screen.

Thank you.

[Speaker 9] (22:18 - 22:30)
We, uh The dirt path that goes all the way to Forest Extension There's There's no work proposed there. Oh, how are the buses getting out to the end?

[Speaker 1] (22:32 - 22:43)
Forest Street Extension Well, let It goes It's going out through the church parking lot.

[Speaker 2] (22:44 - 23:11)
The other end Where the buses are going Can folks see my screen? No Single page Continuous page Side by side Marissa, can we put it on the screen?

[Speaker 8] (23:12 - 23:39)
It'll be easier for them to see Yeah It'll be easier The other side We can We're going to need it on this side It is.

[Speaker 2] (23:39 - 23:41)
I'm using Bluebeam which is a little different than

[Speaker 17] (23:42 - 23:45)
Yeah Uh

[Speaker 2] (23:46 - 23:49)
Let me try

[Speaker 9] (23:50 - 24:01)
Excuse me, I have a question for the board I'm really not sure where the school how far it is from the pond from the potential vernal pool

[Speaker 1] (24:01 - 24:08)
There's The road is what goes by the vernal pool not the school If we can get this up

[Speaker 9] (24:09 - 24:12)
The distance from the school to the vernal pool

[Speaker 1] (24:12 - 24:14)
The Ewing Woods or the

[Speaker 9] (24:14 - 24:21)
The pond The potential vernal pool to the school How far is that?

[Speaker 1] (24:24 - 25:14)
We can get a map up here So The darker red line is the buffer zone Maybe we can turn Sorry I'm trying to get that Oh, we got to do it on that one I'll turn this one around because The darker red line goes all the way to the Here's some IT help IT help. Can we get this up? I know if we get this one There you go Is it possible to get this green up?

[Speaker 2] (25:14 - 27:31)
No, no We had it up the last I think that's because David was sharing with you that one Yeah, yeah Got it We have it here This is all This is all that was on it Stop Red line's the buffer zone Okay Which we've stated. So just for orientation The existing school is here Oops, goes a little bit farther I'm a little shaky drawing So the Forest Ave is here The darker red line's 100 feet from the white one resource area. So that's the buffer zone That's the jurisdictional area The That current buffer zone consists of parking lot, school, and adjacent playground And we'll have variations of that in the proposed condition But maybe We can speak to that The There's a connection to the existing pavement, the end of the pavement at Forest Ave from the school site It will be gated.

It's for emergency vehicles only Sorry, Forest Ave extension It's for emergency vehicles only

[Speaker 9] (27:31 - 27:33)
No, that's not what they said

[Speaker 1] (27:33 - 27:37)
Please direct questions to the commission

[Speaker 2] (27:40 - 27:45)
I misspoke So it's buses and emergency vehicles only

[Speaker 1] (27:45 - 27:53)
Please remember, you have to keep this in order Speak your questions after you raise your hand to the commission

[Speaker 2] (28:04 - 28:08)
A pavement connection from the school site out to Forest Ave extension

[Speaker 6] (28:08 - 28:09)
And how close is that to the

[Speaker 2] (28:11 - 28:22)
It's beyond 100 feet Because if you look at the red line The area you're talking about is out here

[Speaker 6] (28:25 - 28:39)
That I'm Martha Caesars I live at 80 Mason Road I just I can't really make I can't tell what that is Is that Forest Ave extension that you've got the circle around

[Speaker 2] (28:40 - 28:44)
Uh Forest Ave extension, the pavement ends right here

[Speaker 6] (28:45 - 28:51)
So then there will not be a paved driveway for the buses to get near the school?

Children will walk over a rocky path?

[Speaker 8] (28:57 - 28:58)
Can I point with my finger?

[Speaker 2] (29:08 - 29:32)
And there's a small stretch of sidewalk that will end at approximately where the pavement of Forest Ave extension ends, but that's not getting extended down Forest Ave extension any farther Alright, so you're saying it's just going to be a sidewalk It'll be a sidewalk adjacent to the driveway And how will emergency vehicles go over the sidewalk?

[Speaker 7] (29:33 - 30:50)
No, no, no I'm sorry, what is your name? You need to speak into microphones Yes Yes People are having trouble hearing So currently, Forest Ave extension dead ends Yeah, me too And it dead ends, right? And then there's a little bit of just broken up where the old road used to be So that's not being touched at all So what's going to happen is where that road goes into the school property The road goes into the school property So the current path is there right now where the road ends It's going to curve into the school right at the corner of the current property right now Yeah So the path, it's not going to go into Ewing Woods It goes before Ewing Woods And it's going to go into the property The sidewalk's going to stop because the kids if you're riding there You just go right over onto the property The sidewalk's going to end where the school property starts So they can walk on the school sidewalk

[Speaker 6] (30:50 - 30:53)
So children will get off the bus in Forest Ave extension

[Speaker 7] (30:53 - 31:15)
No, they'll get off the bus The buses are coming from Whitman So they're going to go right in and they're going to go right out So there's a queuing area on the long side of the school there It's shaded as the long side of the school And where his arrow is, it's a queuing area It's big enough to stack multiple buses but we only have two

[Speaker 6] (31:16 - 31:23)
Talk me to envision something that a bus is going to go on to get out of the parking lot It's got to be a wide enough road

[Speaker 7] (31:23 - 31:37)
Yeah, so we know it's wide enough because the big blue fire truck can get through it And the ladder truck can get through it Because the chief has been involved in the traffic discussion

[Speaker 1] (31:37 - 31:51)
I just I hate to interrupt, but we have to bring this back to what the Conservation Commission can deal with. We can't deal with the traffic, with buses, with It's not within the buffer zone

[Speaker 5] (31:52 - 31:54)
That part of the project, we have no

[Speaker 6] (31:54 - 32:02)
We don't have jurisdiction over that part of the project And I would only say I walk the Ewing Woods all the time and I always thought that that was conservation land

[Speaker 1] (32:02 - 32:04)
It is conservation land, you're correct

[Speaker 6] (32:04 - 32:06)
Okay, and so that's not in your jurisdiction

[Speaker 1] (32:06 - 32:17)
That is, but this is not as I understand it, not going into the conservation land, is that right?

[Speaker 2] (32:17 - 32:30)
Correct, we're stopping So between us and the conservation land is the Forest Ave right away Fifty?

[Speaker 1] (32:55 - 33:18)
Can I just clarify, are we talking now about something different from the road to Forest Avenue Extension? Or are you talking about the building itself? No, no, but we were talking about the connection that's going to be made for buses or whatever to go on to Forest Avenue Extension, but now you seem to be talking about where the Vernal Pool

[Speaker 4] (33:20 - 33:30)
Thank you I just was talking up a little bit Okay, so More or less, it's the same area, I just wanted to clarify

[Speaker 2] (33:31 - 33:39)
So the wetland resource area extends a portion of it extends actually into the Forest Ave right away

[Speaker 4] (33:39 - 33:40)
Right

[Speaker 2] (33:40 - 33:54)
So the path that goes by the wetland resource area is in the Forest Ave right away Our project, all the work stops on the school property which is not within the right of way

[Speaker 4] (33:54 - 33:59)
But everything's disturbed there All the habitat, the

[Speaker 1] (34:00 - 35:23)
Well That's why there are conditions that they have to make sure they do erosion control and other measures are taken so that they don't damage it The commission at the last meeting also raised a concern about how compacted that path was so that storm water may flow into the pond and we were discussing I think you can give a presentation on your opinion on that but one of the conditions that the commission wants to add is that if after construction we feel there should be a natural barrier there to prevent that storm water flow we will reconvene and, you know, require that So the point is the commission is looking at protecting the resource areas and making sure that the work that's done, the project will protect those resource areas through a number of 52 or more conditions So it's not, again I get the sense you think that the Wetlands Protection Act somehow prohibits all construction and it doesn't It just ensures that anything that is done in a buffer zone or in the resource area is done in a way that will not harm that resource area

[Speaker 4] (35:23 - 35:49)
So you get validation or whatever from the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act you go by the local wetland violence regulations You are in touch with the Mass Natural Heritage Endangered Species Organization Did they program, did they check out

[Speaker 1] (35:50 - 36:10)
There are no endangered species here. That's a box they have to check off If you read the NOI that the town submitted, there's a lot of information.

It's a hefty document It has a lot of information in it and one of those issues It's the state Wetlands Protection Act that we're implementing.

[Speaker 4] (36:10 - 37:43)
There is no local Wetlands Protection Act Some towns do have those Swampscot does not So it's just the state Wetlands Protection Act So the Mass Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Act program is not conduct does not conduct an overview of this There are no endangered species There are. I beg to differ There are spring papers which we hear now and also there are salamanders which we in the neighborhood have all seen There's a list of I can tell you exactly where the salamanders go They live in the ditches in the school parking lot and around and in May, the first warm spring in May they come out and they go to the vernal pools and they've been observed and they lay their eggs and then they go back into the ditches and anybody, all of us who have lived in that neighborhood have at various times seen evidence of this In order to see them you have to see them at night and a couple of people have actually been interested to go and see them at night but I've had a salamander in my basement that somehow got into my pump, you know the pumping area, the sub-pump and other people have seen them in the yard right by

[Speaker 1] (37:43 - 37:59)
I don't think anybody, not to interrupt No one is denying that that is a vernal pool No one is denying that there's a vernal pool there are salamanders There are no endangered species that were that was checked off, right?

[Speaker 4] (38:00 - 38:12)
I read that they were considered species of well I think the spotted salamanders are endangered species and I think the spring papers are considered something to

[Speaker 2] (38:13 - 39:20)
The national heritage folks updated their maps August 1st every 7 years but they just updated them August 1st and there wasn't anything listed here We're not saying there's not wildlife here there's none of that listed In any event, what we did is work to keep to keep the work within the developed area and we also work hard to make sure the water that is currently flowing to those wetland resource areas continues to flow over the same amount because some of the species you're speaking to you don't want to dry up the wetlands and you also don't want to flood them they're happy as they are now so one of the early comments from the conservation commission's peer reviewer was to make sure the volumes of water that was going that was currently going to those resource areas was being maintained in the built condition so that we didn't upset that habitat and we took care to do that

[Speaker 5] (39:20 - 39:50)
And all of the water that's coming off the roof and eventually ends in the Ewing Woods wetland area is going through an underground filtration system correct? Yes So it's not only the volume but the quality of the water is something we're concerned with not being impacted by this So that's where the 70 conditions come in not only during the construction phase but once the building is complete we want to make certain that we don't disrupt this wetland habitat

[Speaker 1] (39:50 - 40:00)
Yes, some of the conditions continue beyond the construction period I would urge you all to look at those conditions

[Speaker 4] (40:01 - 40:05)
Well we would have I think if we had seen them They came today

[Speaker 1] (40:05 - 40:08)
I had to sit and spend the afternoon

[Speaker 4] (40:08 - 40:15)
I know they just arrived so we didn't have a chance to look at them before this meeting

[Speaker 16] (40:15 - 40:16)
In the back

[Speaker 15] (40:26 - 40:33)
I will mention with the blasting

[Speaker 1] (40:33 - 41:26)
we did raise that a concern that again this commission is concerned with the resource areas and our concern was that blasting would somehow affect like say the vernal pool or the wetlands What you really need to do is the earth removal advisory committee will be the select board issues a earth removal permit.

There's an earth removal bylaw and it covers blasting, dust issues like that and the earth removal advisory committee will meet to advise the select board on what to include again what conditions to include regarding blasting but that is not something in general we can

[Speaker 13] (41:28 - 41:51)
I was going to say I can speak to that a little bit they are organizing a meeting with ERAC the earth removal advisory committee I believe it is scheduled for next thursday august 14th tentatively at the police station community room also via zoom final location will be issued on the agenda but for now it is supposed to be at the police station community room

[Speaker 15] (41:51 - 42:02)
forgive my ignorance I'm surprised that something like that wouldn't fall under your jurisdiction as well too it seems like it would go hand in hand with what your oversight is

[Speaker 1] (42:02 - 42:11)
we did raise it with respect to what damage the blasting could do to the resource and you would address you want to deal with

[Speaker 2] (42:11 - 43:23)
so the peer reviewer did raise the issue of will the blasting have any effect on the actual resource area will it somehow crack the wetland and drain it so we're committed we're going to put monitoring right at the property lines closest to the resource area this is just speaking to the resource area I'm not saying the only monitoring that would be done but just to speak to the resource area concerns, we're putting monitors right at the property line closest to the resource areas when the blasting occurs to make sure we stay below well below the values that we need to that would cause any offsite damage now the technical aspect of it is the wetlands themselves even if they're under labeled bedrock the hydric soils are very plastic it's not it's not like a quarry that you're going to crack in and it's going to drain out but even beyond that we're looking to make sure that again the measurable impacts beyond the property line on the resource areas are below the state requirements which are very strict and then again as mentioned the ERAC process will also deal with a lot of the other issues you've talked about

[Speaker 1] (43:24 - 43:54)
you can take a look at the bylaws, the general bylaws and there is an earth removal bylaw and it lists all the issues that the earth removal permit has to address and blasting is one. I will be at that meeting, I'm the liaison from the CONCOM to the earth removal committee so I will be there for that the peer reviewer also asked questions about dust produced from the blasting those were addressed also, correct?

[Speaker 8] (43:55 - 43:56)
right

[Speaker 2] (43:56 - 44:01)
the dust is we might expect them to be further addressed further

[Speaker 8] (44:01 - 44:06)
I'm just saying in regards, it wasn't just the potential drainage, it was also the

[Speaker 2] (44:06 - 44:50)
part of this application is just not the plans, the calculations support the plans, it's also ongoing operations and maintenance of the site and operations of the actual construction that's all part of the initial filing that was submitted which ends up being about 500 pages in total you know there's procedures for during construction, there's procedures for after construction to make sure the results that were promising are met not just the day after school opens but well down the road it's properly maintained again the resource areas remain vibrant and healthy

[Speaker 1] (44:50 - 44:54)
you have perpetuity, there will be conditions that go on

[Speaker 6] (44:59 - 46:07)
well I guess I'm just going to follow up on sort of what is what is the area the conservation commission actually is protecting that's sort of what I thought you were as a group and I wanted to ask this question because I don't know if they've, I've expressed concern about the emissions of the cars once the schools open and when we heard the traffic study report the last meeting at the building meeting we were told that there are going to be several hundred cars morning and afternoon since that time I've been doing research and there's been a lot of study about the effect of cars emissions on forestry, on water tables on streams and even more importantly on health and so I'm going to bring this to the board of health as well but my concern is that these cars, we're living in an age where everyone is concerned about climate change and the one thing they're finding is that the car emissions are really causing a problem for our climate and we are now creating a situation where probably two thirds of the families in our community are going to be parked or sitting in an idling car on Laurel Road, Mason Road Whitman Road and then the other way

[Speaker 1] (46:07 - 46:09)
again there's a lot here that we really

[Speaker 6] (46:09 - 46:22)
can't, ok so I'm just wondering I'd like to bring it up here because if this commission maybe start to think about that, about what will happen to people as a result of having all these cars idling But we don't deal with human health here

[Speaker 1] (46:22 - 46:24)
I know, I'm going to bring it there also

[Speaker 6] (46:24 - 46:28)
but I thought climate change might be something that you would look at in terms of forestry and streams?

[Speaker 1] (46:29 - 47:11)
We implement the Wetlands Protection Act and it's got set resources that are protected, set performance standards that if any work is done in those resource or the buffer zone they have to meet so that's what we that's our focus So the impact on emissions on any of the forestry or the water table in the area where we live isn't a concern? There's not anything to it and I don't know if you can address that But not to get, I don't want to get into it I'm only bringing it up

[Speaker 5] (47:13 - 47:41)
Maybe There's no question that there's concerns around the effects of climate change on wetland habitat However, that's a global effect of millions of cars and other activities 70 cars or a couple hundred cars here versus there that's a drop in the bucket of the overall problem The CO2 emissions that go in the atmosphere are going to go whether the schools near Stanley or somewhere else

[Speaker 6] (47:41 - 47:49)
But the National Park Service is already issuing warnings on all of their websites about having cars sitting in lines idling

[Speaker 5] (47:49 - 47:59)
That's a problem in general that we need to stop regardless of where the school is That's independent of the wetland So that's something that you can take up with the town for sure

[Speaker 10] (47:59 - 48:22)
I just want to say one thing I remember when my son was at Stanley They would not let the parents idle They literally turned our car off I don't know if that's still happening But I think that's something The principal at the time was very adamant about Turn your cars off You would literally go around So I think that's something maybe we could take up with You know

[Speaker 1] (48:22 - 48:36)
But outside the scope of Yeah No, no, that's okay I guess, Marissa, to give people on Zoom a chance if they have questions Is anyone

[Speaker 13] (48:38 - 48:54)
Sure, I'd invite anyone on Zoom to use the raise your hand function and I'm happy to call on you Does not look like I have any hands raised

[Speaker 16] (48:55 - 48:56)
Okay

[Speaker 3] (48:58 - 49:51)
Yes So just to be clear on one point Two thirds of the school age children will be commuting in that area in a four block area Where today It's only the middle school And it's only one elementary school Two thirds of all children will be driving I just want to make sure you guys Because that's a very powerful point I didn't even think about it Until she brought it up The effect of the emissions on our environment Because of the decisions that we're making here tonight Are many and far reaching And I appreciate that this is a conservation commission And I appreciate the fact that Your charge is to make sure that Our waters, the conservation area Are in good shape and good form But I just want to repeat that You don't have to respond to it I just want you guys to keep that in your mind I'd like to go back to the picture that you showed us a minute ago About the red line

[Speaker 2] (49:53 - 49:54)
That one

[Speaker 8] (49:54 - 50:11)
Can I respond to the emissions? Those cars would be going to a school Regardless And emissions, the very nature of them Is they disperse And so We're not creating more emissions Those emissions would be on top of that regardless

[Speaker 3] (50:11 - 50:13)
The difference is you have 600 cars

[Speaker 8] (50:13 - 50:18)
I understand but you were saying The effects of the emissions are going to spread regardless

[Speaker 3] (50:19 - 50:38)
You have 600 cars waiting in line Where today you have three different schools Where there's 200 cars per school That are absorbing those And it's not as big of a line And there's not as many kids that drop off So the lines move more quickly So the wait time isn't as long And again, we're digressing And I apologize for that

[Speaker 1] (50:39 - 50:39)
So

[Speaker 3] (50:41 - 51:10)
I think you think we have broader power No, no, no I think this is a town And we're making a decision as a community And I appreciate that this is the Conservation Commission But I think it's important for all of us To do the right thing For the town, for our students, for everybody That's all So I look at that red line and I have a question So we talked about runoff We talked about the water being filtered To the rain gutters and all that stuff Coming out more clean Is the footprint that I'm seeing in grey What part of it is to be paved?

[Speaker 2] (51:12 - 51:22)
The grey on the screen Is the building So that's the roof Wait That's the building?

[Speaker 3] (51:22 - 51:41)
Yes So where's the pavement going to be? Let me I guess the question I'm asking is In terms of the footprint That is paved today versus the footprint That's going to be paved in the future What's the difference?

[Speaker 2] (51:42 - 51:46)
It's I don't have the exact number off the top of my head It's in the report

[Speaker 1] (51:47 - 51:49)
There was an increase in Purvis

[Speaker 2] (51:49 - 51:59)
It's definitely an increase in Purvis It's significant That's why for the stormwater There's a lot of effort being To make sure those impacts are mitigated

[Speaker 3] (51:59 - 52:02)
So today the rainwater seeps into the soil That we have

[Speaker 1] (52:04 - 52:05)
Unfortunately not

[Speaker 2] (52:07 - 52:08)
The site's mostly ledge

[Speaker 3] (52:08 - 52:18)
The site's mostly ledge Be that as it may There's still going to be Less opportunity for rain To soak into The natural environment

[Speaker 1] (52:18 - 52:24)
Do you want to explain The basins?

[Speaker 2] (52:25 - 53:41)
So Regarding the resource areas Again, the peer reviewer brought up the fact Very early that we wanted to make sure So we were Taking great care to make sure that The volumes of water that those resource areas See today Doesn't change in any appreciable amount The site will have much more Impervious area when we're done With our construction So to mitigate those extra areas Of imperviousness We're creating A whole brand new stormwater system That not just address the volume And the rate that water leaves the site But also the quality of that water That leaves the site Two of the main features Are these very large underground Detention systems Where we can hold the water back And release it slowly To mimic what happens out there today Upstream of that Is all the water quality measures That we're looking to do To make sure that the water we release Meets today's standards for stormwater So we're removing 80% of our total suspended solids 80% of our phosphorous So it's a To not impact our downstream neighbors And to make the stream of water That's coming off the site cleaner That's the elevator pitch

[Speaker 3] (53:41 - 53:57)
Yeah, and the maintenance on that Is probably not something we want to talk about just now Because it's irrelevant My point is, the physical building Is going, built on the buffer land Within that buffer zone The red line is covering Oh, a little, yes

[Speaker 8] (53:57 - 53:59)
The current building is there too

[Speaker 3] (54:00 - 54:24)
We've made mistakes in the past I think that the building was built In a way that it probably should not have been And I think, shame on us But we're here today to talk about A new building to make decisions Based on what's best for that area And so my question to you is The building was there What a mistake we made back then Are we going to do the same thing And encroach on buffer land With a structure that size?

[Speaker 1] (54:24 - 55:52)
When you say encroaching on buffer You make it sound like you can't do that But that's not You can build in The buffer zone Do you know how many filings we get Of homeowners Who are in a buffer zone And want to put an extension on their house Want to put a patio on It's all in the buffer zone They come to us We make sure they meet the performance standards For whatever resource That buffer zone is off of And that's what we did here And we I mean, I have never seen I'll tell you An order of condition With 70 odd conditions in it That we have issued In this town The peer reviewer With the cooperation Of the town's consultant Have really buckled down to make sure That this project is going to Protect the resources Under the Wetlands Protection Act And I urge you to look At those And look at the notice of intent In some detail Because There really Has been A big, large effort here To make sure that this school Is not going to Impact Adversely The wetland areas That it is near

[Speaker 5] (55:52 - 56:31)
And to add to that The consultant we hired Their job was to provide an independent review For us, the conservation committee Not for the project And so That's partly why we've arrived at this point Where we have 72 conditions They are helping us hold The project's feet to the fire, so to speak To protect the protected areas From Damages And in those conditions There's also clauses there For if damage does occur, what happens So there's provisions I think To protect the wetlands And to enforce restoration If damages do occur

[Speaker 4] (56:36 - 56:52)
Well Doesn't it make us think That the extraordinary Effort to Do this project That all these 72 conditions Maybe It's going beyond What is

[Speaker 1] (56:52 - 57:12)
No, no, not at all Just because there's 72 Or however many conditions Doesn't mean that there's something wrong With the project It just means that The conservation commission, its peer reviewer Has tried very hard To think of every possible Scenario

[Speaker 4] (57:12 - 57:36)
To protect this resource Now what is the oversight of this I mean how can How can we be sure That every one of these conditions Is going to be carried out To the absolutely proper I mean Is the DEP going to come out Periodically and check this Who's going to be oversight

[Speaker 1] (57:36 - 58:33)
There are Well the commission is There's reporting that has to be done We've been on site We have, there are conditions that require Before they do any work The commission goes out there To make sure erosion control Is in place I mean and there's I know there's a number of conditions Where Information has to be provided And then there are the conditions That remain forever You know we want to make sure That the systems they've put in For purifying The water Are maintained And that will be on the town And they have to report every I forget if it's a semi-annually Or annually To the commission On how they are maintaining things So there are safeguards in there On an annual basis

[Speaker 10] (58:35 - 58:42)
We could change that if it didn't You know at some point if it was You know if we needed to We could change that to quarterly

[Speaker 1] (58:42 - 58:50)
I mean there's a provision in there That we have the authority If something's not, we feel isn't Working right

[Speaker 4] (58:50 - 58:58)
It's very technical all this business I mean I would think it would be hard for any of us To really understand And have confidence

[Speaker 1] (58:59 - 59:05)
That's why we have a peer reviewer That's why we hired a peer reviewer With an expertise

[Speaker 8] (59:08 - 59:13)
Who has advised us That they have met all of the Their concerns

[Speaker 12] (59:20 - 59:32)
Yes I have a question about the trees Is that part of your commission?

The preservation Of the trees around The site Is that part of what you're doing?

[Speaker 10] (59:33 - 1:00:07)
I can comment a little to that When we did our site visit We asked and we were told That supposedly no trees Would be taken down And there was just some brush Like I mean I don't know If you can pull up one of the pictures But it was just like brush trees Like it looked like kindling So I mean I don't know if anybody here Can attest to that but I remember Asking when we went to our site Visit about the trees And we were told They would not be touched

[Speaker 2] (1:00:09 - 1:00:43)
Again we're staying within the developed area Towards what I call the back of the site Where this school site becomes Forest Ave extension Sometimes it looks Looks like it's one or the other But There's no We're not cutting down any trees Within any of the off property And I think it's just brush in the corner In the northwest property Is it where the soccer field is?

[Speaker 4] (1:00:45 - 1:00:46)
Right

[Speaker 17] (1:00:46 - 1:00:46)
Right

[Speaker 4] (1:00:46 - 1:00:55)
I think so About the trees I think we were told There would be several trees cut down And the

[Speaker 1] (1:00:55 - 1:01:27)
Just the fact that trees May be cut down doesn't necessarily Violate something Again you have to look at the resource And what you're protecting And whether it's going to have an adverse effect On On the On the resource So I don't recall there being any issue About cutting the trees down Affecting Any of the resource areas

[Speaker 2] (1:01:27 - 1:01:29)
And I'm also trying to bring up the planting plan

[Speaker 7] (1:01:29 - 1:01:35)
I mean there's trees being cut down And there's also A lot of trees being planted

[Speaker 1] (1:01:36 - 1:01:40)
I understood there were Going to be rain gardens put in

[Speaker 5] (1:01:41 - 1:01:47)
And One of the conditions that we put in Is that anything that's planted Needs to be a native species

[Speaker 2] (1:01:47 - 1:02:04)
And we replied There's a small area where Given in the response And speaking to the landscape architect They can make it all native But they thought the plant that they selected Which is a subspecies of viburnum Was the best one for that location

[Speaker 1] (1:02:05 - 1:02:14)
I think there's also a requirement To take out any invasives On the property Yeah on the property If it's disturbed

[Speaker 5] (1:02:14 - 1:02:15)
So was the viburnum non-native?

[Speaker 2] (1:02:16 - 1:02:21)
The one species from what I understand There's a lot of native viburnums

[Speaker 8] (1:02:21 - 1:02:28)
It was a subspecies And because of the way it blooms In three seasons Or there was something about

[Speaker 2] (1:02:28 - 1:02:40)
It's the shady corner And it provides the best green But she did say And again it's not in a It's outside of any buffer zone area But it was an issue of the commission She could find something else

[Speaker 5] (1:02:40 - 1:02:45)
There are a lot of problems with native viburnums From what I understand

[Speaker 2] (1:02:45 - 1:03:08)
From my landscape architect friends Some of the issues has to do with climate change And what is currently native Is transitioning to not be native anymore And what is not native is coming up north I don't know if that's the case In this but that's from my work With a lot of landscape architects The transition we've been dealing with The natives and non-natives

[Speaker 1] (1:03:11 - 1:04:10)
I just want to say We here Are very concerned About the environment That's why we volunteer on the conservation commission Believe me this is a thankless job A lot of the time And so We do take our job seriously I mean that's one of the reasons We said this is a big project Let's get a peer reviewer in here Who has a lot of expertise in this area And that's why we have gone through this Painfully Through this NOI And through the conditions And trying to make sure that this works And it For our jurisdiction Our focus It does If you have issues with Traffic and stuff That is not something We're going to be dealing with But we have Tried very hard To make sure And taken this very seriously This project

[Speaker 12] (1:04:12 - 1:04:41)
My question about the trees Did not have to do with that corner But had to do with the back of the new building Where it abuts the path That is by the side of Ewing Woods And So the rear of the building I assume That they're going to leave the trees That are right up against the building Or are they going to cut the trees At the back of the building And just leave the path And the trees in Ewing Woods So that was my specific question

[Speaker 5] (1:04:42 - 1:04:44)
Inside the resource area

[Speaker 12] (1:04:47 - 1:04:56)
So on the right hand side Of that picture Those trees I think that's what I'm thinking Yep See the school

[Speaker 2] (1:04:58 - 1:05:01)
We're looking down These trees

[Speaker 7] (1:05:01 - 1:05:02)
Those trees are all going

[Speaker 2] (1:05:02 - 1:05:05)
No they should be staying

[Speaker 7] (1:05:05 - 1:05:06)
They're not on school property

[Speaker 2] (1:05:06 - 1:05:07)
They're not on school property

[Speaker 7] (1:05:07 - 1:05:13)
The ones that are on school property Are most likely coming down

[Speaker 2] (1:05:14 - 1:05:24)
If you were to If you go out there So a good indication of where that property line is Between the school And the right of way Is the hydrant

[Speaker 12] (1:05:24 - 1:05:27)
Oh I know where the hydrant is I walk that path every day

[Speaker 2] (1:05:27 - 1:05:39)
So if you were to mentally draw a line parallel Between the school That's the property line So if you go to the school side Those trees would go But anything on that line would stay

[Speaker 12] (1:05:39 - 1:05:41)
Ok thank you

[Speaker 5] (1:05:41 - 1:05:46)
Does that mean some trees inside The buffer zone are coming down Yes

[Speaker 7] (1:05:49 - 1:05:51)
Yeah probably Yeah especially

[Speaker 2] (1:05:51 - 1:05:52)
The northwest portion

[Speaker 7] (1:05:53 - 1:05:55)
The northwest

[Speaker 2] (1:05:55 - 1:06:02)
We've been talking about Ewing Woods so much But the buffer zone on the site For the UU Woods Yeah ok but not

[Speaker 5] (1:06:02 - 1:06:08)
That area is a mess To be honest That's the Bramble Grove

[Speaker 8] (1:06:08 - 1:06:10)
It doesn't look like there are many trees

[Speaker 7] (1:06:10 - 1:06:11)
I don't

[Speaker 5] (1:06:12 - 1:06:15)
Ewing Woods Is that any of those trees coming down

[Speaker 7] (1:06:16 - 1:06:19)
Ewing Woods is so bad No we're not

[Speaker 1] (1:06:20 - 1:06:31)
Ewing Woods Is a burning bush Invasive species problem That is I don't know how You could ever fix Every other bush is burning bush

[Speaker 12] (1:06:31 - 1:06:41)
And you can see all the red Because there's no greenery yet So you can see what that is No that's

[Speaker 5] (1:06:41 - 1:06:47)
So inside of this buffer zone Those trees on the north side of the path Are coming down or not

[Speaker 7] (1:06:48 - 1:06:50)
I don't I'm sorry I can't see that picture

[Speaker 5] (1:06:50 - 1:06:55)
I don't believe so Ok Those trees should stay

[Speaker 8] (1:06:56 - 1:06:57)
No it doesn't look

[Speaker 2] (1:07:06 - 1:07:17)
Like it is Really zooming in I think this is just This is

[Speaker 5] (1:07:19 - 1:07:20)
This line is a brush

[Speaker 2] (1:07:22 - 1:07:53)
The dash See this one Property line So some of those trees are right on the property line Yeah but they might be the overhang of them So I I I hate As I mentioned last time I was in front of you I hate to say but all or Every You know as an engineer But It was great care taken not Not to wholesale take down trees Given the

[Speaker 5] (1:07:53 - 1:08:00)
Proximity of the resource Area to the School that I would say prioritizing those Trees would make sense

[Speaker 17] (1:08:00 - 1:08:01)
Yeah

[Speaker 5] (1:08:01 - 1:08:02)
We

[Speaker 2] (1:08:04 - 1:08:41)
Ok You know a typical condition I See for that is Prior to any being cut down they get marked And then either I don't know how you operate Yeah I like that idea My commission we assign a commissioner Or Maybe it's the agent or whoever you want But they come out and look So that you know we just don't Cut them we mark them we look at them together And say Ok we can save it or it's not worth saving Or That one that's not marked is dead So why don't we just do the water connection over there

[Speaker 16] (1:08:41 - 1:08:44)
We should definitely do that Yeah we can do that

[Speaker 1] (1:08:45 - 1:08:46)
We can

[Speaker 8] (1:08:47 - 1:08:51)
Thanks for bringing that up

[Speaker 1] (1:08:51 - 1:08:51)
Thank you

[Speaker 2] (1:08:54 - 1:08:56)
Last question I promise

[Speaker 3] (1:08:56 - 1:09:11)
Ok Was the study that you had a committee come in To help peer review the work that was done Somewhere from Where I'm sitting it sounds like That was an exercise in trying To make this project a reality What do we need to do to make this project

[Speaker 1] (1:09:11 - 1:09:20)
No that was the opposite Because the peer reviewer has to poke holes In the town's Project

[Speaker 3] (1:09:20 - 1:09:25)
So the question ultimately should have been Is this the right place for this building Was that question asked

[Speaker 1] (1:09:25 - 1:09:35)
He's like us the peer reviewer is like us He's looking at the conservation issues He's not looking at is this the right place to put a school Is the traffic ok He's just I'm not asking no I'm just saying

[Speaker 5] (1:09:35 - 1:09:52)
To your point though So to your point though It was a like ok If this project goes forward What's wrong with it or what do we need to do It wasn't like this project versus us Putting the school somewhere else It was weighing the school in this one location

[Speaker 3] (1:09:52 - 1:09:58)
Versus saying Is this the right place for the school period Is this the right place for a school

[Speaker 1] (1:09:58 - 1:10:00)
That's not our decision

[Speaker 3] (1:10:00 - 1:10:01)
Is this the right place for a building

[Speaker 1] (1:10:02 - 1:10:03)
That's not our decision

[Speaker 5] (1:10:03 - 1:10:23)
When it gets to us It's like a project has been proposed We review it We review just that project We don't make decisions around alternatives We just make certain that it meets The guidelines of our jurisdiction Which is the wetlands protection act So we have to protect the resource areas Which are the wetlands

[Speaker 3] (1:10:23 - 1:10:49)
I gotta tell you This is disappointing This whole project is just a big disappointment And this is just another example Of how it's a disappointment I don't know what else to say It doesn't sound like the committee Was there to decide whether This is a buildable spot Because of the wetland consideration It sounds like it was We're gonna make these conditions part of The building project

[Speaker 8] (1:10:52 - 1:11:00)
Is the building capable of being built Without harming the resource That was the question to us We don't decide

[Speaker 5] (1:11:01 - 1:11:18)
We do get occasionally Projects Not this one Where there's no way To put a pool basically on the bank There's no way it can be done As it's proposed In those instances We have said this is what you're gonna have to do To make this work

[Speaker 1] (1:11:18 - 1:11:30)
Or if they wanted to put the school In the wetlands That's not gonna fly There's no way You could have done that

[Speaker 5] (1:11:30 - 1:11:32)
There's nothing we would ever propose

[Speaker 1] (1:11:32 - 1:11:33)
Yes, no

[Speaker 5] (1:11:34 - 1:11:48)
If that proposal came before us That would be a case where we'd say This is not gonna fly You're gonna have to move this That's not what this is We deal with the 72 conditions We can adequately protect these wetlands

[Speaker 17] (1:11:52 - 1:11:52)
It's growing

[Speaker 1] (1:11:52 - 1:12:04)
It's growing If there are no more questions Marissa Is there anyone You wanna check on Zoom?

[Speaker 13] (1:12:04 - 1:12:18)
I'll do one final request for anybody via Zoom Who would like to voice a comment Or a question You may use the raise your hand function Looks like we are good

[Speaker 1] (1:12:21 - 1:12:49)
If so I would entertain a motion To close the public hearing I would now ask for a motion On the town's NOI To build a School at 10 Whitman

[Speaker 10] (1:12:53 - 1:12:57)
On the town's NOI To build a school at

[Speaker 1] (1:12:57 - 1:13:00)
And I would entertain Any conditions

[Speaker 10] (1:13:01 - 1:13:13)
All conditions From the conservation commission And the peer review In any that we need to add At 10 Whitman Which would be

[Speaker 1] (1:13:13 - 1:13:37)
Prior to cutting trees They'd have to have the commission come And I would also Add that If If the commission Determines that there's some Need for A border Natural barrier Between the school and Ewing woods We'd come back For that

[Speaker 11] (1:13:37 - 1:13:56)
There were just a couple of conditions That we wanted to Talk about the language on Is this the appropriate time To discuss that? In the general Are we looking at Do we have to reopen the hearing?

[Speaker 5] (1:13:56 - 1:14:03)
I feel like we closed the hearing The public part of it

[Speaker 1] (1:14:03 - 1:14:19)
Well we're Now making a motion To Approve the project With conditions And he's making a correction On the We closed the hearing

[Speaker 11] (1:14:21 - 1:14:30)
Condition 44 Under the special conditions That must be in the special conditions

[Speaker 16] (1:14:30 - 1:14:31)
Yes

[Speaker 11] (1:14:35 - 1:14:52)
Yes We did want to note that the generator For the project Is located in that area And we just would like the generator To be included within the list Of the Acceptable fuel containing Items in that area

[Speaker 16] (1:14:52 - 1:14:53)
Okay

[Speaker 11] (1:14:55 - 1:15:27)
And then also Condition 46 Which references permanent trash dumpsters In the 100 foot Buffer zone Only if they are enclosed in a structure So we are proposing Permanent dumpsters in the service area So yeah We just wanted to make sure that the language was Appropriate there For what we are proposing Can you describe the service area

[Speaker 1] (1:15:27 - 1:15:59)
Do you have a picture of it? Yep You'll have to take that up with Linfield Yeah that one has a mistake in it That one split by me Oh The town of Linfield Yeah I wonder where the peer review got these from I can't Oh I stopped your screen sharing because I pulled up the conditions But you can go ahead And do it again What is the change in language That you're looking at?

[Speaker 2] (1:16:00 - 1:16:32)
It's more we just want to make sure What We're showing it meets your intent of your Just read literally It could create conflict With what we have proposed So we would like to Is this on the screen now? So this is the mechanical area And Remember this mechanical area Which includes the dumpsters Is enclosed with a wall And so what we just want to clarify That condition reads more like Fence around dumpster

[Speaker 5] (1:16:33 - 1:16:41)
So that whole area is enclosed I interpret that To the intent of what the

[Speaker 8] (1:16:41 - 1:16:47)
Yeah But maybe we take out in a structure In a structure seems weird Maybe we just say enclosed

[Speaker 2] (1:16:47 - 1:16:50)
I like that I just read it as

[Speaker 8] (1:16:50 - 1:16:53)
Yeah it does seem like right around

[Speaker 1] (1:16:55 - 1:16:58)
And are they Within 50 feet of the resource?

[Speaker 2] (1:16:59 - 1:17:10)
Yes Within 100 feet they may not be Within 50 feet The dumpsters are definitely not They're probably more like Where is the generator you were just talking about?

[Speaker 5] (1:17:10 - 1:17:12)
That there right there?

[Speaker 2] (1:17:13 - 1:17:38)
I think it's that one And that's either the transformer And that's the generator or it's vice versa It's one of those two rectangles See this one? Yeah Sorry I'm really bad at drawing So how are we going to modify Number 44?

[Speaker 1] (1:17:40 - 1:18:13)
The generator has I mean the generator will have a double wall If you're Physically concerned We just want to make sure Except for such Stored enclosed containers Within a building or in Tanks attached to vehicles Or unless permitted I'll just take that one out Add an exception for the generator It is a closed container right?

[Speaker 11] (1:18:13 - 1:18:20)
But the Condition reads closed container Within a building And it's not technically within a building

[Speaker 1] (1:18:20 - 1:18:23)
So take out the building Or tanks

[Speaker 8] (1:18:24 - 1:18:26)
Attached to a vehicle So it's not

[Speaker 11] (1:18:26 - 1:18:33)
It just doesn't quite capture what we have Although the exceptions don't quite capture What we have on the site

[Speaker 5] (1:18:34 - 1:18:37)
Someone has a raised hand William Jess

[Speaker 8] (1:18:38 - 1:18:39)
Oh that's the consultant

[Speaker 5] (1:18:40 - 1:18:42)
I was going to say do we want to talk to the consultant about this

[Speaker 13] (1:18:42 - 1:18:44)
Bill you don't have to raise your hand You can chime in any time

[Speaker 5] (1:18:44 - 1:18:46)
Yeah that's exactly what I was going to say

[Speaker 14] (1:18:47 - 1:18:55)
I think you can simply address this If it's in a double wall tank With leak detection Then it's fine

[Speaker 10] (1:18:55 - 1:18:59)
Maybe we should put that leak detection Yeah

[Speaker 14] (1:18:59 - 1:19:12)
All they do is it's a double wall tank And there's a probe between the two tanks So if there's a leak They get an alarm Pretty standard Generator equipment These days

[Speaker 10] (1:19:12 - 1:19:14)
Does the alarm go to like someone's phone

[Speaker 14] (1:19:14 - 1:19:27)
No it would go on the Wherever the school alarms The generator has a whole host of alarms Associated with it And they likely have A central alarm panel in the school building

[Speaker 2] (1:19:29 - 1:19:35)
With the buildings today That will get found Yeah that's how they get

[Speaker 10] (1:19:35 - 1:19:40)
A call Is someone going to

[Speaker 1] (1:19:40 - 1:19:44)
Make a suggestion on how to better State this

[Speaker 8] (1:19:44 - 1:19:49)
Yeah I think it was a double wall Tank with a leak detection Leak protection

[Speaker 10] (1:19:49 - 1:19:52)
Leak detection Detection

[Speaker 1] (1:19:54 - 1:20:02)
Thank you Bill Thank you Bill Are there any other Issues with the Conditions?

[Speaker 8] (1:20:02 - 1:20:02)
Were there any other

[Speaker 11] (1:20:06 - 1:20:11)
No Not that I'm Aware of Ok

[Speaker 1] (1:20:13 - 1:20:42)
So I think we have a motion On the table to approve The NOI With the conditions Of the peer reviewer With the modifications Just made And the addition of Two additional Conditions One about prior to cutting any trees The commission has to review Which trees are being cut And

[Speaker 5] (1:20:42 - 1:20:48)
Only within the resource area Or do we want the whole property

[Speaker 8] (1:20:48 - 1:20:51)
No it's only Within the buffer zone

[Speaker 5] (1:20:51 - 1:20:55)
Only buffer zone Ok And

[Speaker 1] (1:20:57 - 1:21:10)
And the other one was If the commission determines That we should Re-evaluate whether there needs to be a natural buffer Between the school and the NOI So that's the motion on the table I second the motion

[Speaker 13] (1:21:11 - 1:21:20)
All in favor I think Just Your names quite aren't visible from the Zoom camera so just roll call to be safe

[Speaker 1] (1:21:22 - 1:21:24)
Tony Bandewitz

[Speaker 8] (1:21:25 - 1:21:28)
In favor Randall Hughes In favor

[Speaker 10] (1:21:31 - 1:21:33)
Monica In favor

[Speaker 1] (1:21:35 - 1:21:47)
So I will get you Marissa All of the conditions In one form And findings Which I started Thank you

[Speaker 8] (1:21:49 - 1:21:52)
And we'll Talk about the Linfield

[Speaker 1] (1:21:52 - 1:21:54)
Oh yeah Linfield has to come out

[Speaker 5] (1:21:54 - 1:21:56)
Let's do a Linfield search

[Speaker 8] (1:21:56 - 1:21:59)
Search and see if it shows up anywhere else

[Speaker 1] (1:22:00 - 1:22:06)
I think we can Do we have to move To adjourn

[Speaker 5] (1:22:06 - 1:22:07)
Move to adjourn

[Speaker 1] (1:22:07 - 1:22:11)
All in favor We're adjourned You can take us off

[Speaker 5] (1:22:13 - 1:22:15)
There's Or Linfield

[Speaker 8] (1:22:15 - 1:22:18)
I was going to say it It wasn't