Uh welcome to the uh For Conservation Commission meeting uh being held at One Government Center. It's Monday, August 3rd, 2026, 5:30. We're in the first floor hearing room. Uh pursuit to open meeting law, any person may make an
audio or video recording of this public meeting or may transmit [cough] to any mediums. Attendees are therefore advised that such recordings of transmissions are being made whether perceived or unpersceived by those present and deemed acknowledged and permissible. We'll start with roll call to my left.
>> Chris Bole [clears throat] Lewis Forever >> John Brandt >> Jim Cusk Drew Carlo >> Tim McCoy >> and we also have tonight Dan Agui our conservation agent Patty Aguar the uh head clerk and Alex Melo from Forward TV.
Um first uh review and discussion update on Bell Rock Road. [clears throat] >> Nothing other than the stuff is growing because the amount of rain that we've been having, but um I did speak to the owner. He knows that those trees need to be replanted and we will do that in uh
late summer, early fall. >> Okay. Motion to table. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All in favor? [snorts] >> I I >> Okay, motion passes. And next, [clears throat] review and discussion adopting fees and structures. >> I've got nothing new on that. I am in the middle of putting together that
package for you. I know I sent you the what the intended fees were, but I was going to give you some backup from a few other communities and then follow through with surfit about aligning that with with a set of bylaws. So, nothing new to add on that. >> Okay. I'm I'm a week behind because I went on vacation.
>> Okay. Uh motion table. >> Motion table. [snorts] >> Seconded. >> All in favor? >> I I motion passes. All right. Next, uh review and discussion of outstanding enforcement orders. Nothing new on any of those. >> Motion table. >> Second. >> I
>> I >> passes. All right. Next. Notice of intent SE-24-855. Uh applicant is owner uh Weaver's Cove Industrial Park LLC. Project location New Street. Celsius map is T-2 lot 00001
filed by Chris Forolia of Godart Consulting LLC. on behalf of the applicant. The applicant is proposing an afterfact restoration area clear visitation. This was taped from July 6th meeting. >> We did receive an email from attorney Nylan uh late this afternoon.
Believe it or not, they are just about at agreement on where the resource areas are actually located. [clears throat] So the uh never mind where the restoration is going to be and how it intends. So they did intend on having a plan before us tonight. Um he said that would not happen of course and that he
would recommend or request that the matter be tabled so that they can now prepare the restoration plan based upon [clears throat] the agreed uh delineation. >> Recommend the man that they were having an issue with. >> Sorry. >> Motion table.
>> I >> Okay. Motion passes. Next notice of intent SE-24-857. Applicant is uh uh Liberty Utilities owner Spectrum Realy project location 994 Jefferson Street map is B-20 lot
00002 followed by Ryan Ernharning of Tron Engineering Company on behalf of the applicant. The applicant is proposing to install 222 ft of 4in carrier pipe with 2-in main gas through means of horizontal drilling. Uh project
also includes entry and an exit pit. This was tabled from July 6th. >> So again, this is a Liberty Utilities gas um main installation that we've been working on with their consultant. We've received nothing new uh from the last meeting. So again, recommend the table. >> Motion table.
>> Second. >> All in favor? >> I Okay. Next is a notice of intent SE-24-861. applicant is uh Ernie Wakoski at Cahill NEPC National Grid Owners Weaver's Cove
uh existing overhead transmission line such as map multiple locations filed by Erica Marcelia Power Engineering Cult Consulting PC on behalf of the applicant. The project is located within a section of existing rightaways from Sky Road submission station to Somerset
Fall River municipal boundaries over Taton River. project consists of separation existing N12 and M13 transmission lines on a period of monopol structures within the existing rightaways. So again, this runs hand inhand with the Weavers Cove project. Um
I actually had a meeting with the owner of Wever Cove a week or two ago. Um and he was filling me in a little bit of the back and forths with uh with National Grid. So he had told me I think they're getting close. We did receive an email this afternoon around 3:00 uh from Jessica Wall. Is that who it was? the
representative, the legal representative asking that the matter be tabled so that they can continue to work out there [clears throat] >> situation with national grid. >> Okay. >> Motion table. >> Second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Okay. Next is a request of certificate
of appliance SE-24-762. [snorts] Uh owner Carlos Estrella. Project location 3820 North Main Street. Census map is X-3- Z0010 filed by Alexander Kroski of Kroski Engineering on behalf of the applicant. It's request certificate of compliance. This was
tabled from July 6. So this has been probably five or 6 months. >> Yep. >> Uh in the making. So you have two options. One, you can continue to table it or if you just want to deny it and then they can refile everything once they get their ASB bill and respond to
our initial comments. I I really don't carry the way. It's just a matter of having to read it in every month until >> I think we need to motivate them to get it done. So, >> okay, >> let's require them to refile. >> Okay. Okay. >> There's no filing fee for certificate compliance, but it is it is the process. So, if you want to if you want to make a
motion to deny it, >> we can send them a letter. We have a motion to deny. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Uh roll call. >> I >> I >> Okay. Thanks. Let's see. Next is a request for certificate of compliance. SE-24-756
owner is Casey Matowski of Trustees of Casey uh Revocable Trust Project location 40 Frederick Street assessments map is C-15- Z007 filed by Alexander Kowalsski of Kowski Engineering on behalf of the applicant. The applicant
is requesting certificate of compliance. Um >> you're not here for this are you? >> No prime engineering. >> Oh for prime. Okay. Um, similar to the last one, we've been waiting a few months now for this applicant to to make the modifications to the way they constructed the site and bring us a revised plan. Um, again, you can either
allow them to table it or deny it and require that they refile. >> I think we need to deny. Same same instance with the item number seven. I think it's the same thing. We've got to get, you know, move some of these things off the agenda and >> second. Uh, roll call. I
>> I >> I [clears throat] >> excuse me. >> Uh next, notice of intent SE-24-875. Applicant is Mallister Towing and Transportation Company, Inc. Uh owner of One Charles [snorts] Street LLC. Project location Charles Shaw Street's map is
H-20-001 filed by Todd Moria, Bills Associate on behalf of the applicant. The applicant is proposing to repair and replace sheet pile bulkhead of elevate portion of the site behind the seaw wall. Repair existing peers, revent install fendering
system and install reinforcement bowls to support vessels beneath birthing the applicant in additional proposing to dredge portions of terminal basin to E1-27.43 to accommodate deeper draft vessels.
anticipate uh make use of the terminal dredging will occur within the footprint of prior authorization of dredging uh to the basin E1-24 ML Y. >> So if you recall um we had decided to send this out for a peer review. We sent
it out to a total of five uh consultants. Two were responsive that you have in your in your packets. One from Beta Engineering, one from Fourth Infrastructure. Um two varying amounts. fourth is definitely um a higher number
to start with. So each of these is they get you to the point where they review the submitted documentation and then issue a report. Anything after that, depending upon what needs to be done, those scopes will both change. But it it is about a $10,000 difference between the two.
>> Um I think if you look at fourth submission and their resumes and the specific type of work that they do, maybe it warrants the additional funding. beta. Um, again, excellent firm. Their proposal is comprehensive, not as comprehensive as what Forth
submitted. Um, so either way would be would be acceptable. Um, I don't think we're bound to go with the with the least expensive. If you determine that that you feel that one is better suited for this type of a
commercial waterfront project. Do either of these companies have more experience than another with >> Fourth? Does I mean Fourth primarily deals with and that's why you don't hear of them often. Um >> they they did a bunch of work recently
in New Bedford and a bunch of their like the wind turbine projects and everything else. So it's big, you know, commercial uh port projects. They're that's why it's called fourth infrastructure. So I mean they they deal with a lot of that. So not to say that what beta would
produce wouldn't be sufficient, but I mean to me there is a a a glaring difference in in the skill sets, but beta could be perfectly sufficient. I I couldn't tell you otherwise. Dan, either way, even with the most
expensive or the more expensive uh option, you got you got enough in your budget for, you know, outside consult >> the outside. Well, the applicant has to pay. >> Okay. >> So, it's not it's not our money, but I I don't like spending >> the applicant's money either if it's not
warranted. >> Okay. >> Um if it was a few dollars difference, there'd be no doubt you would go with fourth. But it's a difference between I think fourth was 22,000 >> and I want to say beta was probably around 12 to 13. Yeah. For that initial
review and report. >> Yeah. >> Well Dan, if you think beta I mean you know we want to encourage business. We don't want to discourage business and I don't >> if you think beta is sufficient to the task um because I know it's a comp you know it's a complicated site. You know the delineation right was complicated a
lot of issues down there. So if you think beta is will will do the job that's we expect them to do and and the job that's required then I have no problem going with beta if you think the outcomes will be consistent. >> Yeah. Again this is there's a lot that goes into this not only for what's under
our review. Um so if we're looking at just straight conservation commission review and approval. Yeah, I think beta would be would be sufficient [clears throat] when we start dealing with the dredging and the disposal sites and that that's not our jurisdiction. That's going to be chapter 91 licensing.
>> Um so yeah, if we had never received proposal then I would say betas would be more than sufficient. >> So make a motion we accept beta beta group's proposal. >> Second that roll call. >> I >> I
>> I >> Okay. to table. >> Oh, >> um you you can if you want to if you want to continue just a a vote to table it again until we get the actual review on. >> That's fine.
>> Okay. And uh >> make a motion to table the matter. Do >> I have a second? >> Second. >> Roll call. I >> I >> I uh next request certificate of compliance SE-24-161
applicant [clears throat] owners G3G relative partnership project location 372 Stevens Street map is E-26-001 followed by Sean with Insight Engineering on behalf of the applicant the applicant is requesting a certificate in compliance
>> so I'll offer that over the last few months Sean has worked very diligently to provide us with the revised asbuilt uh inspection photographs of all the underground drainage systems because remember this is so it was a lot of work to go back and piece together was this thing constructed in accordance with the
95 plan >> first of all the 95 plan was poorly done >> yes it was >> I I I think I think Sean's at least been able to produce >> a substantial document photos um bills for cleaning out the systems I think the applicant's done done quite a bit of
work and I would with that I would recommend the issuance of a certificate of compliance. >> Let's get it off the agenda. >> Motion to issue certificate of compliance. Have a second. >> A second roll call. >> I thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Sean.
[clears throat] >> Next is a request of certificate of compliance SC-24-207. Uh applicant is James Island Court. Project location 4041 uh North Main Street assessors map ax-
03- 0042 followed by Alexander Kosski of Kosski engineer on behalf of the applicant. The applicant filed request for certificate of compliance. So this is if you remember um last meeting we discussed this was an old notice of intent. Uh Mr. Gardetski
submitted a request for a certificate of compliance. um he does not have the original plan of record. We do not have the original plan of record and I recommended that he reach out to D and do a file review and get us a copy of that. So >> um we cannot offer a certificate of
compliance without the plan to compare it to. Um and I don't know how he could write a letter saying that it was built in accordance with the original plan if he doesn't have a copy of it either. So >> with with this one, I I would leave this one on the agenda, but I would recommend that that it's tabled until we can at least get a copy of it.
>> Motion to table. Second. >> Second. Uh, wo >> I >> I >> I >> I pass. Uh, next discussion on 52 Ferry Street. >> Uh, I have nothing new to add. Um, I actually did speak to Mr. Bogen this morning. If you remember, this was um a
discussion about potential violations. Um, and then I had started doing some research on it. What I explained to Mr. Bogen this morning, you know that I reviewed everything that the commission had permitted. Just about everything that I can find was permitted
through the conservation commission. That's not to say that it was permitted through chapter 91. Um, so I told them I I needed some more time to to do a more thorough review of that, present you with some facts, and then you can decide. >> Okay. >> All right. >> So, with that, I would take it off the
agenda. Sure. Um and we'll we'll add it again when when we have a comprehensive assessment of the property. >> Motion to remove from the agenda. >> Second. >> Roll call. >> I >> I >> Next notice of intent SE-24-876.
Uh applicant is Manuel Samara Scomber of Prestige Media Group. Uh owner RVD LLC. Project location Augusta Street. This is map is 1-26 lot 0012 filed by Richard Roman of Prime Engineering on
behalf of the applicant. The applicant is proposing to erect an electric shed and existing radio tower site. >> Before we get signed, which petition are you here for? >> Is it for this one? Okay. >> Thanks. >> We already have um green cards and the legal ad.
You have it. You can give it to file. >> Thank you. That's all for today. >> [clears throat] >> Um, you want me to give a presentation or do you want to give? >> No, go ahead. >> All right. So, um, this is
>> an existing radio tower. I don't know if any of you know where Augusta Street is >> down off the end. Yeah. Off of Rodman. There was a couple of little subdivisions there. And then there was a very big piece of land off the end of Augusta Street >> where there's a radio tower currently built. There was a notice of intent filed for that radio tower. Uh,
incredible that all those wires are under the ground. Huh. I mean, it's when you look at this plan. At first when I looked at it, I'm like, what are all these lines? I thought it was like a radius of like if the tower fell. Yeah. >> It's not. It's actually lines that were installed under the ground. So, that was all permitted, closed out, certificate of compliance. The petition before you
tonight is solely to construct um a little electric shed further away from the buffer zone than than the tower itself, right along the edge of the existing gravel driveway that provides access to it. Um the only concerns that I have was through on the
application they did not pay the fee for the wetland line delineation. Delineation's fine. It's in accordance with what the previous was. Um so if you if you were seeing that you wanted to issue an order, it should be done so conditional upon receiving that
additional fee and then also the receipt of a revised plan that acknowledges that this is also in a FEMA zone A, not just in the buffer zone. >> Right. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I'll show the line and I'll get that to you tomorrow, Wednesday. Yeah, no worries. >> Okay. >> I have nothing else to add, but we may have anybody that wants to hear.
>> Would you like to? >> No, just want to hear. >> Okay. >> Are you on Augusta Street? >> I am. >> You're on. >> I'm in the last house. >> Oh, okay. >> No. >> Scott Beach. W I E C H prime. >> Do the board have any questions?
>> Nope. >> I I see all the wetland. I just don't see the um 25 foot, 50 or 100 foot border lines. >> I didn't see it before. >> So, >> unless it's in a different copy. Yeah, I see the >> we only have a 100 foot buffer zone, >> right?
>> So, there's a 25 ft no touch policy. So, here's here's where the wetlands line goes around there. That that's where they want to build the shed. So, if you want to have them add the 25 foot, that's fine. >> Oh, not necessarily 25, but the 100 foot. >> Okay. >> Marker. >> So, shows up. Yeah. So the 100 foot line
>> just uh I'm give me a moment just looking at the scale. >> All those lines are >> are actually electric lines under the ground from that tower. >> Oh [laughter] well >> I was impressed. I didn't know what what's the purpose. Is it for
>> We don't know if it's for transmission. It really is. >> Rich doesn't know if it's for TV or for radio. Okay. >> He's like but I guess every hundred a couple hundred feet go on the ground it broadcast further and further out. >> Oh wow. So yeah, it was trying to climb up. It was nuts. It's first time I've ever dealt with Yeah. like that. But >> I've never seen anything like that. Every >> I've seen plenty of cell towers go up,
but I've never seen like a radio tower or television tower. >> Yeah. Every three degrees. They go every three degrees and that's how they determine it. >> Yeah. >> I believe that's a radio station. >> Is that what it is? >> Right. Yeah. Well, that one I know is radio now. Yeah. >> Okay.
that I would just make a motion that uh that we add a condition to it. >> Show the buffer the 100 >> show the 100 foot buffer on the site plan. Um I can I can kind of picture it given the scale. >> Yep. >> And yeah, the impact area is very small.
So it's just a matter of get just getting adding the >> okay >> the line. >> So we have three conditions. Pay the appropriate fee for category 6. note that it falls in a FEMA zone flood A and add the 100 foot. >> Do you want the zone A line on there or
just a note saying that it falls in there? >> That's fine. >> Just a note. >> A note saying that the property falls within the FEMA zone. >> Okay. >> That was a comment from D's on their uh their file number. >> Was a motion made? >> Yeah.
>> Not yet. >> I'll make that motion to with the three additional conditions. >> Okay. to issue the order of conditions >> to issue. Yes. >> Okay. Second. >> Roll call. >> I I >> I All right. Passes. Thank you. >> Thanks, guys. Thank you.
>> Next is a request for certificate of compliance-24-829. [cough and clears throat] Applicant owner is Jeffrey Johnson. Project location 1 Bronson Street says map C-16-0101 filed by Jeffrey Johnson. The applicant
request certificate of compliance. [clears throat] So this is, if you remember, down off of Mariana Bishop Boulevard, August Street. See that? We've got Augusta Street and August Street. If you didn't know, we had both of them, but we do. So this is that Bronson Street development. This is requesting to release one of the lots
for a certificate of compliance. This law, again, >> nowhere near the 100 foot buffer zone, but because the whole project was permitted under one order of conditions, we do have to issue a partial certificate of compliance just for that one. That one. >> If you haven't been down there, you go take a look at it. It's It's cleaned up
pretty dramatically and the storm water improvements that we made them do through this development has uh has done a really nice job even for the upstream neighborhood >> even after a day like today. >> Yeah. Well, at least now water can flow downhill where it couldn't before. [laughter] >> So, it's amazing and you can do that.
>> Yeah. Do I have a motion? >> Motion approve CLC. >> Second roll call. I >> I >> I >> I >> I >> Okay. Next. Approval minutes from June 1st, 2026. And we'll combine them with
July 6, 226. >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Roll call. >> I >> I >> I >> I >> I >> All right. No citizen input. Uh can I have a motion to adjurnn? >> So moved. Second.
>> Second. All >> in favor? All right. >> I ready. >> Nay. [laughter]