This public hearing is now called called to order at 6 p.m. This hearing is being held as a requirement by the provisions of chapter 131 section 40 of the general laws of the commonwealth and act relative to the protection of the wetlands as most recently amended.
Notice at this time and place of this hearing was originally published in the haven neighborhood news on February 18th, 2026 and March 5th, 2026. It was also posted in the town's clerk's
office. Persons wishing to be heard will be called in the following order. Um, please do me a favor. Speak loudly and clearly, approach the podium, state your name, and turn off all cell phones. That ain't my job. That was Doug's job. Sorry about that.
>> Um, I'd like to entertain a motion that we open this meeting. Motion to open public meeting. >> Second. >> All those in favor? >> I. Um, first thing on the agenda is meeting mail. Julia, I'm going to give this one to you, please.
>> Okay. So, SP R E D and D O E email notification from Victoria Alaro, town planner regarding training session regarding consolidated local permitting for clean energy facilities. Review matters presented. Votes may be taken.
So, we just got um an email uh notification. and Victoria sent it over to us and it is just a training session that the commission might be interested in and um you can sign up for whatever day works best and then there's going to be one um session so you can choose to
do it or choose not to do it. I think it was sent over to you guys but I can double check to make sure that you have it. Um it won't be till June so we have some time to to work through that. >> All right. if you don't mind just put in your notes that you get it sent to us so we kind of know what's going on.
>> Okay. >> All right. Thank you. >> All right. Old business says nothing. Um continue public hearing NOI in Stormwater Cristiano meet in the middle LLC zero middle road map 23 block 1B
SE00001-062. A notice of intent and storm water application was filed by Cristiano meet in the middle LLC for property located at zero middle road map 23 lot 1B. The applicant proposes to construct a singlestory uh commercial storage
building with office space and a contractor's yard for material and supply storage with the associated pave park and utility storm water management controls and landscaping within the 100 foot buffer zone to a bordering vegetated wetland. The applicant is
presented by Chris Vanderberg um of SiteTech Engineering and Environmental Consultants Incorporated. Plan name was proposed con contractor's yard storage facility dated February 23, 2026. Stormwater management reported dated
April 26 uh April 2026. Project is being peer reviewed by Merrell Engineering and Land Surveying. Review of matters presented taken. I'd like to entertain a motion that we open the continued public hearing. >> Motion to open the continued public
hearing. >> So move. >> Second. >> All those in favor? >> I. >> Steve, it's all you. >> Okay. >> Um go to the podium. And if you want, I'll take a look in the back and see. >> No, I have I wasn't sure. Do you want me to set that up uh somewhere?
>> Uh right next to the podium if you don't mind, Steve. >> Sure. >> And I do know your name, but if you don't mind when we get to the podium, please say your name. >> Yes. Uh for the record, Steve Giosa with Scitec Engineering representing the applicant this evening. Um
while I'm setting up, um as the commission knows, this is a continued hearing on this project. Um Meet in the Middle is looking to develop a contractor storage facility on the south side of Middle Road, right opposite
Morses Lane. And um since the last meeting, we've uh obviously we received Merrill's peer review on the project and the peer review consultant has concurred that the applicant has revised the plans
and met the the changes that they were looking for on the site plan. Um, we also had a follow-up sitewalk this past weekend and uh we have made one minor change to the plan after the sitewalk and after a little bit of discussion. Uh
but briefly what we've done is um just orientation his middle road Morse's Lane the entrance coming in when we walked the site we came in over on this side of the property and kind of wandered through this area then back to where the building is in the uh the far back
section of the site. The changes we've made to the plan since I think the last meeting. the outside storage area here. We've actually shrunk it, pushed it further back away from the resource area. Um there was um a question about
where the pond is and that's this area down here. It's an old farm pond on the property and I think Chris Capone, the wetlands consultant, submitted a little supplemental report to the commission on that. Um but one of the things we talked about is the utilization of this area
for storage of equipment. and how are we going to manage that in the event of a spill or potential spill of maybe hydraulic fluid. We've graded this area away from the resource area so the the flow of any runoff is down in in
this direction. But as a added safety feature, we've added on and I had this sketched on the plan at the meeting and we've now put it on the drawing a little containment berm down here at the base creating a little sump here about a 1ft deep sump. So if there was a spill, we
have a spill management plan that's part of the application where we'd have a spill kit within the building and then we'd also have this secondary storage that could occur down here in the event of a a minor spill of hydraulic fluid. Um we've respected the 25 ft no touch
zone. Most of the work is actually going forward in sort of an overgrown field area. Uh, so we're not doing any wholesale clearing of trees on the site. And I know the chairman uh mentioned earlier a potential vernal pool which is
off the property embedded within a wetland. And when you're looking at vernal pools, the way they the habitat of the vernal pool works, it's a 100 ft habitat area up to the limit of the resource area. So if it's embedded within the wetlands, it comes to there.
But in this case, and that's not certified vernal pool. I think it's a potential vernal >> pool. >> The way the topography works, we actually have a high point >> separating any of the activity on the property from dropping off to the abuing lot.
>> Uh so everything that we're doing and working with is draining actually away from that area. So we think that that uh protects the resource areas um pretty well. Um I don't think there were any other changes. We do have a title five
septic system, a holding tank for the floor drains in the building. That's a tight tank with an alarm system that would uh be implemented. And um again, we try to we do have a zoning approval for this project where we agree to create a buffer zone in the
front, a little burming area for visibility screening to Minnow Road. And we've added plantings along the boundary line to the house over here on the edge on the I guess that'd be the east side of the site. Uh which was actually the person who owned the land that we're
working on now. And she sold the property to my client who's looking to develop the contractor's sh. So, I think that's kind of a quick overview and be happy to try and answer any remaining questions the board may have. >> Any questions?
>> So, I I was pretty comfortable um after this sat Saturday site visit we had um because of the fact that it was staked out on the four corners as we asked for. I wish that had been done on the very first site visit. Um I
>> you know we kind of were out here and and really didn't know um the point to even to start um showing the four points of that particular building in the location really um set some comfort with
me. uh knowing that it was far enough from that pond area um just gave me a a better feeling about this because I was very skeptical in and how close it was going to be and I appreciate that you
guys did go above and beyond to push that further away from that resource area. U for me that's a home run. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Anyone else? >> Yeah, I mean I I agree. I mean, I appreciate the additional grading
will be helpful. Super burn. Um, >> there's always a chance. So, so I went there Friday, met with Steve, I couldn't do the Saturday visit. Um, the other thing is like you were saying that there's a big high grounding between that garage and the thing. is also I
think that's great at le >> so I think we got plenty of protection working for uh Cristiano and his side on that right and for the playing. So um I'm very comfortable with this. >> Yeah that's >> Is there anyone from the audience?
So with that being said um I know that um I know that everyone's been very comfortable. I know this already got approved by the planning board also. Yes. >> Okay. >> Yes. We have zoning board approval approval at this point in time. >> Okay. So, with that being said, I'd like
to entertain a motion that we close the public hearing. Motion to close the public hearing. I'll >> second. >> All those in favor? >> I. >> Then with that being said, Steve, I know that you have to go by the standard order of conditions on the um NOI.
>> So, with that being said, we have specific uh order conditions that I'd like to add to that. Um, we can even email them to you when you're done. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, with that being said, um, we have right here, I just want to make sure I got two of them that we read.
Okay. Eros and control inspection, on-site meeting with contractor within 5 days prior to construction. No stockpiling of materials, no equipment stored, no refueling, no portable toilets, or wash outs from concrete in the buffer zone. An emergency spill kit
shall be readily available while working in pro work is in progress. Emergency emergency phone numbers including environmental cleanup contact shall be available on site. Um with that being said, I'd like to
entertain a motion that we accept the order of conditions. Motion to accept the conditions. >> Second. >> All those in favor? >> I All sir. >> Thank you. Good. Thank you. Have fun and enjoy it.
>> I reviewed the period as well which I felt was >> Yeah, I talked the agreeable conditions in that >> substantial close. Okay.
Continue public hearing. NOI Storm Water MD South Coast Properties LLC 72 Middle Road SC 001-623. A notice of intent in stormwater application was filed by MD South Coast Properties LLC 72 Middle Road map 24 lot
35. The applicant proposes to construct three duplex buildings with associated site work. construct a uh detention pond within the 100 foot buffer zone of the border and vegetated wet lane and to perform minor cleaning filling and grading within the 200t river front
boundary. The applicant is represented by David Minion of Dominion alone. Plan name is special residential development plan over 55 units be known as middle road medals at 72 middle road a cushion at mass dated February 2026.
Project is being peer-reviewed by Merell Engineering. Review of matters presented. Vote may be taken. Engineer has requested to continue the hearing to May 13, 2026 and the site visit to May 9th. Peer review is not yet completed. With that, I'd like to enter a motion
and we open the continued public hearing. Motion to open the continue public hearing. Second. >> All those in favor? I I'd like to entertain a motion that this does get to continue to the May 13, 2026 with a site visit on May 9th. Motion to continue for
May 13th with the followup site visit on May 9th. I'll second that. >> All those in favor? >> I I >> Okay. Continue. to extend a request of order of resource area delineation TJA540R
Main Street SE00001-0544 a request from extension to an existing order of resource area delineation was filed by GGA uh 540R Main Street LLC property located at 540R Main Street map 11 lot 10. The
applicant has requested an extension for the proposed 3.116MW fullallic solar farm with the associated infrastructure. The applicant is represented by Isa Smith of Atlantic Design Engineerings Incorporated. Viewers matter presented. Votes may be
taken. Peer review is being determined. I'd like to in a motion. Oh, this is not a public hearing. So with that, Julia, >> what do we got there? So, um, the peer review is currently being determined for this. I originally reached out to Brad
Holmes who had a conflict of interest and so he was unable to do this peer review and he suggested I reach out to Markman Janello at LEC Environmental. So, I reached out to him um and he is working with uh one of his partners, Nathan, to see if Nathan can take on the
peer review. um they haven't responded back yet if they are able to take on the peer review, but I am in contact with them and I'm in contact with ASA to keep him updated. So, that's where we're at right now. >> Awesome. We have a time frame on this.
>> Um well, she's digging into it, trying to see who we can get to peerre it. Um >> it's hopefully as soon as possible, right? >> We don't need Yeah, we don't need a full engineered uh peer review. So, all we're trying to do is find a botist to go out there and just double check it. So if we go through peer review, it's
going to make them spend a lot more money than what they actually have to. So that's why we're just trying to narrow it down to a strict um bot to go there. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Very good. >> All right. With that being said, new business. Any new business, young lady?
>> No new business. >> Storm Warner, >> nothing for that. >> Okay, let's go to discussion. And with that being said, I'll take you to go have a seat. Discussion
185 matter poison road request for an amended order of conditions has been received. D file number 0596 review of matters presented. Votes may be taken.
Mr. Marsh want to speak on this or how are you going to >> see how did you want to proceed? Um, well, we submitted a request. >> Mr. Marsh, if you'd be kind enough to step up to the podium, state your name
for the record, please. James Marsh, I represent the owners of 185 road. We made a request on the 2nd, I believe, of April. The request was for a minor modification
to the uh previously approved order of conditions. What we're proposing those minor modifications consist of maybe I'll have >> Well, that's why um you were at the the site this
morning. We did Mhm. >> had an opportunity to at least see the property and and with the plan understand some of the changes that we're proposing, but I'll have um the engineers speak about the grass uh swell that we're proposing along with the rip
wrap as well as a 6ft fence to run parallel to this the concrete wall. >> For the record, Stevie Carvalo of Carland Corp. So what we've done here is just kind of accentuate this grass soil direct storm water flowing in this
direction down towards the wetland along the property line. Um we proposed a expanded rip wrap area along the um end of that existing retaining wall as well as a proposed 6 foot wooden stockate
fenced along the property line. be happy to answer any questions the commission may have with regards to those proposed changes. >> So, we're following the um a policy set forth by D that speaks to amendments,
>> right? >> Um where we consider what we're proposing to be minor enough that the commission can make a decision tonight that we can move forward with a a formal hearing on a modification
amendment to the existing order as opposed to finding that this is substantially different than what was previously approved and we would need a full new notice of attack. Well, to that avail
so the commission knows Julia and I did walk the site today and it's clearly a beneficial redesign of the the project with the additional fence along the uh property
line as well. I think if the um the additional swale with the with the rip wrap drainage, everything being um sloped to the back.
Uh if it works as uh planned, it should alleviate the u issue with with your butter. Um I uh I don't feel it was a substantial
modification personally looking at the site. What was your opinion uh Julia? >> So I just had a few things to say which I did bring up at the site and I might as well bring it up for the entire commission. Um so I this morning in the office before the site visit I was
looking at the plans the old plan versus the new plan as I've never been out to the site before today and I wanted to like familiarize myself more with this project to see what you know what it actually looks like out there versus what the original plan stated. And one
thing that just um kind of confused me a little bit that was different than the original plan stated is the wetlands are 10 foot difference um than they actually are on the original plan. Like from the house to the wetlands on the original
plan versus the new plan. There's a 10-ft difference of where the actual wetlands are. So that kind of confused me like did the wetlands move or did the wall move? And then I did see the wetland flags out there today which helped to alleviate some of that but uh
it was just a little bit of confusion like why did that happen? >> Now you made that determination uh >> by scale correct. >> By scale. Yes. >> I've stated that from the getgo that I I understand. I mean,
you know, I think short of having a new delineation done, I mean, I don't know how long the board wants to continue kicking this
can down the road. Um, >> so this board is to protect the wetlands. >> That's correct. >> So, does this protect the wetlands? >> Well, I I don't know that for a long time.
>> I know. I understand. And at this point >> in the best interest of the the resource I don't know that it would be beneficial to
maybe try to pursue further. >> We've had an engineer who didn't go so well, >> right? >> Had another one go in. >> I I do have a question. When when you're all set, hiding.
>> Yeah. So, I mean, it's not our job to, you know, the neighbors. Well, I used it. >> So, I think if it's if it hasn't, you know, done what we've been trying to do for this long is just the right way.
If it is, then that's it. I think everything else the engineer should have worked that out. I just think >> did they did the job. >> Well, >> that's what we >> again short of, you know, requesting further
delineation. It's really not completely apparent >> because we don't know where are >> the not exactly >> not exactly. in and the you know beyond that is it is
it worth >> I don't know do they >> creating more of a disturbance again to >> ultimately ultimately >> they feel this is what they've designed here is going to do the job >> I mean I believe so I
>> I don't know I don't know I don't know >> I looked at the uh the finished product closely >> by walking the site today and again um
without uh additional delineation you know it's not going to be easily determined >> right >> the problem the problem >> I can address the the flagging you can see the
at least where the erosion control was put in and it was approved by the the former uh agent for the commission that location. Um it's well embedded now. It hasn't moved and that was installed
based on where the flag was. >> Um so I can't speak to the precision of the the last engineer. Um, but the locations I can say at least for
where they're located matches up with what's shown in the field. And it's apparent that that approach control um those silt socks have been there since the beginning.
the he can speak as to you know what what you have there is is close to what what was approved under the order and what is being uh proposed here um
maybe you can speak to it but what what is what is proposed and how that's going to function it's going to reduce the the show water flow in and clean it >> so I'm not sure really what you're referring to in regards to the change in the wetland flag from this this plan and
then our plan. Um, based on what I see, it looks exactly the same. This green line, it's 100 foot buffer matches up. I'm not so I'm not sure really what what line you're you're talking about. Yeah, I took both the plans in the office today, lined them up against the window,
matched up the foundation perfectly, >> did the scale, and it is off >> uh the the wetland flags. They're in different places on both plans. >> On both in >> according to the exact where the foundation is, the wetland flags are 10
scale. I I know Mark Vinton was out there um in approving the locations for the for the straw or no the whatever they are the erosion control that was used. >> Yes, the >> the water. >> Yeah, the water. >> And um didn't find there was an issue
with any impacts from the work which was progressing at that time into the resource beyond where the flag was. >> So understood. I hear what you're saying. Um, but moving forward, we have these these locations that are showing
the field plotted out on the farland plan. >> Yes. And that's not to say anything. I just wanted to let the commission know what I've been up to in regards to catching up on this project. >> But as to protecting the wetlands, and that's really your job here. Um, what is proposed um is going to work and function in a
way that's going to slow down storm water. It's going to clean the storm water going through a grass swale. And then there's a a rip rod area at the end which is Go ahead. >> In in reality, I mean, this plan kind of
the plan that was approved back then did call for a swale. >> Um the we're kind of doing the same thing here, right? We're proposing a swell, but maybe a little more of a well- definfined swell that captures a little more water, perhaps something that's a
little bigger to be able to handle that flow. Um, we're doing the same thing here, but but we're bringing the soil back further on the property to try to capture more of the storm water runoff coming off this front part. Uh, intercept it and have it go down along
the property line um into the wetland before it has a chance to get onto the neighbor's property. But that's essentially what this plan's doing. It's similar to what was approved previously but in our opinion improves >> right
>> that >> and this this is clearly not indicative of what the existing conditions this this was one of the drawings Julia that was submitted. Yeah, I actually looked at this.
>> Is that if you if you use the um water as a >> So, how how was the um the benchmark elevation? H how was that determined? It looks like to be
like 47.06 maybe. How was that determined? >> On which plan? >> Your plan. >> On our plan. >> Yep. So, our benchmarks are all relative to the North American vertical datam of 1988. It's the same datam that FEMA and pretty much all GIS stuff uses. Um, we
try to keep most of our projects, especially projects that are adjacent to a wetland resource area on that data. In the event that the properties uh mapped in a flood zone, we can determine the extent of flood zone. >> Those are the Yeah, >> the plan that was previously approved is
based on an assumed data. So they just assigned an elevation of 100 somewhere >> did their survey based off of that. >> You guys are using the the data, correct? >> Correct. >> Yeah. And again say it's not it's not a public hearing.
It's just a decision to be made by the by the commission to see whether or not we proceed as a minor amendment. And then if that's the case, we'll we'll notify others. We'll get on to the next um public hearing in May. So at that
point it's a public public hearing and about and then you can make a decision whether to issue a new amended or an amended order with special conditions. >> So Mr. Vice Chairman if I if I may. >> Yeah please.
>> So obviously they were um they filed for the request for this amended order which we obviously have to accept. I I myself personally don't feel comfortable giving a decision or making a decision based upon the information because I
haven't personally had enough time to sit down and review what's before us tonight. Um that's you know that's your prerogative.
Um you know I was able to do the site visit today >> and I am I am of the opinion that it's definitely beneficial as far as what the
property owner has put forth. I'm still so then what happens if >> oh we would um we would accept the u amended order >> and then what happens
>> correct >> I can explain or you >> so the polic policy the steps bystep process. So we're here tonight. We made the request back on April 2nd. You decide tonight just whether or not this is a minor modification and
therefore we can move to the next step which is we then uh put this on the agenda for a public meeting a public hearing on a on an amendment of the order of conditions that was issued previously issued. That
requires us to notify Butters and put in the newspaper. It's a public hearing. And at that point, if you're then satisfied in issuing an amended order of conditions based on the new plan, then it's you can issue special conditions to
go along with that. Just as if >> we had been in front of you on a notice of intent. If you decide tonight that it's requiring a new dose of intent because it's substantially different from what we were previously permitted under the order of conditions and we start over
with a whole new nose of intent which my opinion for what it's worth this is minor revision to a plan as the engineer said it was already proposed a swell was already proposed in the old
plan it was permitted We're actually improving it. >> So, it was already done, but if we don't vote on it, then we have to do it all over again. >> For For Really? Why? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, well, I guess I mean,
Mr. Thomas said some things. >> I I I agree. >> I I've given my opinion. I'm not I'm not with casting a vote >> and um um >> I'd like to give the butter an opportunity to speak as well if you feel
you're uh you feel that you're uh finished Mr. M. >> I I am it's not a public hearing. I >> No, I realize >> Yeah. And he'll have every opportunity to speak whether it's >> okay.
>> So >> I got you. I and I'm not sure about this, but um it may run as if if we were to file a new notice of intent. >> Um you have only a certain amount of time to make a decision. >> That's right. Correct.
>> So again, this was only submitted I think it was back on the 2nd of >> April. April. >> So where are we today? This is the 20. >> Yeah. >> Every board commission usually has some sort of time period where provided with the statutes and regulations to make a
decision. I think you have a substantial amount of time to think about this, >> but >> so based on that, I' I'd like to be able to to have time to mull this over a little bit and put this on for the next meeting. >> Again, I I >> put this on for the next meeting. >> Well,
I don't think we need to hash this out again. What we what we're discussing right now, it's not that substantial. It really isn't. the the issue at hand is how we going to go forward and and um
have this on the uh next agenda as a as a that that would be what we need to establish today. >> Also, this isn't any like official if the commission accepts it. They're not proposing I don't think yet you proposed
the official amended order that has the actual plan that the commission needs to uh approve. So, if you guys were to agree on whatever you agreed on tonight, that's not official. You you wouldn't actually have to accept the amendment order when it came down.
>> Absolutely not. You could you could ask for certain minor revisions to the plan >> as if we were going through another. >> So, if you accepted it tonight, it's not it's not technically official. This is exactly what has to happen. you still have the opportunity to, you know, hear from a Butters and put in your own
perspective on because it has to be a public hearing. So, you know, it's not the official amended order that's being accepted. >> I agree. >> I agree. I think the only discussion we really have before us today is if we want to go forward with this as part of
the agenda on the next meeting. >> Okay. And again, that's what you know, we're not make any uh final decision. Okay. So, >> chairman, I think if if Mr. Thomas doesn't want to vote tonight. >> No, no. Still has a majority.
>> Again, make a decision. >> We have No, there's not a not a >> This is just discussion. Yeah. At this point, please. >> Can I go to the podium, please? >> What are you going to add? >> If you guys have >> I'm I'm all set.
>> You're good. That's fine. I'd like to say a couple words. That's all. >> No, please. >> Jim Suzan, resident of 183 Metap Road. My agent, Aaron, and I did look at this um plan. We've been looking at it uh today. I went to his office. We spent
about 10 minutes looking at it. Um this will I think is really going to help relieve it for me and my property. I really do. >> Okay. The only issues that um my engineer and I have is that there's not a cross-section of the swell. We feel
the swell is too short. Um we feel it has to go closer to the road. These guys did come out. Uh I called on a rainstorm. The water was coming off his driveway going down the street about 6 feet and coming right in and flooded my front lawn. So bad that I called the conservation commission, asked them to
come out. That's how bad it was. So, I feel that this is definitely 100% step in the right direction. I think a little bit more information on this um going over with my engineer, I think would really um
get it so it's like would work perfect without going back and saying, "Okay, well, you built this now. It still has a problem here." Um like I said, I really think this is going to help me. Um, but I think that, um, there needs to be a little bit more information, like a cross-section so we can see actually
what the swale is. Um, I know you're looking to put this through an amended order. Um, if if it all looks good, I my own personal opinion, I wouldn't appeal it, right? Because it it's here to help me, not just the storm water, not just his property. It's also here to help my
property. Actually on Easter uh the rain on Easter my back sidewalk was getting flooded as the water was coming around the stone flooding the corner of my sidewalk and down the uh my grass. I actually got pictures of it. Call the commission again on that. So I need to
figure out how to relieve this. So my engineer proposed a a swale in the beginning. It never got submitted. There was a couple issues I guess. Um this is a lot like it. Um, the only thing is, like I said, I think we just need a little finetuning on this, show the cross-section, and I think it has to be
longer. I think it has to go closer to the street at the beginning of the street where his driveway pitches right to my property. If they're in a swale to catch it, it's going to continue flooding it. So, I just think that it just needs a little more finetuning, my own personal opinion. As far as whatever the commission wants to do, that's what
the commission wants to do. But I think this swale is going to benefit me and not hurt. So, >> well, let me make a comment. If if that's the case, that's that's great. I'm happy to hear. Uh, and it sounds like it's just some minor tweaks to what
has been proposed by us. Um, to address those, we got to move forward. >> No, I agree. And I don't want to keep passion let you know that I looked at it >> in all fairness and and and you know, transparency that that it's fine.
We we know we're >> um the only other thing I do want to say is that I saw the fence line. That means the old pipe has to come out. That means someone's going to have to be working on my property um for them to take the pipe out. If we come up with an agreement, a swale that's going to work, I will allow
someone to come on my property, pull that pipe. I will take my fence down. Um so this way the new fence can go up because the new fence fence cannot go up with my fence up. So, I'm more than willing to work with this to make it work, but I think it needs some more on
the engineer side of this. Um, if we could take and maybe have >> um him talk to my engineer directly or whatever, try to work this out. I I don't think it's huge. I I think we're real close. I just think it needs to be fine tuned. And
>> that's what Dave and I were going over today. >> Okay. >> So, all right. >> Enough said, Jimmy. Thank you. So that being said, I I mean I I feel a little I feel more confident, okay, >> that you know this can be rectified with
a minor tweak with that agreement. Well, I'm okay with that. >> I'm not going to, you know, try to uh create a a new design or anything, you know, at this >> Yeah.
>> as a commission. At this point, I'm going to um entertain a motion to place this on the agenda for the April um what's the next meeting? >> April 13th. I mean,
>> May, right? >> Yes. May 13th. >> Y. >> So, I'd like to entertain the motion to uh place this >> on the agenda >> for May 13. So moved. >> Second.
>> All those I in favor I >> right. >> Yeah. >> For the as proposed. >> That's correct. >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> And then there's just one more thing I wanted to say about 185 Mountetit road. Uh so the commission knows. Uh today
during the site visit there was um some tires in the wetlands that are were not there from the owner but were there from previous and the owner proposed that they would go in there and clean that up. So I just want to make everyone aware of that so they know that the owner will be in the wetlands hand
cleaning some things and he'll send me photos once it's done. >> Very much already removed. >> Oh perfect >> we're ready to move on this thing. A we appreciate >> that's correct. I mean he did he did actually and I was I was looking at that
as well. >> It did it did kind of after >> that's why >> yeah it was obviously >> forward. Yeah. You know what I'm saying? >> So yeah.
Okay. >> There's two sets of waddles put up though, just so you know. >> One with Meril Lee. Those were further in the woods and then back when Kyle put them in. So there was two different sets of waddles put out. When Noret was there, >> he had no waddles as a resident. I
wasn't even on the conservation. I don't do it. I called Meril Lee. They put them out there and then Kyle's waddles came in closer. That's all I'm going to say. And I don't think >> I hate to say that it's neither here nor there. It just >> that design has nothing to do with the wall or anything. That design is all
just a swell. That's all that design. >> That's correct. That's correct. But we were >> we were looking at the wetland delineation while we were out there because I had an opportunity to clearly look at that.
>> All right. >> Think we're all >> very good. All right. Moving on. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you. >> You going to rejoin us? >> Yes. I'm going to actually, if you don't mind, I'd like to step out. >> By all means. By followess.
>> Yes. >> Returning from recess. >> All right. Now, we're still under discussion. Lord's yours. We are 35 Hathaway Road. Update review of metals presented votes may be taken. >> This is now under agent updates. Says it at the bottom. That's just
>> Oh, okay. Sorry about that. >> Just want to make sure we're >> Yep. Okay. 35 Hathaway Road. Give it to us, young lady. >> Okay. So, um update for 35 halfway road. They are now um the applicant is working with field engineering to begin their after the fact NOI. So, they have
started that process and they have secured an engineer and um staying in contact with them to keep them updated on what exactly we want. Um, so we want the uh them to do a um >> after the fact they don't have to. >> No, but I'm looking for a specific word
that I just forgot. Restoration area. I want them to do the restoration area. So that will be on the plans. Um and yeah, so that's the update for that one. >> Okay. Okay. 324 Main Street update. >> All right. So, um, I actually spoke with
this resident today on the phone. Um, they let me know, uh, kind of a background of this, more of a background of this, uh, you know, issue that's currently going on. And he let me know that he actually did start some of this work that was agreed upon in the
gentleman's agreement with the commission. He started it last year. Um he told me that he has removed 40% of the wood chips and he has ground about 15 of the stumps. Um and there has been some progress to fix this issue. He also let me know that he had like an
equipment failure issue which is why he couldn't get everything done in the time time frame that he originally proposed. Um but after speaking to him he he did let me know that he has all intentions of completing this project and he does want the gentleman's agreement to still
stand. um I I told him I would work with him and do um maybe like monthly site visits at his property to make sure that this is actually going on. So, I just wanted to bring that uh kind of conversation to the commission's light and let you guys know that that's what
we were discussing. So, if the commission still obviously wants to go with an enforcement order, can go with an enforcement order. Or if the commission wants to stick with this other thing, we can try the other thing and if it doesn't work, then go to the enforcement order. So, here's my thing on this. Um, we did
go come up with a gentleman agreement. So, this way we didn't hammer the guy. We didn't want him to lose his house, foreclose or whatever. So, we stayed with it. I went by um yesterday. Yeah, I think it was yesterday. I went by his house and I noticed a lot of
tracks in the wood chips. A lot of the wood chips are gone. So, he is working on it. I noticed last year he did get a stump grinder in there. Last year he did do some stump grinding. Um, I am willing to keep the gentleman's agreement and not put this in a
full-blown enforcement order, but I think we have to give them a time span this time. We did not. We u pointed him a lot in the right direction to get all the boy scouts, go to Bristol Aggie to order your plants. We did everything we could to make it as most reasonable uh
farm without spending a lot of money. And that's what this whole goal is, right? You don't want a resident to go lose his house because of something he did wrong, right? And not knowing he did it wrong. So the only thing I can say is that we have to come up with a date, right? So here it is spring, he can do a
fall planting. So that means from now to fall, he could do a fall, he can't do a June, maybe a June planting, maybe. Um, so he's no good for July, August, September. He can do a late September, early October planting. by October he
should have that place 100% ready to plant. I feel that we should call him let him know that he has to do the ordering of plants according to uh Mr. Holmes's recommendation. >> I feel that um this should definitely be
planted by fall and let's say October. And if these are not um met, then we go to a full-blown enforcement order and throw the gentleman agreement out the window.
>> I think if we can get him to agree with that, um I agree. >> Well, Chairman, >> I kind of got going to make that as an emotion what I just said. So, I'll need someone to second it. >> Second it. Well, >> yeah, >> I'll make the motion.
>> Okay, make the motion. Yeah, I >> give him the opportunity to address this by >> and I'll second the motion. >> All those in favor? >> I >> All right. I'll give him a call tomorrow and and let them know. >> Yep. Tell them we're still on the
gentleman's agreement. Um tell them to don't forget to use the resources we pointed out. >> Yep. >> Boy Scouts first and get the plants sorted. >> Yep. >> So then we'll go from there. All right. >> All right. >> All right. 659 Main Street up uh update
review of matters presented may be taken. Go for it, kids. >> Okay, so we had I've had two site visits at this property. The original site visit I talked about last time a resident Mike Copper showed me his yard was being flooded out by the neighbor's
property. I shared some photos with the commission and then this Saturday uh the commission and I went out there and we saw um kind of how the neighbor's yard is pitched towards his yard. It's clear that it can flood the basement the way
that it is pitched. Um and I looked into a few things. Um, so one of the things we talked about was finding out if the neighbor has an occupancy permit because there isn't 70% vegetation there yet. It
was somehow sold. It's probably like >> I don't know 15% veget's like no vegetation. >> So I looked into it and I couldn't find um if they had an occupancy permit and I couldn't find the original set of plans. It's not we don't have anything in our
office. So, um, >> so that means it might be out of our jurisdiction. So, I know that >> it was originally out of our jurisdiction, but now because it's storm water, I think it's coming into our jurisdiction. >> Correct. So, what happens is, just so you uh kind of figure it out here, right?
>> We don't have an NOI on that property. No. >> So, no water conditions. So, that makes it out of our jurisdiction. So, as far as the conservation commission is 100% out of our jurisdiction. So, now we go by our storm water. We own storm water, right? So now we're going to solve this through storm water. So um that's why it
can be sold and everything is because >> because it wasn't originally ours, >> right? It wasn't originally ours. So now we have to go they don't need the 70% of vegetation. They don't need none of that, right? But and now our storm water, we have to figure out how to
solve it, right? So would the grass help? No. All it's going to do is slow it down truthfully. Right? So now we're going to get a hold of that resident since it was sold and it's been purchased. Let them know that we do have an issue with the way their yard is pitched onto another property. Um no
matter what a neighbor's proh water can never go into your property. It's actually there's a trespassing law on that. >> So we have to figure it out. He might have to put some kind of drainage system in something to do with that. That's what you got to let them know in a letter saying that there is an issue.
This has to be resolved. Um, right now we got April which is supposed to be the high range. It's almost over. Um, but they are going to have to solve this. So, I'll reach out and say that we have to they might have to get a hold of an engineer um saying that how do we fix this as far
as us as storm water. We cannot go there and say, "Oh, yeah. If you put a trench and you did this, you did that." We can't do that much, right? So, we have to tell them they have to get an engineer. they have to resolve this situation. Um, we have to give them once
again a time frame. Um, I would say a 60-day time frame to to get back to us with an engineers's um, uh, review uh, let's say or and if they don't, as long as they hire an engineer
and have a locked contract, we're willing to work with them. >> All right. I think that sounds good to me. >> Yeah. You guys seem the issue there. >> Mr. Clapper, I have to tell you the truth, I wasn't able to go out there this Saturday. But I mean, you can tell
that I've kind of like figure out what we got to do, right? And um if we can get them to try to put some kind of swale in and I mean, you saw what I've just been through. Something I think it'll help you. >> The thing is not that their water can't go anywhere, >> right? Correct.
>> That's their problem. >> So, and if um like I said, we'll take and have them get an engineer, have them put a resolve to it. It'll be summer month. So, in a way, technically it have to fall. Hopefully, where you don't get hammered, right? But hopefully they take
care of it before anything comes along. If not, we will go out there and do what we have to do to make sure we push this for you. >> Like I said, it wasn't >> intentionally. They were probably blind to it. They bought something. >> Yep. Unfortunately, bought it.
>> They bought it. >> Yep. >> They bought it. >> So, let's see if we can get it resolved for you. Let's say this. We're here. Everyone's happy. No one's flooded and we go from there. >> Sounds good. >> All right, sir. >> You have a great evening. >> Well, um I'll have Julia keep you
updated. And this way here, you're in the loop. Okay. >> Yes. >> No problem. >> All right. Have a great evening, sir. >> See you later. >> Okay. Six elderberry dry update. Review of matters presented. Votes may be taken. Go for it. >> Okay. So, at the last uh meeting, I
updated you guys. This was from the original um issue we kind of had when we went to Fort Elderberry Drive. We saw some trash in the wetlands at 6 Elderberry Drive. And so I reached out to them. Um a letter was sent on uh March 27th stating that they should
start this cleanup within the next 30 days and email me the pictures once it's complete. And the homeowner emailed me pictures of the complete cleanup on April 16th. So this is all set. >> Great. Thank you. >> Okay. And did you do a site visit? I did not do a site visit post, but I also
wasn't the one who personally saw the trash in the wetlands pre, so I don't exactly know what it looks like. It would have to be. >> Can you call tech them and tell them you'd like to do a driveby? >> Yeah. >> All right. And then this way you can just look in their backyard if it looks good. I mean, don't me wrong, I'm not
saying they did, but someone could take a picture of an area that looks really good, right? >> So, if you don't mind, >> just to make sure it's actually done, if you don't mind. and do that if you know when you think you get a moment, email them and just tell them, "Hey, they don't even have to be home. I want unless they got a dog, you just want to
do a driveby, look over their fence, >> and just make sure everything's done." >> That's not right. >> All right. >> All right. >> Sounds good. >> All right. Other business. Any other business that may properly come before the commission not reasonably anticipated when posting 48 hours prior
to the meeting. Future business. The next meeting of the conservation commission will be on May 13, 2026. meeting will be held at the police station conference room located at 64 middle road of Kushnet Mass. With that, I would like to entertain a motion that
we adjourn the meeting. >> Second. >> All those in favor. Heat. Heat.