by Chu Tele Media and will be available on their website and on YouTube. And we do indeed have a quorum. And um let's just get right into it. Um open session. Do we have anybody in the audience who wants to talk from the citizens of the
town? No, I don't see anyone. Why don't we go right to our liaison with our planning board chair? Hello, Chris. >> Chris Lavali, planning board chair. Um this week we are closing on our zoning article hearings for town meeting. Um we
will continue with the citizens petition article hearing. Um we have not been able to get the citizen uh who drafted the petition to be able to present to us. So we're hoping to get them in soon uh so we can hear about it before we
vote on it. Um, we have a new hearing for the definitive subdivision for 191 195 Riverneck Road um for three industrial uh parcels um splitting that into three. Um we did
receive word from the attorney general uh on our town meeting zoning articles from last town meeting. All are good. Um but we will need to adjust uh the zoning table um for a do protected use that
happens to be in there. Uh when they do look at the uh articles, they do a little bit more comprehensive review of what we have in zoning. And what they found is that there's a child care um uh use in the use table that is actually uh
a uh an exempt use. So, we are going to have to remove that from the the zoning table probably fall town meeting. Um, but there were no issues with the CBLT zoning. Uh, so that is going forward and um we'll be able to use that in the next
town meeting. Um, that is it. >> Any questions? >> Applicant on, excuse me, Riverneck Road one still comwalth construction. So yes,
um that is a uh they did come before us with the preliminary uh subdivision. Um and at the time they did say that was essentially to freeze the zoning. Uh that was before the contractor's yard was uh denied. Um so I don't know if
their plans have changed or if it's still just to really freeze zoning. Um but it is going to be subdivided into three lots. Um, looks like one of the three lots is mostly going to be an infiltration uh pond. Um, and then the
other two will be uh industrial lots. >> Okay. >> With a road down the side. >> Thanks. >> Yep. Okay. Thanks, Chris. >> Thank you. >> Appreciate it. Next up, we have our regulatory hearings. Notice of intent continued
from January 27th, 2026. This is for New England Power Company at 100 Ecuador Road. And um I'm understanding that the applicant has requested continuence until our next meeting, February 24th. >> Yes. Uh pending completion of the peer
review. Don't know that it will be finished by then, but they requested a continuence till then. >> All right. I'll take a motion to continue the hearing until February 24th. Carl, I move that we continue the notice of intent for New England Power
Company until our next meeting of February 24th. >> Motion from Chris. Do I have a second? Second from John. All in favor? >> I. >> I. Okay. Motion passes. We will see them on the 24th, assuming the peer review is in uh in a timely way. All right. Um,
next up we have a discussion item for $880 for funding of Oxbow Associates Putinham Brook design proposal at Warren Pole. David, do you want to talk about that for a moment? So, this is uh this is a followup uh well, it's a followup
originally to the meadow habitat study um that Oxbow did for Warren Pole and uh me members recall that um Adam Cole from Oxbow was here at the January 13th meeting to present that study and he was
asked by the commission to submit a proposal for imple for implementing some of the re the study's recommendations. in in in particular to to do some plantings along um Putinham Brook uh to
uh increase the the botanical uh biodiversity uh and but in in particular to plant some um native shrubs there. Uh this in the second paragraph here is the actual scope of what uh this proposal
is. Uh uh Oxbow Associates will design and provide a planting plan in the form of a graphic figure which will include a list of species to be planted and their staking locations. The focus location will be the stretch of Putnham Brook that runs through the open wet meadow.
Oxbow Associates will additionally provide a text narrative describing where to procure materials and how to install live stakes. Um, you know, I just just to give some examples of what I think is going to be planted probably
things like dog woods and uh elderberry, you know, those sorts of shrubs. Um, grow right along the brook and, you know, shade it. Um, you know, maybe maybe get some fish in there if they're not already. Although although although although
Putinham is designated perennial, it certainly dried up a couple years ago during the drought. >> Yeah. >> So >> yeah, there are there have been summers it's been running all summer though. So yeah, >> and it was certainly wouldn't hurt to be
getting some greenery to shade it because >> uh as a farm as a farm uh trench it was exposed as it should be for a farm but in >> in this application. So this is not for any labor. So we'll have to figure out how we get how we acquire the material,
what we acquire and um how we get it planted. So it's a different problem. Yeah. >> But this would be a plan that gives us a specification for >> Yes. >> what what to put out there, what makes sense based on a botanical uh expert. >> Yes. >> Okay.
So, um I'm I'm envisioning that this money would come out of the uh annual appropriation budget um for land management uh activities for which there's uh just about 5,000 in the budget right now with a little bit.
Let me see. So, we've got March, a March, April, May, June. So, four months left. Uh about four and a half months left. So, I certainly think we can afford it. Seems like a good use to me. So,
questions from anyone comments. John, >> can you can you put blueberries there? >> Yeah, I Yeah, I I think so. Some some high bush blueberry. I would >> Yeah, >> I wouldn't be one bit surprised um if that's included in their design plan. >> Yeah,
>> I think they should look at that. >> Well, I'll definitely ask, but say I wouldn't be surprised if it's there. Obviously they they probably have. >> Yeah. >> Pier >> question. David, I I read this and maybe
I missed it. Um is your uh how much how much of the uh new plants are live stakes? And but I'm reason I'm thinking because of John's question, I I don't know about blueberries being live stakes, but maybe
they're available that way. I'm just thinking the live stakes are easier to install. >> Yes. than digging holes for a lot of bushes. >> Yeah. >> And I don't I don't have an opinion here. I'm just curious if >> um Well, I think I I I I think the intent is to do mainly shrubs >> and and I think, you know, live staking
is, you know, the the primary method for doing that. Uh I don't I don't I don't think I don't think I mean, we'll see, but I don't think that the plan would be to do like wild wild flowers or something where you'd throw out a bunch
of seeds, right? I I think this is, you know, uh because it ultimately one of the functions is to shade. I think you want you want shrubs, you know, fairly high shrubs, >> right? But but I guess my question is, are we asking Oxbow to favor live stakes
over, you know, uh plants in pots or bald and burlap? >> Well, I think that's a recommendation >> is what that's where we're going. Okay. Got it. >> That's that's that's what he mentioned at the last meeting here. >> I'm just thinking cost and ease of installation. >> Got it. Blueberries are cheap,
>> I believe. So, >> yeah, you plant them on the ground. >> They do well and they do well around the area. >> And they do well right next to a stream. >> Yeah. I I question is, you know, I I think ideally we of course we'd want wild ones rather than cultivars. Yeah. One uh one one one question I have um
for Adam is because I think he mentioned when he was here that they would first try to take the live stakes from um on-site plants, >> you know, uh plants that are already there. So, um and I'm sure there are blueberries there already. So, I will I
will confirm that with him, >> you know, assuming the commission votes to go with us. And people walking, they can take their tin can and pick some blueberries. >> Plenty of blackberries there in the summer, I'll tell you. Oh, man. Yeah. >> Pick your own. >> Well, the birds are going to eat. >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Any other questions? Anyone else? >> First. >> I'll take a motion then to approve the uh >> Mr. Chairman, I'll I'll move then to approve the request for 8 the sum of $880 for funding of Oxbow Associates
Putnham Brook design proposal at Warren Pole. >> Motion from Chris. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Second from Bill. All in favor? >> I >> I passes unanimous. Thank you very much. Next up, another Oxbow. So yeah, another
oxbow proposal and um that is to I'm sure every everyone recalls that uh this this year and last year uh there was a bad purple loose strife infestation at Warren Pole in the wet meadow. Um I
don't really recall seeing that um before 2024 uh but it was definitely there um that that year and in 2025. Uh so uh sort of the established way of dealing with purple loose strife these
days is to release um the called loose stripe beetles uh that uh are origin from Europe and they they eat the loose stripe leaves killing the plant but they don't damage or hurt any other native um
ve vegetation or species. uh and they've proven to be quite effective um in eliminating uh the loose strife or at least keeping it very very well controlled. Uh I've certainly I personally witnessed that over the
years. Um you know some beekeepers really like purple loose stripe but um it just it just it really just crow I mean sure you know it really crowds out native biodiversity. it can it can get really out of control and develops these really huge root balls um that are are
very difficult to uh manage any other way than with the beetles. So, uh we did apply for a grant um to do this. uh the the grant was not approved because and and this was through SISMA um which is
which is a local or organization that's um sponsored primarily by Subbury Valley trustees. And the reason they said they turned down the grant application was because they wanted to have evidence that the Beatles are not there. Um and and they they said that well if we could
if we could show that um that they would look they would take another look at funding it. Um but anyway so so so the the task there really two tasks that this proposal is uh u describing and the
first one is just that is that this this year Oxbow will survey for the Beatles um and uh I guess whether whether they find them or or not. Well they'll they'll serve they'll survey them and
try to get a count of of the beetles. So that's says prior to the re the release of any beetles, Oxbow Associates will select a 100 individual purple loose stripe plants evenly across the property. Uh Adam Cole will map each
study point using GPS and document any evidence of feeding damage or signs of blue stripe beetles on a standardized data sheet. This effort is important to determine if the species is already present on the property and if so determine the density. Uh, Oxbow
Associates will obtain five cartons of loose strife beetles, 105 individuals per carton through a reputable biocrol business and released on site in May to early June of 2026 directly after the their arrival via overnight shipping.
Uh, Oxbow Associates will provide a report summarizing our methods and results. So that's task one uh which is this year. So task two which is the monitoring and reporting which is next year Oxbow Associates will repeat the
same methods as implemented for our pre-release assessment by collecting data on 100 purple loose drive plants from late May to early June of 2027 for the presence of loose drive beetles. We'll we will record the number of beetles on each plant and the results
will be provided in a report. So this project cost is 3500. I see I see it that half of that would be spent this year, half of that which would be 750 and half next year. Um
again I think I think there's plenty of money for that. Say there's there's thou there's five about 5,000 in uh the annual appropriation budget. I know the commission just approved 880, but there's also about 5,000 in the land
maintenance fund. So, I s I I certainly think with those with those two um accounts uh together, I I think you know 750 this year and 7750 this year and 1750 next year. It's c
certainly a reasonable cost from each. Um I I I think over the long term then um I mean we'll we'll see if if either either the Beatles don't become established or they do but but but
they're not um doing what we expect them to do. They're they're we may ask Oxbow to do some sort of a follow-up recommendation at some point. Although that's not um within within this the scope of this work. I think I think in
any case some sort of longer term monitoring uh should be done but maybe that can be done with volunteers. >> How big an area do they do? >> You know what I mean? So you can actually see if it if it if you have
five acres of it and you do one acre or whatever then you can see if there's that one acre looks a lot better than the other four. I mean is there is there a >> Well, I think I way to do it. I I I think I think the plan is to um again
look select a hundred individual plants, loose strife plants. Now, I I I I don't know, you know, how they're distributed throughout the property, you know, throughout the meadow, but but I I think I think the plan in any case would be to
um release the beetles on those individual plants and with with the expectation with the hope that they then would spread out. Um but I I I mean, I don't I don't think the plants are are going to be, you know, within within 100
square feet. I I I I I think the intent would be to, you know, do some over some, you know, fairly wide area on the property and I can I can get clarification on that if you want. >> Just so you can see the results, you know, >> y monitor.
>> Well, I you know, if if if if the beetles do become established, I I I think it will become obvious pretty quickly that they will spread over the entire property. Um, it really doesn't, you know, my experience, it doesn't take them very long. I mean, the meadow the
me the wet meadow is about 19 20 acres. Uh, I I I think they could, you know, certainly maybe maybe even one summer I think they could spread out o over that area. >> My observations have been that the
purpleoo strife is the front third of that wet meadow. >> It's not the full It's really in the front half or front third. Yep. It the the the the meadow gets wetter as you're going back like it becomes an emergent
wet marsh which don't think the purple loose drive really likes. >> If this is successful do they do they die off because of not having any any food? >> Well, that's that's that's a good
question. Um you know certainly one question I have were were the Beatles there previously? that's that's why we haven't seen them. We didn't see them before 2024. Um, you know, is is like climate change killing them? Is there something else that's killing them? Or
or is it just a result of the fact that um it hasn't been mowed? I mean, it was historically mowed, I think, at least a couple times a year, right? >> Yeah. Up to 2020, it was mowed all, you know, every year. >> So, that may have had something to do with keeping the beetles, the beetle
population, um, down. Um, so then well and the loose rifle with it. So the fact that it hasn't been mowed since 2020 20 or 2020, whenever that might have something to do with it, uh, I would, um, I would, you know, I when I
requested the proposal, I certainly, you know, asked that question. Um, that, you know, in the context of long-term monitoring, if the beetles don't become established, you know, maybe, you know, we can do do another study to try and figure out why, you know, is there something killing them? What's going on?
That's a good question, >> Mark. I you know, they were uh released uh what 15 years ago, John, in River Mealbrook 10 years ago. >> And um >> something like that. >> And uh they eliminated acres, well, acres and acres and acres
of loose strife just downstream of uh the water district. >> Uh it became a monoculture. That's about all that was growing back there. And that stuff was all gone. um I wasn't paying a ton of attention but gone in a couple of years anyway that was at least I think 10 years ago
and I find the beetles you know because there's a seed bank right it's not one and done because there's seeds you know from next year and year and year after so um I've seen the beetles in in like my backyard along that meadow on some blue stripe fugitives that you know have
popped up and um to Bill's point I I don't know how you measure the effectiveness the way you're describing that's a great idea. Um but one idea is that um they they like skeletonize they call it the plant. So they basically eat holes in
the leaves and then the plant dies but the plant sitting there until the next frost and snowfall. So you if you wanted to wander through >> you can see >> you should be able to see while the things are flowering. So you don't even have to know what the plant looks like. you know, they should be eating the
leaves as you see some of the purple plants and that might be a way to maybe not scientifically but get a sense, >> right? >> So hopefully they survive. Um, one question I had David, we could ask if we engage oxbow, do the beetles
migrate down the watershed and I guess they need more loose drive plant so you know I don't know if in Putin Brook there's >> not migrate down. >> Yeah, because there's a lot of backyards and the roads and >> Yeah, it' be nice to understand that. >> Yeah,
>> because maybe down the road you there'd be releases elsewhere. Makes sense. Are you hoping they'll come to your house? >> Well, I have I have them. >> We need some Japanese bamboo is what we need. >> Yeah, that's next. David, can you come up with that?
>> Dave, I got a question. >> Is it true that the geese move the poop purple loose strife around? That it all comes in with the geese. The more geese you have, the more purple loose strife you have. >> Boy, I don't know, John. I've never
heard that. >> Well, I've heard it. >> I'm I'm I So So you've heard You've heard people say that or >> I've heard it. >> Um you know, >> shock me. >> Comes in on the geese. >> I could be. I mean, I wasn't I wasn't
aware that the geese like eat eat the seeds or >> um but who knows? It could they could just hitch hit a ride in the feathers. >> Geese have ruined a lot of fields in >> Chelsea. >> Whether you know it or not. Mhm. >> I mean, perfect h kayfields
>> have been ruined by geese. >> How so? >> That they they spread weeds. >> Really? >> Yep. I mean, I have weeds in my own hay field. It's called chick. >> Mhm. >> We never I never saw a weed like this in
my life. I got purple loose strife in my front yard. >> Mhm. >> And I got to have 50 sometimes 50 geese in my front yard. >> Well, I think >> not including my backyard. I mean, I think geese eat just about everything. >> They eat everything, >> you know, that plant. So, you know, some of these seeds, I'm sure, pass right
through them. >> And and I think they spread it. >> Could be. Could be. >> Chat GPT says absolutely. Yes. >> Geese are being >> significant. >> What are we going to do about them geese? >> Yeah.
>> Who has a shotgun? So, we have a proposal to spend $3,500 of which 1750 in this fiscal year. >> Yeah, that's that's how I think it'll likely pan out. >> He he he answered you.
>> I I think the geese move a lot of this stuff. >> I think we should look at >> this. >> And I should you Oxbow, they're experts in it. >> Uh yeah, I agree. We should definitely
consider that. I I'm not sure how many geese there are at Warren Pole. I mean, geese like, you know, standing water. At least >> they The geese land anywhere. >> Mhm. >> They do. I don't They land geese there too often, though. But they certainly are there. Yeah, >> they're there.
>> I mean, I I've certainly seen ducks at Warren Pole. Maybe ducks do the same thing. >> They They land in Mil Pond. They walk out. >> Oh, that I believe. >> And they ruined just about every >> everything. Weeds everywhere. and the weeds that come out.
And I've had somebody that knows a lot about weeds and he's come out and he's looked at it and he's given me the Latin name >> and I says, "All right, give it to me in English." And he says, "This is Chickik >> and this is a weed that I've never seen in my life on my property
>> until the geese got there." >> Do the geese come in like they do? Well, you know what we need is we need to bring back some big predators, >> you know, like wolves and mountain lions. I got the the the early and and
I've read this that the early colonist around here, they wrote they wrote that one one of the mountain lions favorite prey was geese. >> Bet want to buy a couple. >> Son of loose.
>> Except they also eat everything else. like >> including people >> might have a problem. The neighbors might have a word. >> We don't have dogs. >> They don't eat very many people. >> Well, I think you had to watch your back when they're out. >> All right, let's uh let's focus here. Um,
>> so Carl, I'll make a motion then uh that we approve the commission approved the sum of $3,500 for funding of Oxbow Associates purple loose stripe beetle proposal at Warren Pole and it was basically going to be split over two
fiscal years as I understand. >> Motion from Chris. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Second from Bill. All in favor? >> I unanimous. All right. Well, thank you. >> I would like to have
>> an answer for Mox Bow on what happens when the food is gone or they die how it happens. They die off or >> Sure. >> Yeah, it's a good question. >> And and I think maybe maybe it's under land management, but we circle back around the Canadian goose problem. You
know, how bad is the problem and how do we manage it? >> It's huge, >> you know, and we haven't even paid attention to it. It's so big. It's huge. Every field in town is decimated from geese. I don't care where you go. >> And the fake coyotes don't do the job.
>> Although although we we've we found a part of a heron uh at Warren Pole. I think it was that was a bobcat. I think a bobcat got that one. >> Probably. >> But I but a geese might a goose might be a little bit too large for >> Yeah, I remember that. We were walking. Yeah.
>> All right. Next up on continual business. This is discussion and possible vote on wetland bylaw and regulations. Review subcommittee recommendation to submit a warrant article for the spring town meeting amending the wet council wetlands bylaw at add a regulatory 100 foot buffer zone
to bordering lands subject to flooding aka the 100red-year flood plane. So David, do you want to take it or Chris? Uh >> um I'll just say quickly that that we have uh done some research about you
know area towns um that ha have uh this um this part part of their bylaw and I think was was it like 13 towns Chris? >> Yeah. Yeah. Now we we took a look we we got some good data. I mean >> we've got uh the local ones just kind of
looking locally. Um, Actton's got the 100 foot buffer zone to land subject to flooding. Bedford, um, just kind of going alphabetically. Bilick is a no. Burlington was yes. Carile is a yes. Draet is a no. LOL is a no. And then
Westford, yes. They have a 100 foot buffer zone to land subject to flooding. >> Um, and those uh those are mostly MAPC towns. >> Yep. Um,
>> no. Actton, Bedford, Carlile are not. >> Oh, MA MAPC. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> MAPC. I think they are. >> Yeah. >> And it's easy it's easy to pull the bylaw down. I I went to each of these and pulled the bylaw down, took a look at them, and I printed some copies off, but
>> Yeah. So the recommendation would be then so the other the other part of the discussion we had was how often would this kick in in a given let's just say a year. How
often would this So there in as I understand it, there could be a pro proposed project that has no need to come before conservation as our bylaws are current written, but this could trigger uh that we would get to review
based on this with this new bylaw. And that would probably not be very many. It'd be very very few if >> Yeah. And I think it would be mostly probably virtually exclusively new development. See there there are there are in in in the 100 foot buffer zone um
regulations right now there are several exemptions like there's ex there's uh exemptions for sheds as long as it's going in lawn and it's more than 50 ft away. Same thing for swimming pools and patios. Um
existing lawns can be maintained. I mean the the exact same exemptions would apply to this buffer zone as well. This this doesn't this doesn't add any new uh restrictions per se. It just there's there's the just the possibility of
having to do some additional review through a filing, you know, depending on what's being proposed. But, you know, these these the these kinds of minor activities, again, they're exempt. I again I think the likelihood that um you know property owners you know individual
property owners will be affected I think is is is next to nothing and I think I think it would be you know the new development and you know fairly large developments um I can just give a quick example I think Hilddrth the Hildrith uh project
that we saw um LA last year I think I think that that that showed work in the buffer zone to the flood plane I think, you know, so that that that that would have been um one example. I think another example would be the two lots we
saw on uh on Old Westford Road, you know, the triangle lot this year. I mean, they they would have had to file anyway because they were in the buffer zone to Bording Vegetated Wetlands, but they also they also are in the buffer zone to uh the flood plane. But it it it
it it would not have affected the um the outcome in my opinion. It would not have affected the outcome the approval >> that the commission ultimately gave. >> So it would essentially give us a little bit more oversight a little bit more. >> Yeah.
>> And helps to prevent development in a potential future potential flood area flood zone. >> Yeah. And and it gives the commission the opportunity to look at potential impacts to areas that are subject to
flooding, land subject to flooding. Because right now, right now we have jurisdiction, we have jurisdiction over the, you know, the wetlands, right? The u marshes, wet meadows, bog, swamps, vernal pools,
any lakes in town, etc. And we have a 100 foot buffer zone around those resources. And then if we have a perennial stream or river, we've got the 200 foot buffer zone. So most of the time we're going to have jurisdiction anyway because it's going to be one of
those resource areas. U so it gives us some additional potential jurisdiction for the land subject to flooding. Typically we'll have jurisdiction anyway because it's going to be that brook or stream that might be next to it or um you know marsh meadow something like
that next to it. uh gives us a little bit more jurisdiction, might come in handy, but it doesn't it's not that big a change really. >> And and I would suggest the main message is we're trying to avoid construction in areas that are subject
to increased flooding. It's not that we want more jurisdiction. I don't know about you guys, I don't need any more stuff to do, but we're really trying to address the flooding that the town has already spent a couple hundred thou in engineering studies to try to address.
Um, and so this is sort of a companion to that effort to try to avoid problems for homeowners or business owners uh down the road >> in the town. Would that change anything for the applicant on uh 100 Ecuador
road? >> No. >> No. >> How about redevelopment? Does there any be any changes in that? >> Um possibly. I mean I you know there there are some sites um that I I think
are within the buffer zone to uh land subject to flooding. So it's within the realm of possibility. the the say the ones I just mentioned are are the ones that come immediately to mind. Hildrth and those two lots on um Old Westford
Road. Trying to think of any others. Um, so I I think it's it really really would be only new development. Um, and for, you know,
fair fairly large projects, although the old Westford Row is only two houses, but >> ultimately it didn't it wouldn't have made a difference anyway. But but that's not to say that it's wasn't legitimate to look at. You know, we >> I I think I'm on my my behalf. I just
think we should wait a little while. I'm not ready to vote on it. >> Let me let me make a motion anyway. We'll put it to I move that the commission. >> Let me speak. >> Well, yeah. Absolutely. You want to speak before my motion or after? >> No, I want to speak before this. >> Okay.
>> I I think we're overregulating. Okay. That's my opinion. I think we can handle what we have in front of us with the rules we have in front of us.
I'm just not comfortable with this. It's just giving some ammo to different people to do different things to block projects or whatever. We don't have a lot of projects out there that we have to worry about.
I I'm I'm not comfortable with this at all. And I'm not comfortable with a board of town meeting reps voting on something they have no clue what they're voting on. That's what I'm not comfortable with. Somebody's going to go
up there and tell them this, this, and this. Okay. Well, no. It's It's not right. I don't think it's right. Would you want to bring a warrant article before the town meeting if it wasn't 100% consensus
on on the board? I mean, if it was a split support. >> Um, because John's right. They're not going to they're going to they're going to kind of go what what we want if they hear
>> some of the people on the board don't want it, some do. >> Um, >> you know what I mean? >> Yes. I I I agree that that that that might impact the the prospects for um passage if if if they know there's there's a divided vote on the board. I
think you know is it is it is it six to one? Is it 4 to three? Um I guess we don't know that until there's a vote, >> right? >> Where did this come from in the beginning? >> Right. We had a subcommittee who reviewed the bylaws and we looked at our
bylaws and looked for gaps and we compared it with what the standard is from the Massachusetts Association of Conservation Commissioners and they have a a bylaw standard that we were not we don't have.
>> Same answer I got down below last week when I asked about my taxes. I didn't understand aware of that. I'm understanding one thing. I think we're overregulating something that we can handle as a board. >> We can't handle it, John. >> We can handle it, Kyle.
>> This would these this would not show up in our in front of us. That's what we're trying. >> If we make a law or we make something, it's going to show up in front of us and some somebody's going to pick it out. >> No, now I'm not understanding you.
>> I'm not getting it. I'm not getting this whole changing the the flood plane thing. It's set by the federal government. Leave the federal government in charge. >> That That's the problem, John. The federal government numbers are out of
date. >> It's changing every day. Let the federal government handle what's out there for flood plane. That's not how it works though. >> They don't handle it. They define it and
then we manage to what they've defined. >> Okay. >> That's what we're talking about. >> What say? >> Huh? What does MI mean? >> Mima FEMA or >> Massachusetts? No, >> I have no idea.
>> Well, again, the the main example that comes to my mind was on Hilddrth. I remember when that filing was first made, you know, I got all sorts of emails um from residents in the neighborhood saying this area floods. Um
they they they sent me videos uh of of of the flooding. Um, and you know what I mean, we don't we don't know what the sort of impact the the development uh in the buffer zone might
have on the areas that flood. And I think I think that would have been a perfectly legitimate thing to look at, but without, you know, this change to the bylaw, we would not have we would not have the legal authority to review that.
>> This is all stemming from Hillress. That is that what I'm correct in hearing? >> I I I I I think some of it is. >> I think it's all >> Well, the question is how many more Hilddrris are out there lands that might cuz on the Hildrith property, I don't
know what you all thought, but I was pretty confident that some of those houses were going to flood because of this flood plane and we had we were powerless to prevent flooding because the flooding is higher than the current FEMA level. Well, >> I think I think I think some of it also
comes from the the the Graniteville Road uh situation. Uh the I mean, it's well known that there's flooding over there to the point where Yeah. the town the town has contracted for a $200,000 study to take a look at. >> And that's because the water comes all off of Granville Road down the hill and
all that water dumps into that area. Okay. Well, >> we've all known that for all my lifetime living in Chumsid where that water went. >> But okay, >> but I don't >> but you got to put that water somewhere downstream.
>> But we don't >> and they got to size it downstream. >> But I but I don't think we really know what sort of um effects might come from that specific site where those two houses were were being proposed. uh that
you know I I'm I don't know that we know for sure that it all comes from upstream. There might there might be something on site. >> It comes from upstream. >> I'll guarantee you. >> So So take this a step further. If this were if this was >> flows downhill.
>> So John like your opinion on this. So let's walk through this. If this were passed and certain properties, let's use Hildrith as an example. I don't want to use elders >> that kind of property comes before us.
What would we do? And I think the answer is we would ask the engineer to do some additional calculations beyond what we did at Old Westford Road to let us know if the basement of these people's new house is going to flood. I
mean, isn't that really all we're talking about? >> Is trying to avoid some poor future homeowner going, "Oh, yeah. the town approved with this. It must be fine when we have an idea because it's in the new flood plane. We have an idea it's going to flood. I mean, I feel like that's not
appropriate for this board to approve a stuff if we've got some evidence that it might flood. That's just not fair to the next property owner. So, that's my thought. >> I I can I can understand what you're saying.
>> All right. the stream at Hilddrth and you do your elevations, that stream is not going to flood to anywhere near them new houses are. It's the material around the houses that
creates the floods >> that creates the drainage. >> Sure. But we had no we had no legal authority to get the developer to address that problem because we don't have this rag. If we had this rag, we could have asked the developer to do
another round of calculations to avoid flooding. I don't care where it comes from. I don't care if it comes from the river or runoff like your the Granville situation. The point is we're supposed to prevent flood damage to people's property. And this is just a tool to
help us look at that. Now, we're not proposing any regulations. We're not saying you can't build in the 100 foot buffer. Right. We're not we're not trying to stop anybody from developing land. >> You say you can't build in a 100 foot buffer.
>> I think if you read the regulation correctly. >> No, we we allow construction within 50 ft. >> Doesn't say that. >> We allow We allow construction in 100 foot buff. >> You're allowed to build in the flood plane. I mean, there are certain requirements. >> You got to get insurance from the federal government. >> Well,
>> you got to get insurance from somebody to build that flood plane. >> Yeah, but that's not the discussion, though. Well, it is, Kyle. It It all comes down to the flood plan. If we change the rules, we're changing the rules for insurance and everything else, I think.
>> No, absolutely not. No, >> I don't. You got no legal ground to say that, John. >> I'm I'm Well, I'm not a lawyer. >> Yeah. >> I'm a layman. >> Yeah. I'm just saying that statement is not correct. >> All right. >> Water flows downhill. >> No, that's correct. >> And I know water doesn't flow uphill. >> Yeah.
I'm I'm gonna say hands down, I said it from the beginning, I can't in my mind give this to the town meeting and let people that don't understand anything about water or floods or this or that vote on something.
C can I throw an idea out. Uh would would your I agree with you, by the way. People aren't going to understand it. Would we be better served to slow down and come up with a couple of specific examples
of projects where this would prevent >> I think future >> flood things that we shouldn't do. >> Hold on. Hold on. Say again. >> Like if we just had a couple of examples for for a town meeting saying listen this is why we're doing it. For example, here's property X. Okay, you look at the
math. is just outside of the flood zone, but the elevation is pretty flat. We know that with a little bit more flood, it's going to flood somebody's basement. This rag would allow us to at least ask the developer, whatever, raise the house a foot, uh, put some BMS in, you know, whatever, some solution.
>> I mean, you're talking about specific properties or >> Well, I think I think I don't know. We'd have to think >> that's a legitimate um I think general example. >> You know, with regard to people understanding it, I had a couple after the last meeting when this was discussed, I had a couple people who
contacted me, not going to say the names. I said we understood it or I understood it. It's very easy to understand. Flooding is very easy to understand. So, so that that's that says to me that that people will understand it. Whether or not they agree with you
that it's overregulation, I think that's a separate issue, but I think people can understand it. I really do, John. >> So, let me ask a tactical question. Are we too late for Springtown meeting?
>> Uh, well, the article's been drafted. Um, might might even be on the warrant, which I think the select board is is approving on Monday. >> Interesting. Okay. Oh, that's interesting. >> On the 23rd. >> I think their next meeting is the 23rd.
>> So that's two weeks before our next meeting. >> So So it can if if it if it is on the draft warrant, it can certainly be removed, >> right? It can it can be removed up till five minutes before the the vote at town meeting. So
>> I'd like to put it to a vote. >> Yeah, Chris, go ahead. >> Yeah, Mr. Mr. Chairman, as I was going to say, I want to put this to a vote. Um, we worked six months on this. We did a lot of work. We spent like probably the subcommittee probably spent about 100 hours looking at this. We took it seriously and um, I think it's worthy of
a vote. So, I move that um, that the commission uh, sponsor um, a bylaw change where we would be having a 100 foot we would now have a 100 foot buffer zone to land subject to flooding. >> Okay. Motion from Chris. Do I have a
second? >> Second. >> Second from Bill. discussion. >> Any disc further discussion? >> Um, do you want to let the town decide this town reps? If we're split on this,
is that a good idea? You feel like they they can make that decision? Is that decision more of their decision or our decision to decide? Uh well I think I think it's it's up to uh the commission to explain you know
the need for this why the commission feels this is important. Uh if it's if it you know certainly it should be acknowledged that it's a split vote on the part of the commission. Um you know uh you know maybe it's difficult to
predict the the outcome. Um there there are c there are certainly a number of neighborhoods in town where flooding is a huge concern. Um you know and I would I would expect those those reps to to vote for it. You know the average person
I think it's a matter of you know just just you know trying to sell it. And you know, again, I personally think there are good reasons. >> I wish we had information like you were just talking about where because something wasn't looked at in the past,
there's a problem. That's an easier way to sell it than just to other people look at as it's just another regulation like John said. And when you have regulations, then you have oh the next step is we're going to stop this from so people lary of that. But but I think I I
I think if if you put it in the context that it it it I can't say that it will never uh um impact or you know existing properties but it's it's it's going to be almost virtually you know apply to
new development you know uh and I I don't I I I would think people would would go along with that. I would think people would think that's a good thing, you know, because I I know I know that there's a concern with new development in this town.
>> Well, and I think the sales pitch is simple that towns around us have looked at this >> and and come up and recognize the value. We're simply trying to help the flood issues in town. >> Didn't look at it that way. Some towns
discounted it. Oh, maybe they haven't looked at it yet. >> That's possible. >> I don't know. Okay. So, any further discussion? We have a motion. We have a second. >> I second it. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Bill second it. So,
we'll take the a vote then. All in favor? I >> I >> and opposed. >> I >> I >> three and three. >> I I didn't see it. I >> was going to abstain, but you're killing me over here.
>> Abstain from something like this cuz you got no stake in it. >> I respect you, Dave, 110%. >> That's one thing I do about you. Oh, >> thank you. >> I respect your thoughts, but sometimes >> Hold on, John. Ally, are you going to vote?
>> Oh, >> I'm going to say no. >> You're going to say no. Okay. So, we're motion fails to pass. So, three to four or four to three fails to pass. Um >> I think we should look at it next time, but I feel like we're a little rushed.
Not by you, but just in in general >> if we had more facts of where where something was a issue because we haven't had the had didn't have the opportunity to look at a piece of property that was in the flood zone and it caused something for somebody else
right at this point. I just don't feel like it's a right time. >> And I feel it's a bad decision, Bill. Honestly, flooding is a big problem in this town. I live in an area close to flooding. I see it like every time we have storms coming in, it's kind of scary. And every time new development comes in, projects come in, they come into planning board, they come in in
front of us. Sometimes our hands are tied and it's frustrating. You know, >> we look at the flooding >> and we look at the flooding that the two houses that we approved on all Westford Road, right? That's flooded, okay? But the water's never gone over all Westford
Road, okay? The water comes from that hill and it comes down through that land and it's got to be sized out and that's where it goes. You got to size the water out of the the area and that's what the DPW
>> Okay, >> I just like to respond quickly to that, John. So, so um I mean we we don't know for sure, John, but but in a case like Old Westford Road, suppose suppose that
where where the houses were being put is is where the runoff uh th that area on the property is where the runoff goes into the wetlands. So that if if the house is potentially
blocked that um that that flow of water into the into the flood plane, that water has to go somewhere. Where is it going to go? Is it is it is it is it going to go into the road? Is it is it going to go into someone else's property? That's the kind of thing I think you need to look at. It's going to
go out to that drainage ditch in the back that should have been sized properly through the road with a cover or whatever and gone downhill. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Let's move on. Let's >> Carl. >> Yeah. >> Just a point point of reference. I'm
looking at the select board agenda on Monday >> and I clicked on the uh list of spring warrant articles that's on the their agenda and I don't find this one. >> Okay. >> So, I don't know if it's, you know, they're going to look at it Monday or not. We'll see that it doesn't get put on there.
>> Right. >> Okay. Let's do our land management site update. Um I'm going to just like wing it here. Does anybody have anything? Uh because it's really snowy and do you have something? Peter, you have anything? >> Uh there's activities going on that
we've talked about before. So yeah, >> it's just there's not a whole lot going on right now. It's kind of slow. Jeff Jeff's building a bunch of duckous. >> That's right. He is. Yeah, he is building the duckous. >> Ally, anything? >> No, >> Chris.
>> Nothing new. Cricket Spring. >> Some activity, you know, just people skiing and stuff. >> Yep. Oh, the uh red one. Yeah. Nice. Nice. Uh John, anything at Russell Mill? >> Snowman's still in the middle of the Milton. >> I when I go down the waters and I plow
and I look, >> the snowman's still out there. There's no reason for it to be gone yet. Next week we get some melting maybe, but not not this week. Not this week. >> And coolest bill or or Deep Brook. >> Uh well, Oakill, I've heard from a couple of
members of the board of directors of the gun club, local sportsman's club, and they're concerned about the Beaver Dam. They want us to keep that on the agenda. >> Okay. >> So, we can look at that. I mean, it's snowed down there now. You can't even get there. But they don't want they had a as we know a couple years ago we had a
a bad wash out. >> Yeah. >> And they're just concerned that we keep an eye on it. So we can keep that on agenda yet. >> Pardon me. >> Is it flooding any part of their property? >> They can't even get down there right now. It's all snow. No, it's not now. >> It won't flood their It's jammed up
pretty good. >> What they're concerned is if it breaches >> a rush of water. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Because they had a it clean it wiped out their tro. Yeah. It was muddy for the last three years. >> Three, three years ago. Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, if we can keep it on the agenda, the
the agenda and then once the weather changes, keep an eye on it and if we have to do something to it, we can. >> But so it doesn't fall off the radar. >> That's it. >> Anything at cool? No, at all. >> Not really. Okay. Good. >> Well, they've been authorized to do the fence.
>> Ah, right. Right. Oh, yeah. Good. Thank you. >> I don't I don't know when. >> They'll be out there tomorrow, I'm sure. >> Good luck. >> Snowblower. >> Yeah. They better bring something for the rocks. >> Hey Bill, coolest question. >> Uh the sledding hill idea
>> working well or is it being used? >> Kids use it. Yes. Yes. Yeah. It's a it's a nice little spot. >> Great. >> Um because it's safe. The kid be you're not going out in the road. You're not going into a rock wall. It's in a little
silage pit. It's confined to one spot. It's a perfect spot and the parents can see it from above or below. >> It's easy to get to from the park. >> It's easy to get to. So, >> it's a good spot. >> Yeah. I think next year once the walkways are done a little better and the parking is set up and people know
more about it, I think it's going to I think that's going to be a good spot for people. >> Build a little chair lift. >> Maybe >> some skis. >> T- bar. Just a tea bar. >> Tire. >> All right. Anything else? Anything on the agents report, David? Uh I'll just say quickly that um the appeal of the
superseding order conditions at Freeman Lake was dropped. >> So that means the herbicide Yeah. So the herbiciding will move forward. >> Wow. >> This summer. >> Okay. Interesting. >> Okay. >> Is it I'm sorry. Can I Does it have to get funding? Was funding already in
place? >> Um well I think I think the funding will be in next year's budget. Uh so I'm I'm not sure. Um, I think that's going to be for the annual town meeting. I I don't know. I don't know if specific numbers are for, you know, the budget are in the
warrant. PE people must know that. So, how is how is it typically done in this um town? I can I can certainly get those numbers. >> I just don't want to delay anymore. >> No, I don't I don't think they're going to. >> I think their plan is to do something
>> this this summer. >> Okay. Okay, I'll take a motion to adjurnn. Our next meeting is February 24th. >> I move to adjourn, Mr. Chairman. >> Motion from Chris, second from Mark. All in favor? I. Thank you very much. Thank you, Cheldia. Thank you everyone. >> I said 8:00.