Oh yeah. Well, he just does his own thing. >> Uh, welcome to the Danvers Conservation Commission meeting for May 14th, 2026. Um, we operate under the Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 131, Section 40,
the Wetlands Protection Act, and Chapter 26 of the Town of Danver's General bylaw, the Wetlands Protection bylaw. After the applicant presents his or her request and the board has had time to ask questions and discuss the project,
we will accept questions from the audience. Because this is a public meeting, it is required by law that you give your name and address first. Although we may disagree on the issues raised, all persons present during this meeting are expected to be civil to all
other meeting attendees. This includes the members of the commission, staff, abutters, concerned citizens, and property owners and project applicants. We also request that you confine your questions to the project and only as it
pertains to the wetlands act. We cannot handle nor do we have jurisdiction regarding such things as noise or traffic. All problems not related to the wetlands protection act and the town of Danver's wetlands protection bylaw must
be taken up with the other boards. My name is Mary Height. Uh Lorraine Drapek >> present. Paul McNelte, >> Michael Splain >> here, >> Peter Wilson >> here. >> Uh we have two new alternates starting
today. Uh Michael McCarthy >> here >> and Andrew McNelte. >> Thank you and welcome. All right, our first agenda item today is 86 Elliott Street, notice of intent, D file number 14-1450.
The applicant is Melinda Vaka. Um, would you like to present? Yeah. >> And and we have two people remote as well. I just um unmuted their mics and cameras so they'll be able to to come in for this too. >> All right. Great. Thank you. Let me just pull the plan up here.
>> Good evening. My name is Do I have to use microphone right? My name is Milinda Vaka. um 86 Elliot Street in Danvers. Um this is our my second time. Uh the first time was last month
regarding the NOI that we are planning to do in our property. So you guys requested to come and see in
person. So um I'm waiting for your suggestion. Everything was done by uh by the rules. We got the permit from the town. We started the work. We got notified about uh some issues or conservation problems
and now we're here again. Um, are we ready to have a question or would you like to present anything or share things with us? >> There's nothing to be present. >> This is the ADU that we're building.
>> Could you speak in speak up? Yes. >> Yes. Good. >> This is the ADU we're building right here. It is compliant with all the regulations of Massachusetts and the town of Der. >> And what is it you're constructing?
>> It's a um 900 foot uh living uh three garage on the bottom and then first floor and then living on the top. >> An ADU accessory dwelling unit upstairs, right? >> Yes. >> Thank you.
Could you just on the on the drawing as a whole just give us a a better picture of the whole scheme of things? Uh because as I recall from the the site visit there was a driveway which is I think is dotted in red. >> This one? >> No. No. For the
>> the old one, >> right? >> This is the existing house. >> That's the existing house, right? >> And then there was a a uh an intermittent stream. >> Yes. >> Somewhere in the middle, right? Yeah.
>> And this is the >> in the wetland. >> The wetland. Yeah. >> Right. >> But it's not on my property. >> Yeah. >> And this is uh I'm not sure the distance, but it's uh according to regulations. I have to check them.
>> As I recall from the site vision, this is probably from Mike and the >> Yeah, we got the scientists and everything was >> done according to that. the wetlands is a result of construction that was done 40 or 50 years ago >> and it just the drainage and then to
relieve the excess from that wetlands behind their property which is not on your property. Is that right? >> No. >> Uh there's for lack of better word it's a ditch that goes out to the street. >> Uh and that's classified as an intermittent stream. Is that >> is according to the wetland scientists
report that's um classified as an intermittent stream. Uh and so you know >> we've been maintaining all those years the stream and cleaning and everything >> the the within the boundaries >> everything comes from the wherever collection water everything from the top
and then it just drains through our property and goes to the >> uh town we've been cleaning and maintaining all those years >> and on this drawing where do you see the boundaries >> the boundaries intermittent stream
>> yeah like the the 50 and the 100 foot buffer zone, but the the 35 and 50 especially >> I'm sorry. >> Oh, yes. I'll try to make it bigger here. Um the 35 is the red line. Um there's one that goes through the center
of the ADU and then the orange line is the 50ft buffer. >> So the one through the center of the building was the >> is the 35. >> Oh, okay. So the half of the building is within that 35, right? >> Yeah. So if we go if the intermittent stream is in the middle then there's a
35 a 50 and 100 going out from either side of the property. So the the property is entirely within the 100 foot buffer on both sides of it. >> And the actual building is in the no disturb >> um portions of the building are in the 35 and the 50.
>> And and how much of the building is in the no build? >> Most of it but half >> just the the calculation sheet. Um 2,287 square feet is in the no disturb and 3,296
is in the no build. >> How do they and and that it gets in within the limits within the 20 >> it's a very very large parcel so that was able to fit within um within the limit. >> How does the math work on that Emily as far as allowing the most of the
buildings in a no build zone? >> Right. It's I'm going off the numbers that are in the impact calculation table that the um that the applicant had submitted. So with the the area on the lot within the 0 to50 is 31,122 square feet.
>> Are we calling that um the that an intermittent stream? >> That's what the wetland scientist called it. So >> and where were we measuring the um where were we taking the measurement for the no build from? >> I believe that that was measured off the side of the intermittent stream. That
would be a question for the wetland scientist or um Mr. Vaka and the engineer are both available remotely. They may be may be able to answer these questions better than I can. >> So if someone wants to come So if this got built and someone wants to come back and forth, are they allowed to go over
the stream crossover? >> No. >> Cuz when I went I did go out not with that scheduled visit. I went out myself and met with uh the gentleman that was there and they just had like uh some siding or boards.
>> Right. Yeah. Those need to be removed. >> So, what will be allowed >> to for getting over that stream? It's >> go back out to Elliot Street and go up the driveway. >> That will be an entirely separate permit. >> We will request to build a walking bridge.
>> So, that would be an entirely separate permit filing in order to get a walking bridge over that. We wouldn't be able to do that as part of this. Um >> Okay. >> So, do you see that happening? People walking out to Elliot and back out the other side. I mean, however, if they can step over it, they can. But if a bridge
is built that's not permitted, then that would be a violation. It would have to be removed. >> So, they have to come back for that. >> For like a crossing, >> yes. Yep. They would have to come back for a crossing. >> But it looks like >> the wetland scientist on this and uh she
suggest is on the paper. My wife has it. She can handle to you guys. uh she responded to question on the draft enforcement and she suggested we either keep one of the bridges foot bridges or build the
better one uh structure safe. Uh so it has to go through either now with NOI or or the future >> so >> to access >> that cannot be approved this evening because that's not on this plan. So you could either >> No, it's not because that's the old one.
she will prepare the plans. >> Yes, Emily. >> So, the enforcement order is what we'll be discussing next. So, that's where more the bridge will come up. Um, this is more just to get the order of conditions if the commission is ready to get voted on. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Well, if I could just address staff. What? So, >> wouldn't we want the enforcement order all taken care of first? Um if the order of conditions is not issued then that will change the scope of the enforcement order because the enforcement order will be to fix basically >> it would encompass the uh the issues
that were raised by the enforcement order. >> Correct. Yeah. And the enforcement order um can be ratified at any time throughout the process. So if there are additional things that need to be added to it at any point the commission can do that. I just, you know, I just have when I
hear most of the buildings in a no build zone, I I'm trying to justify that. Uh I know they wanted the uh dwelling unit. Um there was a do don't we need alternatives for that? >> There was a draft plan that had been
submitted that had the ADU um further back. It was still right up against the intermittent stream, but putting it further back on the property got it closer to the bordering vegetated wetland and basically altered even more of the land by making the driveway longer. >> Yeah. But I mean, aren't we under our
rules were supposed this they should be submitting alternatives. >> It's we accepted that as the alternative draft plans that showed that this was >> you accept, you know, it's the wor that was the worst case. >> That was the worst case. Yeah. So, this was the I mean, it's you can ask the
applicant um if there's a way that the project could be scaled back um to rel to relieve some of that. >> Well, you mean scaled back, downsize? >> Yes. >> No, this is just 900 square foot ADU. When you the the neighbor's shed is
bigger than this ADU, like how smaller you want me to make it? >> Yeah, >> it's just too bad. >> Where is the property line on the Here >> that is the property. Okay. Yeah. >> Yeah. There's like a big shed here and
it's a stone wall. If you remember the neighbors last time, this is a stone wall. >> Okay. >> Which is not touched and never going to be touched. >> How about making a smaller footprint and adding a second story? >> Well, they already are adding though.
>> That's what I'm That's what I'm asking. Right now, it's two, right? the garage on one level and then the second floor would be the the living area. >> Yes. >> You could make the footprint smaller and have >> a third floor. >> What's the height zone? What's the height requirement?
>> Good question. >> We don't even know that. >> No, this is all >> I would have to talk to regulation and then it was requirement off the top of my head. >> No. Um >> just brainstorming here >> getting back if I could address staff
again just because I'm uh how how close are we on the percentages that allow this? Is it just making it or >> um yeah it's just >> so the ADU was comply and permitted with the buffer
zones. In addition, the project complies with the town storm water regulation and has been reviewed and approved by the town engineer and building department. >> Correct. >> And do we know how long the the intermittence? >> So on the table below it's the
>> recommendation of the >> Yeah, >> I think when they told us Mike at the at the site visit it's a number of years like 30 or 40 years. >> Yeah, I would suggest 50. >> I've walked by that like as a kid. Where does the water come from?
>> Well, funny that >> you know where the water comes from. >> Mike, listen. >> Where it comes from? >> Yeah. >> Oh, I don't know. From the neighbors and storm and like >> Do you remember, Mike? You probably the only member of the board that was on here when we had it. There was
>> upstream. Someone had a violation with a pool in that area. Yeah. >> And we gave them permission because they needed a waiver. >> Yeah. and to build that but to clean it up. But the neighbors were all very opposed to it and I think the neighbors
appealed it to the D and there was a a superseding order conditions order but this is the same water. >> It's a By the way, it's not always water on that stream. When it rains it kind of collects and just drains there.
>> Like summertime is no water at all. >> Yeah. That's why it's intermittent. >> Yeah. And it's already grass and everything there. It's not touch height of a building 30 ft in dampers. >> I don't think that's the way
>> I don't think the three levels is the way to go on >> just a thought. I'm not really >> Yeah. No, I know. Um, >> well, I I guess I've asked all my questions to the applicant and to staff for now.
>> Yeah, you >> uh we're just actually just a point or a comment. Uh I'm just uh frustrated that these applicants obtained a building permit and started the work without knowing that they had wetlands concerns.
Uh to me that's a you know at the town hall level that that an application like this should get circulated around and just make sure everyone checks off on it. So you know in that regard I I I feel for you folks you know having started a project. Yeah, that's been
going back and forth and we finally started and we >> because I think you know if you came to us without >> before you even started we >> Nobody told us push back too. >> Nobody told us. >> Yeah, but it's your responsibility as a builder to get all of the permits.
>> Yes, you get the building permit and you start work. What else you need more than the building permit? You add you add, I think, five or six other permits. So, and and with water on your property, there's going to be a conccom permit, and that's your responsibility to know
that. >> How do I know? I go to the town, they tell me what to do, I get the permit, I start the work. How do I know I need more permits? When they told me I need, I stopped and I came to you guys. >> Well, you had a engineer and somebody who designed the building and all of
that. >> Yes. Um, you know, maybe that's something to think about if there's we have people on the town who check everything and make sure everything is by regulations. I'm responsible for my profession. If you ask me, I'll give you
answers. Here's the town. Here's the people who know the rules. They need to tell us. They need to do their job. Not me. How do I know how many permits? >> Consider talking to your engineer or the person who designed the building. He
never said that. He said, "Okay, we got the permit. We're fine. You wanted wetland scientist. We got it. We did everything. We're still working with her and we have all the recommendation." >> Is he? >> No, I'm very The engineer is online remotely as well as Mr. Vaka. So, if either of you would like to chime in on
this conversation, please do. >> Uh, it was nothing shown on the GIS for the wetlands and uh we are we don't know anything. So, you cannot blame us for ignorance. We went to the town. I went to the town engineer and they said me
you need to get permit building permit. You get the electrical permit. So whatever they told me we took care. >> Nobody told like my wife said nobody told us we have to go here and the my engineer was designing. We did the uh
infiltration system and everything and was nothing shown on the GIS and and for me I still even the scientists classify this as a intermediate stream. for me is just a ditch there. It's nowhere around it. It's just a grass which I've been maintaining for
the last 20 years cutting the grass. My my father actually >> it just if >> so we didn't know anything >> if I could it just seems that if if an engineer had come out there and they would have seen that stream they would have the first thing I would have
thought of is do we have a issue with conservation commission that would have been the first thing that I would have thought of. seeing the stream and seeing where you want to put the the structure >> according accordingly when I was talking to my engineer the first thing that they they see is of the GIS nothing shown
there is nothing for them and then this kind went and to discuss actually I was arguing with Emily and Brian at the town try to convince them that this is not a stream but who am I had to fire the weather scientist which
calmed me down and said yes according to So this is called intermedi but we didn't know nothing at and the building when you get the building permit it says you need to start in 6 month or the building the permit is not valid. So I
started two weeks before the expiration even if I wanted I wanted to push more on the warmer weather but because of that I have to start I heard I hire the the contractor I already spent on this project $50,000 which is a lot for me
guys and it's not because had this conversation come at before I was kind of probably drop it or say yeah whatever you guys think or you need I need this pyramid yes okay Whatever need to be done, we do it. And right now that is at this point we try to do whatever you
guys request correct it. I really work with the weather scientist today on the the draft that Emily sent to me and she is willing and I don't know if my wife handed the the list to you guys to to
comply with everything to make it right. I'm going to I'm going I was planning even without the weather side because I was planning to build evergreen trees along the driveway on both sides, six or seven on each side and planting the shrubs on the at the bank of the of the stream.
And that's what the scientist was discussing to give me the the type of the shrub type of the grass and everything. >> Thank you. >> Did you have a question? Um yes. Did you see the recommendations from the mass D
and have a plan in place? Is there a plan to reconfigure closer to the ADU? >> We can we can remove the the seal fence and everything. It's on the response of the weather scientist. I'm going to move the seal fence close to the driveway.
>> Close to the driveway. We revise it. >> All right. So, we haven't seen that yet then. That was just what was submitted >> tonight. >> This is Yeah, this is the original submission. years. All right. >> I wasn't asked for it on the plan to prepare a plan for the day. >> Okay. Um I just want I am very sorry
that this happened to you. But on the other hand, we have a potential significant problem if there's inadvertent alteration to this wetland resource area. And that's something that that we have to really consider seriously. But I am sorry. I do we do
hear what you say. It's awful that this happened. >> We're not going to touch We're not going to touch. I took a picture last night. My wife has them. You can see it's it's green on both sides of the bend. It's grass is not touched. >> It's already green. >> And even even on the area then then
was excavated. The grass is out again. >> All grass. Nothing is >> Yeah, that's without planning anything. We're going to plan we're going to do whatever moving forward >> requested for the road control. >> All right. Thank you so much, Mr. Vaka.
Um I have a quick question on could you just give us a review of the storm water drainage and runoff plan? >> Uh my engineer can take care of this. >> Yep. >> He knows better than me. >> Thank you. >> Yes. Good evening. Yes. Ara engineer
working with Sparta and his wife on this project. Yes. We submitted stom water report request of town engineer. We addressed all of the 10 standards for the state standards and this application was approved and again the intent here is not to really
alter or change the drainage patterns or the runoff or the volumes from the addition. Therefore, we proposing to do like a premeable surface for the driveway. So that's a true grid system that has some crush tones with some honeycomb reinforcements to keep it in
place. And we also propose an infiltration trench behind the ADU. So that will take all the roof leaders and infiltrate them into the ground. So in the report, if you need a a copy of the report, we'll be happy to submit it to the to the to the commission, but it
does address all the standards and it shows it shows the model that was developed for precondition post conditions and it shows all of the discussions about all the storm water regulations. >> All right. Thank you so much. Um and then how is the weight of the structure
going to impact the adjacent resource area? >> Well, the this the new structure is going to be slab on grade with a foundation for the just for the for the garage and uh you know I said the there's no we don't really anticipate to be over far
out from the resource area. We don't think we're going to have any impact. We more than you know 5T at the close. No, not even I don't know. Can't read that distance. I don't know how much that is from the edge of the from the edge of >> yeah 10 ft or so from the edge of the stream.
>> So we don't really anticipate any changes or impact to that to the stream. >> Is there going to be a slab? >> Slab and grade. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Oh, excuse me for staff. uh are we
seeing the plan that uh that they're going to go forward with or is there going to be some changes? >> This is if changes are suggested tonight but otherwise this is the this is the plan that staff has been provided >> but but changes have been suggested um
by by the state. No, >> no, just for the erosion control line. So we would need to see an update with that erosion control. >> Not not where where the footprint is. No, the state the only recommend or suggestion that the state had was with regards to that erosion control line being moved on closer to the Thank you.
closer to the property. >> All right. >> And I just have a couple more questions and thank you for your patience. Um, will the footings of the building potentially >> collapse the stream bank? Oh, is that the No. How will the slope
of the stream be protected? >> Good question. The stream is not going to be touched. >> We're far out from the right. We're not going to touch the stream. >> Like the engine the driveway is going to be
>> ahead. Individually talk so I can hear you. Please go ahead. >> So you as I'm saying the footing is only 4 ft deep and you can see where we're not really cutting here. We're trying to build on top of the existing. So we're not making any cuts. So the only cut
will be you know we are filling at about a foot or so on the where the slab is and we only going to cut down 2 ft of the footing. So we are filling behind and around so that we're not really impacting or touching getting near the stream. So my concern is the stability of the
soil once that heavy building goes on top of it and how that's going to if and how the pressure of that building is going to force the ground to shift a little bit and that's going to collapse that small stream that we have.
Have you looked at that or done any numbers or looked at the ground? Where does this >> No, we we haven't looked at that. But I said we but I said we're 10 ft away from there. So I mean was outside the zone of
influence of of the of the foundation. >> Is there something about the soil base that would cause a concern >> when we that would be a question for the engineer. That's that's not something that I would know. >> Yeah. >> No, I'm asking the chair if Oh. Oh, I'm sorry. And I was concerned about the distance
between the stream and the building itself. Um, and if that's it's going to be 10 ft away from the whole building, there's going to be 10 ft distance from the stream to the building >> from the edge >> from the edge of the stream to the
building. >> Is that correct? >> Yeah. From the closer Yeah, that's the that's the closest point to it. Yes. >> It's from the from the edge of Isman. It's from the edge of Isman which is outside the bank line of Isman. We we
stayed away from the eastment. We discussed with the town engineer with Steven and we moved it away from the line of Isman which is line of ement is probably five six feet from the top of the bank.
>> All right. Thank you so much. >> Oh yeah. And you get here five 5T from the >> closest point uh between the building and the uh the edge uh of the stream and in feet >> edge of the strain is going to be between 13 and 15. If you need it, I can
open the cut file and I I can measure it for you now. >> Yeah. Can you just measure it off the plan? Give me I cannot measure on the plan but 16.8 Eight. Let's see number here. Trying to open the cut file.
It's sometimes is the dotted line on the edge of the driveway. Is that 35 ft from that stream? And the next one is 50. >> Yeah. So from the building nearest building
corner to edge of the water is 15.4 ft >> 15.4 four. >> That's the closest point then. >> The closest point. Correct. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And then I think my last con is
concerning the abutters that were here um a couple weeks ago. Um how is their wall going to be protected during construction? >> Uh it's not only their wall is my wall and it's our property line. So the wall is not going to be touched at all. I
talked to had a conversation with him uh 3 days ago. >> I saw them by the wall and I went over and talked to them and they are they are more than happy what they see and what they hear from me. >> So what are your goal? What are you going to do to protect that wall from
the >> not going to touch at all? We're working out way. It's 15 17 ft from the from the wall the the the construction >> 17 ft from the wall distance. So you won't be touched at all. >> Okay. 17 ft from the wall. So, it's way way
far. >> Thank you. Anybody else have any other questions? >> I think there's a hand up for public comment. >> Yes, >> Mr. Brad, please. >> Thought his hand might get tight. He's had it up. >> I'm sorry.
I'm so hyperfocused on the the information. >> You guys public, >> you have to hold it, Bill. We've got to be able to hear you. I know. >> Thank you. >> Bill Barry, Tom meeting member, precinct
one. I apologize for being late. I just came from a prior meeting in town. I'm listening to what's going on and I might have missed something, but it sounds to me like you folks weren't given all the information that they you needed
so that you could ask a question so they could answer it and not be was it ambiguous or guess it's about this or close to that. I hear it at too many meetings and I just think tell them a
con you need a continuence so that you can submit a list of questions, possible questions or they can submit a a list of possible answers to questions you might have to help you be better prepared for what I'm listening and I'm not faulting
you the board but I listen and I just I just find it disturbing that uh you don't have all of the information you should have. >> Thank you.
>> Emily, can I ask you a quick question? >> Yes. >> So the order conditions here, we can discuss those. >> Yes, definitely. Yeah, those are just >> Do I read them or >> Yeah. Yep, you can read them out loud. Those are just discussion points. >> Okay. For for the applicant for you to for the commission to discuss with the applicant if you would like to. That's
all. >> All right. >> Can I do that now or should I wait until the additional >> Yeah. Do you? Yeah. If there's any Yeah, you can. If the board has any other questions or if there's any other clarification that's needed from the applicant, then now will be the time to
get that information. >> So, should I do this first? Okay. Um, are we ready to take a vote >> or if there's any other information that you would like from any other information? >> Is there any other public comments? >> Any other public comments?
>> No, >> I don't have anyone remotely. >> All right. I mean, I think you're asking for comments on what my intention is and other board members can share the their feelings as well. Um I mean
for this project I think there's too much work being done within our our our limits the you know the the boundaries the the 35 and the 50. Um I would like to see them try to make some changes to get that work a little over closer to the the
boundary line on the I'm not sure what direction it is but the lower part of the drawing. But as of right now, I can't support this. So that's all I have to say. >> Yeah. >> You're suggesting they resubmit uh something.
>> I would say >> I don't Yes. But I'd say we don't want to close the public hearing and force a vote because then it's then it's done. But you know if they uh as it is right now I would say I can't support it but you know if they could make some changes and
>> so what are the changes you are suggesting? >> I'm not going to suggest I already offered one but I think that's up to you but I think we'd like to get more of the building and all the driveway out of you know away from that >> further >> maybe we can shift it we can shift it.
>> It can be shift a little bit more here. Yes. But you know just a little farther away from those boundaries the 35 and the 50. I mean there's so much of that building that this project is within those boundaries. >> 50 is not going to change 50 is not going to change anything. 35 yes we can
shift it. It can decrease the area on on the on the 35. But the 50 whatever we do is not going to change anything. >> Well I don't know. You're asking us to approve approve a building that is mainly in a no build zone. So we're
trying to work with you to >> it's within the requirement is 9.9%. It's within requirements >> but that that keep in mind this is >> we've been through this with applications
>> those numbers are not those numbers are a limit on what we can approve. They are not a right for the applicant to say I'm under 10% this is what I this is what I'm going to do. you that's that's >> no I'm not saying I'm not saying that I'm saying we can shift it but it's not
can change mine on 50 it can change the number on on 35 only I can shift it back on the uh close to the wetland area >> and away from the ditch a little bit >> you can go a little bit this way >> wouldn't that show credible evidence to
an alternative that's less impacting if he were to move it back at least you >> you start to satisfy the 35 foot Well, that's why I was asking about alternatives in the first place. >> No, I I get that. I just usually incredible evidence >> presentation.
I just would like to see some effort made just to get a little bit out of that. I mean, I >> I really feel for the applicants with this this lack of a better word for this ditch that goes through their property, the drain. I mean, it's just >> My wife has a has a mark out on the on a PDF that shows a red line a little bit
further. If you can take a look, Linda, can you show it to them? This is >> a red box. We can shift it on that spot. >> They won't bring the numbers. >> Uh that we want to work with you, but we want to minimize the intrusion. And if
that can be done, I think you'll make the board happy. >> This is a patio. So >> yeah. >> Yeah. I think >> we can we can move it on the back. It's can bring the driveway longer which is can cost me more but at this point like
I said I already spent 50,000 so >> either I either I lose 50,000 >> I know and I I I I sympathize with your your play but it's just like we've been back and forth on this and who's responsible to work with
>> but can the driveway >> mean can the driver come to the corner of this uh landing area instead of right in the middle of it just whatever you Yeah, we can do it from this. >> Yes, we can do that >> from this uh >> Yes, we can do that too. We can save the driveway too. >> It's not a problem. >> You know what? I think we should move to
continue. >> Yes. To allow them the applicant to come in and move things around a little so we could then vote for the >> Mhm. Okay. >> Right. If if you want us to vote tonight, it's probably not risky. If you vote, we vote tonight.
>> And I want to solidify. >> Can you guys vote with the conditions? >> Say it again. We want to be able to say yes. We want to >> Yeah. Can you Can you What were the condition to? >> Our goal is to help um come to a compromise and find something that works
for both of us. And if we pull that building back a little bit, shift the driveway over >> um and then come back. I think that um >> that would be a good choice. >> Can you with conditions? We can do that.
So can move the driveway and I don't know because he's dragging this too much and >> well >> it's in it's it's the time time is money I mean >> well we can schedule on my neck can't we >> I'm sorry
>> we could schedule the very next hearing date. When's that? >> Yeah the next hearing date is May 28th. So for any plan revisions I would just need the plan revisions one week before that. So, I would need any plan revisions by May 21st to afford enough time to review everything. >> Yeah, I can send the plan as soon as
possible. >> Okay, great. >> Maybe next next couple of days. >> Great. >> There you go. >> And it's and with that plan, uh, Mr. Vaka, I would also stress since the impacts are going to be shifting within the 35 and the 50, we'll need a new impact calculation table to show what
those new impacts. >> Yes, that would be we done, but the impact, like I said, impact will be shift on 35 only. 50 is going to be the same I think. I'm not sure but 35 yes will be shifted. >> Oh that's great. >> It's progress is in the right direction.
Yeah. >> Which one? >> We don't want to. >> So we want >> we want to move to continue. >> There's one more hand in the audience. >> Yep. Yep. neighbor. >> Oh. Oh. Oh, he's coming.
Uh, Andrew Height, town meeting member, precinct 4. Uh, I know you guys are suggesting moving stuff. I just um suggest that the applicant should reach out to whoever approved the original plan to make sure they don't need to go in front of them again like the zoning
board or planning board or whoever they went through in front of before so they don't delay the project anymore. Thank you. >> Absolutely. Once I get the updated plan set, I will share them with all um all departments at town hall. >> Emily is going to walk from one office to the next. >> I will. Yes. I will have people sign the
sheet saying that I gave it to them. That's the one. >> Yes. No, I agree, Andrew. Thank you. I agree. >> Anybody else? >> No. >> We good to continue? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Do you want a motion? >> Yes. >> Okay. I'll make a motion we continue for the uh the application for notice of
intent for 86 Elliott Street, D file number 14-1450 to our next meeting. Is that correct? On the >> 28th 28th, >> May 28th. >> I'll second. >> All in favor? All right. >> Okay.
>> Thank you so much. >> And now we're doing the uh enforcement order, right? Or are we going to wait for that? >> Yes, it's it may be best to wait on that until we have a final plan. Um because that will determine some of the conditions of that. Um, so we don't really need to go through that or we
won't need a vote on that this evening. >> We don't need a >> um you can if you would like to just for the record do a motion to continue it. Um, >> why don't you motion of continuence for the enforcement order >> 486 Elliot Street >> for May 28th.
>> For May 28th. Thank you. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Great. Thank you all. Um, so uh Mr. Vaka, I'll be in touch um within the next few days here to get everything moving along. >> Thank you guys. >> Thank you.
>> All right. Um our next item is 80 Andover Street, D file number 14-0516. The applicant is Seaside Legal Solutions owner John Kylie Jr.
>> Hello. >> Hi. >> Um, good evening. My name is Caitlyn White. I'm a wetland scientist from Hancock Associates here on behalf of the applicant. Um, this was a pretty simple grading and pavement project that unfortunately was permitted back in 1993. Um, so I'm in front of you tonight
to ask for us to close this permit out. We've walked this site with Emily and Brian. Um the site is stable, there's no debris, trash, anything like that. Construction's done. Um we're just looking to close it out and um make sure the parcel is in good standing with you
guys. >> Okay. We were wondering where the parcel is. 80. Where is that? >> It's um the Mitsubichi dealership off Andover Street. >> What's it near? >> It's near other car dealerships. >> It's It's right on 114. Um
>> yeah. Sorry, I'm not from Danver. >> No, it's okay. Um, what are the >> move around? I'm trying to picture where it is. >> Um, >> left of the Chevy dealership, I >> think. Yes. Thank you. Left of the Chevy dealership. >> Oh, okay. All right. What was the original project? >> It was just paving. They had
>> just paving. It got done. >> I'm sorry. >> It was done. >> It was done. Yep. Yeah. >> And the order of conditions at that time didn't require an asbuilt. So, we're we walked the site and we're going off of the plan that was approved in 93. And >> site looks >> Oh, well looks like the plan.
>> Yep. 33 years >> a little late coming in. >> I think if there were library fines of a dime a day, >> you'd owe us some money. >> Yeah. >> Any other comments?
>> Uh, no. Other than the fact that it took so long and >> Yeah. >> George, I meant George. I'm sorry. >> I just want to ask Emily, this email. Hold on. >> Why now? They are selling the parcel to pig. Yeah, >> exactly. That's usually how it comes
about, right? >> The lawyer gets right to it. >> Um, is there anybody in the public that'd like to speak? >> We're good. Okay. >> Um, and just quick thing, uh, Mr. McCarthy, just as a matter of record, since you're an alternate, we hadn't stated at the beginning of this petition
that you'd be voting on it. So, I would just ask for procedurally that you just please abstain and we'll have the other four members vote on this one. >> Appreciate it. Thank you. Mhm. I think we're good. >> Okay. Uh I'll make a motion that we um
issue a certificate of compliance for 80 Andover Street Tile number 14-0516. The applicant is Seaside Legal Solutions and the owner is John Kylie Jr. >> Oh, and a quick note within that that there's condition 27 A through C are in
perpetuity on that one. >> Do we need to read those? >> You don't need to read the conditions, but just state that for the record that conditions >> condition 27 is um in perpetuity. just for the record. >> Okay. And as part of that, we have u conditions that exist in perpetuity and
they are they'll be on the documents. >> Yes. Yep. They want us to pick up compliance. Thank you. >> Okay. >> I second. All in favor? >> I >> Hey, we're good. >> Is there another car dealer going there? >> Um it's the adjacent car dealership
bought them. >> Nothing is changing. >> No, that's Gasoline Alley. Miracle Mile over there. Yeah. >> All right. Item four. Um, >> I was just going to say one more quick thing. So, Mr. McCarthy, again for this one, since I know you're not going to be
able to be present at the meeting on the 28th. Um, so it may help to abstain from this one too because in case anything gets continued. Um, >> perfect. >> What are you saying, Emily? >> Sorry. That Mr. McCarthy isn't going to be available for the meeting on May 28th. So for the next two agenda items
in case anything gets continued, we want to have the people at the meeting that are voting proceeding. >> No able to vote. >> Y >> thank you. >> I'm in the Bahamas. >> All right. >> Suffering. >> What about Andrew being >> Emily? >> I'm sorry. What was that, Peter?
>> Would Andrew be qualified? >> Um he hasn't been sworn in with the clerk yet. >> He what? >> He hasn't been sworn with not sworn in. >> Yeah. All right. Uh, this is item four, notice of intent, 13 Popes Lane, D file number 14-1451,
and the applicant is Forest River realy. >> Good evening, Jay Packards with Hancock Associates. I'm representing the applicant in their notice of intent filing at 13 Post. >> Speak up a little. Yeah. >> Yep. Here, I'll hold it closer to my face. >> Good evening. Jay Pacuits with Hancock
Associates. I'm representing the applicant in their notice of intent filing at 13 Popes Lane. Uh they're converting what is currently a two family dwelling into a contractor's yard. Uh Emily, do you mind going to the third sheet? It's not Yeah, this one
here. Yep. Um so this is the existing conditions plan. This is Pope's Lane. This is Route One up here. Wetlands are located right here. This is the developed portion of the site. It's a fairly large parcel for Pope's Lane. It's 1.8 acres. Uh the
developed portion is down by Pope's Lane. Uh the rear of the site is all wooded and undeveloped. The site slopes down from up here down to Pope's Lane and then over to the wetlands. Uh so storm water flows from here down to here over to the wetlands. One thing I do
want to point out is this survey was done by someone else prior to the purpose purchase of the property and was delineated by someone else uh years ago. So, we are still using the existing conditions plan, but the delineation has been updated by Hancock Associates in
the last month or so. So, this plan does show an old delineation. The design plan show a new delineation. They're generally consistent with each other with a small exception that our delineation goes a little bit further over in here. So, just to for any discrepancies,
uh do you mind going to the next sheet? So this plan represents the Hancock um delineation. It's in color so you'll know it's ours. Um so this is our site preparation and erosion control plan. Um this house is split into two distinct
parts. This is the original portion of the house over here and this is a later addition. We are proposing to remove the original portion of the house. So the left side of the building and keep the right side of the building. Uh we're proposing to keep the uh pavement on site, but we're removing a
shed over here in the no disturb and no build zone. Um and can we I'll speak on that a little bit more, but uh can we go to the next sheet? So this is our dimensional regulations plan. Like I said, we're keeping the right portion of the building and that
is going to become the office for the contractor's yard. The applicant owns a landscaping business currently out of Marblehead and they will be moving over into Danvers. This will become their new headquarters. Their office will be in the building that's to remain. Uh the site is going to be converted over to
the developed area will be converted over to a 3/4in crush stone material. So that will be so that they can store uh excess materials and vehicles on the site and they'll be able to get around without sinking into the mud essentially.
Um, if we can go to the next sheet. So, this is our site plan here. So, the site does slope from the rear to the front like I mentioned and we need to flatten it out a bit to be able to park vehicles and store materials. Uh, so we'll be flattening it out and the thought is to have a small retaining
wall at the rear of the site. It's less than 4 ft tall. The initial thought is that Pope's Lane is very rocky. We can use some of the rocks for a boulder wall at the rear of the site. Um, but that depends on how many rocks we find during excavation. Um, so we're proposing 15 parking spaces
throughout the site. That is what the applicant needs for their business. Um, we are proposing a small bulk storage area at the left rear of the site. This bulk storage will be things such as mulch. Uh, no fertilizers will be stored on site or any sort of harmful
chemicals. What they'll be storing, like I said, is their uh trucks, the mulch, and then if they have any leftover cement, concrete pavers, uh that'll be what's stored on this site. >> Uh snow storage. Oh, one second. >> I'm sorry.
>> Yep, no problem. Snow storage is proposed over in this area. So, it's along the roadway and away from the wetland. Um the crushed material that's proposed for this site is a permeable material. And with removing that portion of the building, we are cutting down on
um the imperous area on this site. Therefore, we're reducing peak rates and volumes of runoff. We're increasing recharge as well. So, the only proposed impervious is that bulk storage area. It's a pavement and that's you so you can scoop it out basically. Other things
that are proposed on site is a dumpster enclosure, but basically we're taking a site that's already developed. It's already grass. um putting some crushed stone down so we can park some vehicles. Uh in the area that that shed is being removed, we have a planting plan over on
the left side uh for the restoration of the area. We're well below the percentages uh within any sort of development in this 30ft no disturb zone and the 50ft no build zone. Uh the existing building is already within the
100t buffer zone. I know we're at the conservation commission, but um removal of the left side of the building makes this more nu more more conforming from zoning. It's a non-conforming structure and a non-conforming use. It is becoming a conforming use and dimensionally conforming.
We also went to planning board on Tuesday night and we were approved by the planning board. Uh the engineering department had no comments on the plans. Um can we go to the next sheet? So because this was two units and it's being split, um we're removing,
abandoning, cutting and capping the utilities to the existing portion of the building, but the portion of the building to remain already has its own utilities going towards it. So those will just remain in use. So very minimal impact in terms of utilities. And I think that's about all I have. I can
answer any questions you might have. >> Yeah. Um, is that a private road, Folks Lane? >> It is a private way. >> It is private. Wasn't that the Was that the site of Warren Manta construction? >> So, that's where um Manter it was. Uh,
but it's not this site here. So, this is if so over on this side is Duigi's of Pope's Lane. You come down and you're looping back and you're coming back up to Route One. So this is right where you rejoin Route One from Pope's Lane. This
property here where the wetlands is is actually owned by the town of Danvers. So this is right before the off-ramp, I guess, from Pope's Lane. >> Yeah. So the the building you referred to, was that a residential property?
>> Yep. So it's a currently a two family and so it's split into the original portion and the addition is the the second family portion. >> The use is changing. The use is changing. Yes. >> Did you need to get a variance for that? >> So, it was a special permit through the planning board
>> which we got on Tuesday. Uh, two family dwellings in this district are not allowed. So, it's becoming more conforming in terms of use. >> Yeah. >> So, that was a pre-existing nonconforming use before that was >> correct. So, it had to be allowed as
long as it was there. >> Yep. in Pope's Lane in the last few years has really become an area that is being filled with contractor yards. This is a much smaller scale than what's going on across the street, which is Bitcon. Um, and I believe there's an other new construction company. >> What do you think is going to be? That's
not a big road. What's the impact going to be there? I mean, are there going to be trucks in and out? >> The trucks that they use are much smaller than what the abutters use. Uh, this is just a small landscaping business where across the street is heavy construction. >> Okay. Thank you. That's all I had.
Anybody else? >> Uh, are there any provisions for like fueling or I saw those as conditions for another application? I just wondered is that an issue for a yard like this? How many vehicles are coming and going that
that are part of the business, not the people's personal? >> So, there's 15 vehicles that will be on the site. Some of them aren't going to be used every day. Some of them may be employees come in, they switch cars, and then they take that out to the business. I believe normally there's one to two
people in the office. Um, so about 15 vehicles not being used every day. >> There's not a whole lot of truck maintenance or refueling or anything going on here. >> You guys don't do refueling or maintenance. >> So, you're just parking the vehicles. >> They're basically parking the vehicles
and they fuel up on the way to the jobs. >> Okay. So there's no fuel storage or, you know, liquid pesticides or any of that stuff. Okay. >> And you're not adding any pavement, is that right? Just the >> So there is a small area of pavement in the rear right here. That's that bulk
material storage. So that's where they can dump mulch and you need it to be paved so you can scoop it up with a, you know, Bobcat or something, >> right? >> Where will you put the snow? >> So snow storage is proposed right in
here. It's outside the 100 foot buffer zone and over by the street. Uh it's as far as away from the wetlands as we can get it. Um the snow will melt and make its way over to the wetlands like this. Um following normal drainage patterns. And this uh site where it's crushed
stone, it is uh gritty in the winter. So it's not something that would freeze up in ice and you would be putting down salt or sand. Uh it's just naturally uh has traction. Could you show me where the dumpster enclosure is and then what's going to be stored there?
>> So, the dumpster enclosure is basically for employees if they come back on their lunch breaks, they have somewhere to throw stuff away. >> All right. So, it's not like um any of the material that they bring back after doing a job? >> No. So, it's a landscaping business. So, they'll be dumping most of the clippings
in the the yards that take the compost. Um this will just be, you know, boxes, packages. Yeah, we were b we were between just doing two normal town of Danver's trash barrels or a dumpster like this and we ended up just going with the dumpster. It's really not much trash that they'll be seeing.
>> All right. Thank you. >> You won't be storing fuel for like the lawnmowers, the weed whackers, the tractors. You >> They fill up on the way to the site. >> Yeah. >> They might have a couple jerry cans in the trucks, but nothing like a fuel tank. >> Not on site.
>> Nope. Permit to that anyways. All right. And you guys have the storm water management. Did you put that in? >> Yep. It should have been part of our uh notice of intent filing. It's been reviewed by engineering. >> So that's all set. Yeah. Okay. >> Y. >> Thank you. >> It's one of the first ones that I got
that there was almost no comments. So I was pretty proud of that. >> Nice. >> Um are we all good with comments and questions? >> All right. Uh let's see. >> Mr. B, Mr. Brad Street. >> Bread Street. I haven't gotten to public
yet. Following my list. >> Yeah. >> To what? Beats. >> Oh, yeah. I know. I I apologize for that. >> It's got your number. >> Thank you, Jay. >> Again, Bill Brad, town meeting member,
precinct one. I go to a lot of meetings and listen and for me uh listening to this because I listened to it the other night a uh site visit and the proper no build do not no
disturb lines should be clearly marked so that you can see them. I've asked about that before when I looked at another job that the town was overseeing. I couldn't see where what started and what stopped. And I'm not on the board, so it's not my job to do
that. It's your job to make sure that what's happening is within your domain. But as an observer, I look and I listen and and again a comment, a site visit, and the proper markings for you to see
so you can make a uh a proper decision. Not that you don't, but a proper decision that will stand up to scrutiny. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So, if I may respond to that, I I believe Emily did have a chance to go out to the site.
>> Yes, I did go out to the site. I wasn't able to walk it, but I did go out to the site and just kind of take a take a quick look around, but it's I didn't actually walk into the woods to go see the flagging. I didn't want to enter onto the property without permission. So, >> yeah. Um and um the wetlands are delineated which is standard. Um you
know it's a little bit difficult to mark out those inner zones and not run them over during construction basically. >> Right. >> Would you say the delineations are more conservative than what was there? >> Ours is definitely more conservative. Uh that old one was from 2021. Wetlands are
ever expanding. So um now we're in 2026. Ours is a little bit closer and like I said they stopped their delineation. I forgot I can take it now. Um, they stopped their delineation about right here. This is what was a lot more restrictive up in this direction. It's
basically the same. I think we're a foot or two in from what they had back in 2021. >> So, you found more wetland on the border, >> just a little bit further. We also delineated it uh a day after the snow melted, which was significant. So, uh
what we did was very conservative. What what part of the project is it that goes through the 35 and the 50 boundary? >> So the red is the 35 foot no disturb zone. Um and basically it's just some crush stone on the edge of the pavement.
Um the thought is is that it'll it acts as an infiltration trench. Um and a little bit like water quality. So any sort of dirt or anything that gets onto the pavement will wash into it, infiltrate the dirt will stay in the crush zone and the water will make its way over to the wetlands.
So some of the that's parking lot then I presume. >> Some of it is in the the the the 35 and the 50 foot limit. >> Yeah. Yeah. And we're well below the percentages. Uh >> waiver for that. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Okay.
>> And we do have a chart on I believe it's the previous sheet >> for you having the percentages. >> Yep. Sorry. Maybe one more after that. Apologies. >> Yes. Yep. Right here. >> Yep. So it's over here.
This is site is 1.8 acres. The wetlands followed this lot line the whole way up. So with these I think it's the total disruption that we have in there is a like a couple hundred square feet or something. 167.
>> Yeah, it's it's very insignificant. Um we're doing I believe it's more restoration than we are impact in that area. Are you putting any parking spaces in a no build or no disturb area? >> So there this area that is parking
currently is being used as parking. So there these this area that's the existing pavement we're parking in. Um, other than that, the parking's over here and over here. And then the carport as well as a space.
>> How many parking spaces are within the the boundaries? You know, the 35 and the 50. >> Um, about one and a quarter. >> And you're not adding any more paved surface, right? You're just utilizing what's there. >> The paved surface is well outside the
100 foot buffer zone. Um, yeah. It's about 20 by 20. >> But no, we're just maintaining all the >> within the buffer zone. There's no paving. It's already what's there. >> It's just what's there. And really, we're just dumping some crushed stone on the ground. >> Yeah.
>> I would say we should ask that they put signs right. >> That's okay. >> Take them out. >> Do you need the one and a half spaces? We could take these two spaces and move them up here. We went to planning with 15 spaces, so we'd like to maintain the
15 spaces, but we could just move them to a different location. >> Take them out of the no build, no disturbing. >> Yeah. And >> I'd be in favor of that. >> Okay. Yeah. And it's, you know, these aren't defined spaces. It's crush stone. It's, you know, but yeah, we can, if we can make that a condition of approval,
move those two spaces up by the dumpster. Good. Good. Any other questions? >> Are we good to vote or do you guys >> Well, you have to close public hearing first. >> Um I would just a quick question from my end of things. I'm sorry. Um, so with
those two spaces that are being moved, I would just um respectfully ask that before an order of conditions is issued, if the plan is going to change, but we would be able to just take a look at that plan set because once an order of conditions is issued, that starts a clock that we need to be cognizant of on
our end of things if that's >> Could I get the plan to you tomorrow? >> I'm sorry. >> Could I get the plan to you tomorrow if we could vote on it tonight? >> Um, it's I I'll be out of town if you can get it to me by Wednesday. >> Okay. Yeah, we can do that. >> Okay, great. Fantastic. Thank you. Just wanted to wanted to get that out. >> So, we could vote tonight.
>> Uh, yes. I mean, the applicant has stated that they'll get they'll get the plan to me by Wednesday. So, the clock starts today and um I'll get the order of conditions out by the end of next week if I can have that plan by Wednesday. >> That works for me. >> Great. Thank you. Appreciate that. Thank you, commission. >> So, we're going to issue the O's.
>> If you guys are ready to Are we ready for the to issue? >> I would think so. I'll make a motion to close the hearing for 13 Popes Lane, DP number 14-1451. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I
>> All right. Can someone make a motion? >> I'll make a motion that we grant a waiver to allow work in the 35 no disturb zone for 13 Popes Lane D file number 14-1451. And that's uh for the record that they are going to
modify their plans to get that parking area out of that >> zone. Is that correct? >> And that's also for the shed removal. >> Okay. But >> and there's a 50 foot looking for a 50 foot.
>> No, we have to we have to vote on the >> I just need a second and everything on the on the 35 first. Sorry. >> I'll second it. All in favor? I >> I >> Yeah, you can make that motion. >> All right. Make a motion that uh we grant a waiver of on the 50ft no build
zone which has been requested by the applicant for removal of an existing planter and does not involve construction of any structure. >> I second. All in favor? I >> I >> and um I make a motion that we issue an
order of conditions on the applicant's notice of intent for 13 Popes Lane DP file number 14-1451 uh with uh the usual conditions and the additional condition talked about at
this hearing that the two parking spaces in the in the no build no disturb be removed and relocated out towards the dumpster. Correct. >> Yep, that's correct. >> All right. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> In favor? >> I >> I >> I
>> I Who was the second on that? Was that Peter or Lorita? Peter. >> Okay. Thank you. Sorry. Just want to make sure I have the record correct. >> All right. >> All right. Great. Thank you guys. Have a nice night. >> All right. Good luck. >> Thanks. >> And there's just a reminder, there's a three-year limit on an order of
conditions. >> Wouldn't like to see the 33year ones come back. What else do we have? >> 54. >> Oh yeah. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Thank you. >> So long.
>> Bye-bye. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> All right. Uh item number five tonight is a notice of intent 54 Cherry Hill Drive, D file number 14-1452.
Applicant is a Biomed Incorporated. And I think we have Denell online. >> Yes. Yep. I just need to allow his microphone and his camera. Give me one second. Okay. Dell, can you hear us?
>> Yes, I can. Thank you, everyone. >> Okay, great. And we can hear and see you. So, you are all set whenever you're ready. Perfect, perfect, perfect. Um, just to start out with some housekeeping. Um, we initially um started out as an RDA. Um, the board requested a sitewalk. Um, we
performed the sitewalk and attended the next hearing. During that hearing, the board um requested a positive termination on the RDA requesting a formal NOI process. Since then, um the applicant has submitted um full-fledged
NOI documents and supporting information during that process. Um supplementary documents was sent to the board. um more specifically um more uh information in regarding the waiver
um for the 50ft no build um the executive summary and an updated exhibit. Um the updated exhibit showed um that uh we are going to be placing a uh concrete
uh structure to embed the sign. Um the sign is a no storage sign. Um thought it was appropriate to have a no storage sign that's stable. So to prevent um inappropriate storage within the jurisdictional buffer zones.
Um more recently um we received a comment from Mass D. The comment was relative to clarification on um the north the northwest corner. I could be wrong on my orientation. Um being a being a
thanks Emily being a um isolated vegetated wetland. Um the discrepancy was on mass mapper. It was identified as a um border and vegetated wetland. Um applicant reached out to the wetland scientist from
Goddard. the guard uh he went on a site visit and confirmed that it was um in fact um isolated vegetated wetlands. We submitted um the proof and report to
mass DP um they confirm receipt um and CCD on that confirmation that they received the supplementary documents. We have not received any followup or rebuttal um for that uh resubmission.
Um but like the the kink in the the puzzle is now that is identified as a um isolated vegetated wetland based on the local um bylaws it requires a a waiver as well. Uh, so based on the back and
forth and some minor miscommunication that we kind of ironed out with Emily, we weren't we weren't able to get the waiver in in time for this hearing. Um, I for for the board members to see, I
went ahead and submitted all the documents to Emily as good faith um to show that um the items that she mentioned and requested to be updated um is updated. The problem is is you guys didn't have a time time to review it. Um
I must say that the items that the board needs to review for um the determination of this NOI process is 100% um clerical. Um there's no um design changes, there's no plan changes,
infrastructure changes. is purely um the new waiver for the um isolated vegetated wetland and the um isolated vegetated wetlands um waiver letter.
So, I'm asking the board to uh if possible um you know grant some to if if it's possible for the board to um grant some allowance for a condition um being that everything is an end to the
board. Um just didn't have a time and enough time to to to view it. um and and allow a condition to approve the project um with the condition of reviewing the supplementary dockets that's pretty much clerical and and not u design or
engineer related. As we uh went through the logistics of the site um the details of the site uh we discussed you know the permitting and the the the drainage I think I think we went through it in a lot of detail. So, uh, not sure if the
board would like a formal presentation. Again, I have no problem with that, but just to save time and energy, um, and to get down to the nitty-gritty and get to the point of this meeting, that's the applicant's request. Thank you. >> Do you guys have any questions?
>> Um, this drawing that was on the desk here, Emily, this is the new drawings that uh you mentioned. >> Oh, no. So that is that first page there that was in part of the NOI report. That is um Goddard's wetland flagging that showed that as an isolated vegetated
wetland. And then the second page is where it was listed in the plan sheet as a bordering vegetated wetland just so the commission could see where the discrepancy had come from. Um so the the plants that um had been mislabeled as a bordering vegetated wetland and isolated vegetated wetlands under the local bylaw
um require a waiver within 100 ft of them. Um, so that was the information that was sent over to um to Danell and to that team um about a week ago in order to get that squared away. So the documents that were sent over um gosh,
when was that email? It was late this afternoon. It looks like it was around six o'clock this evening. So I have not had time to review the documents that were sent over this evening um quite yet because I was on my way here to to get ready for the meeting. Um, so I just I I haven't had a chance to review the documents that were sent over this
evening, but that was where um the discrepancy in the plan and that was where the com um the comment from D come from. K. >> Well, shouldn't we continue if you haven't had it? >> Probably. Yeah. >> But I as I recall when we went to that site visit, you know, this interaction here between the parking lot and this
wetland, I thought it was more significant. It seems like it's just on the border according to this. >> That's the um existing condition. That second sheet is the existing conditions. Let me pull up the >> That's what >> that's the existing conditions. That's not the proposed conditions >> when they build
>> the one that's up on your screen now. That's the proposed conditions that's being presented. >> So, well, their proposal is that their parking lot >> won't be in it at all. Is that right? >> This line is >> which is the 100 foot. >> Yep. >> Oh, all right. All right.
>> Thanks. >> If the board has any questions and Yes. Any clarifying questions? I mean, we have Danell available. He'll be able to to talk through any of his questions for you. It's I'm sure Danell, you're >> you're more familiar with this than I am. So, you should be able to you'll be able >> I have just one question. I think maybe
just one or two. But so, the discrepancy that has now uh been remediated. uh does that impact uh in any way what what you intend to do you know visa v your plan
>> um so the it's it's mainly uh a form and a and a waiver that's the only thing it it it required so the mass EP came back and said hey you know we want to we want something to define that this is an isolated vegetated wetland because your plan does not indicate it as isolated
vegetated wetland so we provided ed that information to them and in turn that triggered a local uh waiver that we needed to supply. And that's that's the the biggest caveat here is that we didn't get to sub submit the IVW um
waiver because of the change in the updated um classification of of the wetland. >> But that's purely what it is. in terms of where everything goes, the parking, uh, um, runoff, any does any of that
change? >> Nothing changed. The plan, the plan literally has not changed since the last time we we came. It's more the paperwork and the NOI process that um, the board wanted to uh, move forward with, and that's what we went with. So it's it's
purely paperwork and and submitting the the appropriate paperwork which we have submitted and um unfortunately as em said >> reviewed >> um it's and it it just has not been reviewed but it's it's the tip it's the same waiver that we sent for the um
clarification on the 50oot no disturb. We just made a specific one for the isolated vegetated wetlands. Storm water stayed the same. payment say the same. It's more so just documented >> via the waiver from the board.
>> No, >> there's no harm in waiting two more weeks, is it? >> Um, Danell, I appreciate that you got that paperwork in for us. Uh, we're bound by legal issues and we need to review that paperwork you submitted
before we can approve the plan. So, I do understand your position. Uh but for us if you had had it to us a couple days ago. I know. When did they um make you aware of the change? >> So it was it was it was made about a week ago. Yes.
>> Um but the the when I when when I reviewed it, I honestly being transparent. I thought I was I was focusing on the the 50 foot no disturb waiver updating that and it was just a oversight. But even even through the
oversight, I think the trigger was the fact that it was missed by us as the engineer and it was also missed by the town and it was caught by the state. So >> it you know it if this was caught earlier on either by us the engineer um
and the and the the town it would have been clarified a little earlier. So it's just one of those anomalies. >> Yeah. for us. We can't approve it unless it's turned in. And there's no way Emily would have gotten that information at 6 or 5:00 and been able to bring it to us.
So, I understand the difficulty um in the dynamics, but understand that this is not against the project. We just need to have the correct plans in order to approve the plans. >> No, understood. You don't need to overclarify. I totally understand. And I
appreciate your um you allowing me to uh present tonight. It was just more one of those items where if the board felt that it's just a paperwork issue, it could be conditional approval based on your review or if not then get continued. >> All right. Thank you.
>> Are we good to vote? >> I could see public comment. >> Public comment. >> Oh, one Oh, sorry. Could I interject? Sorry. >> Oh, yes, sure. I just wanted to know if there's anything else the board wants to see because uh if this gets continued um you
know I'm sure the applicant don't want to go down this road again. So aside from the waivers um reviewing the waiver and the disturbance um updated disturbance sheet I think you guys have the disturbance mostly the waiver. Is there anything the
board would like to see that would would bring us back to square one? I don't think so, but I think it makes sense to at least um pose the question to the board and so we could make any adjustments if need be. Thank you.
>> I would just reserve if I had any further questions till the next the next meeting. >> Yeah, >> it seems like everything's they're pretty close in showing us what they want and it's >> Yeah. It's >> not outlandish. >> Yeah, it's pretty straightforward.
>> Yeah, I think we're good. Dell, >> would you guys >> Okay. Yeah, >> Emily, >> that's up to the commission if there's anything addition. I mean, from my side of things, it's Danell and I have already been in touch. It's the full complete accurate plan set that shows the disturbances and the isolated vegetated wetlands, the waiverss. So, he
and I have um gone back and forth on the administrative side of things. if there's any any >> changes, anything that the commission might want to see that Dell can have prepared in time for the next meeting to make sure that >> we're all on the same page. Um Dell, I think that's correct, right? >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, we've been we've been talking back and forth and I appreciate the communication, Emily. So, I I don't think there's anything that the board will request that we wouldn't be able to turn over in time. >> Great. Are you guys >> And I would ask Oh, just one quick thing. there is any additional material
that's going to be submitted, I would ask that we could please have it by May 21st. So, by one week prior to the meeting, just so that we have um time to take a look at it if there's anything else. >> Sounds good. >> Great. Thank you. >> Sounds good. Do you want do you want hard copies of what I sent you, Emily V
email? Um, I think that once um once the order of conditions is issued and everything is confirmed and final, then I'll ask for a paper set um just so that you're not submitting a set and then there's potentially another change and then another paper set as needed if that's okay with you all. >> Yeah, that's fine.
>> Great. Thank you. >> Uh do we have any other questions? We're good. >> No, thank you. >> Do we have any public who'd like to speak? All right. Um, and I think we're good for motions. >> Okay. I'll make a motion that we
continue the uh not notice of intent hearing for 54 Cherry Hill Drive, D file number 14-1452. >> Is there a second? >> I'll second it. >> We have to continue to a date until May 28th. >> Oh, May 28th.
>> Second. All in favor? I I >> All right. Thank you so much, Danell. >> All right. Good night. Good. >> Thank you. All right. >> Well, that was pretty interesting. It was
>> Are we good to do the minutes? >> Yeah. Um, has everybody read and approve the minutes? And are we ready to vote? >> Yes. >> Um, I'll make a motion to approve the minutes from the April 23rd, 2026
Conservation Commission meeting. All in Can I get a second? >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> All right, we're good there. And Emily, do we have any old or new business to discuss? >> Um, next meeting is, as we all know, May 28th, we have in addition to the two
items that were continued from tonight, um, we have three new notices of intent, okay, >> that we'll be hearing. Um, so I'm getting all that information together. I'll have that out to you hopefully by the end of next week. And, um, yeah, we're we're moving forward. We're into We're into conservation commission busy
season. >> So, >> and then we would probably see 86. >> So, you're going away. When are you going? >> Yes, we'll see 83th to the 30th. >> Yeah. >> So, things are >> things are picking up for sure around the Bahamas. >> Oh, nice. >> It's my final. >> Where did you go out of? >> All right. >> Miami.
>> Miami. Look at there. >> I loved Ireland. I did it in 1986 by horse. >> I think we have the whole west side. >> I make a motion that we adjourn. >> I second. >> All in favor? I >> I