Good evening. The time is 6:30 and the date is Wednesday, October 8, 2025. Oh, Commissioner uh Jim Franklin, um Megan Hickey,
and Brian Payne are absent um today. Um Commissioner Buzz Artiano is attending virtually. Thank you, Buzz. >> Um I'm going to now open this meeting and make a roll call.
And I remind everyone to just sign in when you come in. Thanks. [Applause] Here's our roll call. Kina's here. Um, Dot. >> Yes. >> And Buzz, >> yes.
>> And Marilyn, >> yes. >> Thank you so much. Please note, we're doing a hybrid meeting uh with in person and virtual attendance. If a member of the virtual public would like to make comments, please uh during this public hearing, please use the raise hand
function on Zoom and you'll be assigned a speaking time. If you're um listening in via telephone, dial in, press star 9. Um that will raise your hand and then press star six to unmute yourself. This meeting's being recorded by the local
scene. Thank you very much. and a record of this meeting will be posted on the local scene website as soon as they're able. Anyone intending to make an audio or video recording of this meeting should notify me at this time.
Great. Here's an announcement. The open space committee still has one open seat. Please contact the conservation department for details. Um would you uh brief us, Matt, on what
needs to be signed? We're going on to signing of documents. >> Yep. We have the uh enforcement orders for 484 Rabbath Road as voted at the September 24th meeting. Um I did issue them with my signature. They just need to be ratified. And we have the DOA for
Ring Road Solar as approved at the September 24th meeting and an invoice for Kingston Landscaping for mowing at Bay Farm. Coming from your right. >> Coming from the right. All right.
We've got um three uh action items. The first is uh 17 nobody circle. That's a request for a determination of applicability. This is for a propo proposed addition to single family house. It's been continued
from an earlier date. Is that the first item you want to hear? >> Yep. >> Not. Okay. >> You want to give us a briefing on that? >> Sure. Um, so we did this at a previous meeting. This was an addition that was not intended to be a bedroom. Um, and
since that meeting, uh, the homeowner has worked with the health agent and they determined they could get a deed restriction officially limiting the property to three bedrooms, thereby not increasing the flow rate of the existing septic system. Um, and I have that document. It's been recorded the
registry of deeds. So, I would recommend issuance of a negative 3 DOA approving the proposal unless the commission has any other questions. >> Any questions? All right. Thank you.
Do I uh need a motion on that, Matt? >> Sure. >> Do I hear a motion to uh issue a negative 3D DOA approving the project? >> I'll make that. >> That was Marilyn. >> Seconded by Dot. >> Seconded by Dot. >> Sorry. Remember, we want to speak those
out for the person that's doing our minutes. >> All right. I'll take a vote on that. Buzz. >> Yes. >> Kina's a yes. Dot. >> Yes. >> And Marilyn, >> yes. >> Motion carries. >> Okay, great. Thanks.
>> Have fun at bowling. Um, I'll have the permit ready for signature at the next meeting and when they sign it, you'll be able to pick it up the next day. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> And what about three Prospect Street? This one I don't think we've done
before. So, we can uh let them give a presentation first. >> All right, let's move for presentation. Just identify yourself for the record. Name and address. Thank you so much. >> Matt, can you put the plan up on the screen? That's easier. I could put the board up, but it's a little small for
you guys to see. >> Yeah. >> Um, so Kevin Flareity from Flarity and Stefani. uh representing um Brad and Eron Sears at three Prospect Street. I give
So I guess just while Matt's getting the plan up on the screen, um the property is located on the right side as you go up Prospect Street across from Charlie Horse. Um the proposal is to do a one-story uh one-bedroom addition, a 12x 15.3
um off the right side of the house. We when we were contacted by the the homeowners, we had um Brad Holmes from ECR go out and flag the bordering vegetated wetland that was shown on the GIS. Um as his delineation was taking place, he also noticed that there was a
potential vernal pool towards the back portion behind the bordering vegetated wetland. So he flagged that as well. Um we put out an existing conditions. >> Do you want me to put the plan up? >> Sorry, it's just going to No, that's okay. I just >> I haven't signed into the Zoom yet and I totally forgot. I was just going to take me a second to
>> so we we went out there to do the existing conditions. Um picked up Brad's flags. Um shown the buffers on the plan. Um so really what we're doing is a 12 x 153 15.3 addition off the right the rear right of the property of the house. Um
we're outside of the 100 foot potential vernal pool buffer. Um we're outside of the 50ft um border boarding vegetative wetland buffer. Um and really almost entirely in the lawn area that's existing. Um there is a arborite that we
will be um removing just because it's so close to where the addition is going to take place. Um part of just removing that is we're going to replant um a couple white oak trees right on the property line kind of a little bit farther away but just as some sort of mitigation factor for taking down um
some vegetation. Um during the sitewalk um u Matt and I went through it. We noticed that there was a sump pump that was discharging towards the rear of the property. Um just as a kind of, you know, to make sure we can remedy the problem. I think it was it's been there for years and years, probably predating
these owners. Um we're going to be removing that and then rerouting the the sump pump through the kind of the new addition area out to the front yard um to kind of make the situation better out back. Um and again, I think I'd be happy to answer any questions. I think and oh,
there's the plan right there. So, as you can see, um the additions right off the back right side of the house. Um that big kind of, you know, symbol that you see is the arborite that we're going to have to where we're going to be removing. Um there's an erosion control layer that we have right at the edge of
the 100 foot vernal pool buffer. Um and that line that Matt's kind of covering over right now, that cursor is where that drain line comes out the back. Um, so you can see here this line that comes straight out here, we're going to be abandoning that and removing any section of it that's going to be
within the buffer that's kind of exposed. We don't want to excavate out to cause any more disturbance, but just to kind of again remedy a situation that the the homeowners kind of inherited. Um, and with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions. >> Well, can we hear from you, Matt, on this? >> Sure.
>> Yeah. So, I'll probably repeat a little bit about what he just said, but addition right here in pre-existing lawn area. Uh, cutting down a spruce tree right here. It's a horicultural plant, not native. Um, replacing it with two bald and burlap white oak species.
So, that's good. We did see out back um that some pump uh pipe coming out into the wetland. So, I did suggest kind of, you know, cutting the section that's out in the wetland and just capping it underneath the back lawn. Um, there was a little bit of
dumping back there, too. I thought, you know, maybe that should be removed before the work starts. And there's potential maybe for conservation posts along the edge of the woods line just to protect against further encroachment. Um, so what they came up with was capping that pipe back there and having the pipe connect out through the new
section of foundation into a drywall that would also take the roof run off just from the addition. Correct. >> Correct. >> Yeah. Um, so and there'll be no change just to add into that. There'll be no change to the it's on town sewer, so there's no septic, you know, upgrades or anything
like that required. >> Right. And you have smelt Brookies to the site, but it's outside of the 200 foot jurisdictional area. And as far as um jurisdiction to potential vernal pool out back, the entire project is within existing developed area. So that really
doesn't add um anything in a regulatory sense to this uh project and it seems to fit all the other guidelines and I would recommend issuing a negative three DOA. Um and we can deal with it however the
commission wants. If you want to say that, you know, the the dumping and all the conservation posts need to be done before the work starts, we could do that or we could deal with it in the future through enforcement if the work doesn't get done just because DOAs don't have the same level of >> follow through.
>> Um, is there any member of the public um online or present who'd like to speak on this? >> All right. Any member of the commission wants to speak on this? Toina. >> Um, >> is that okay?
>> Yeah. >> So, I I would like to just ask that I'm I'm fine with the project. I would ask that the conservation post and the cleanup happen prior to the work starting. I just think three posts would be plenty. One in each corner, one on each
corner and one in the middle would be fine. >> Can we make that a condition? >> Any issue with that? Yeah, we have we we're fine with that. >> Okay. Anything else? Then I'm going to take a uh vote on a
motion to accept uh the to the motion to issue a negative 3 DOA approving the project with the conditions just mentioned. Uh Dot, >> yes. >> Colleen is yes. Buzz, >> wait, we need to second. >> Who made the motion?
>> Um I made the motion. Sorry. Yeah, I'll >> make a I shouldn't make the motion. Would you make a motion? >> I'll make that motion. >> And we have a second. Buzz, thank you. I'm so bossy. Um, D. >> Yes. >> Kina, yes. Buzz,
>> yes. >> Marilyn, >> yes. >> All right, that motion carries. Thanks. >> Great. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you very much. Uh, it's a few minutes early. Is that all right? We'll open our m our public hearing. You want to wait two minutes?
>> Um, let's jump into 28 Rabbi. >> All right. Then moving on to 208 Rabbi Road. This is a request for a DO uh DOA for proposed removal of hazard trees and for treatment of invasive plants. Um, this
has been continued from an earlier date. Um, is there someone who would like to from there want to come up and just identify yourself um for the record, please?
[Music] Good evening. Uh, my name is Frank Derico. I live at 28 Rabbit Road, Kingston. I've been up there resident for over 40 years with my wife who's a lifelong resident of the town, Jennifer Cronin.
Um, so a situation came up in the last few weeks we've been dealing with and we're a little very concerned about it. Um, you know, I came up with a bullseye
in my leg. My wife's bit by ticks. Dogs are bringing them in all over the place. And I know um you've asked to leave some of the grass long and and undisturbed, which really is very concerning to my wife and I. Um
I'd like to uh continue this because I am not an expert on wetlands. I know very I'm sorry I don't know very much about it. I can speak on a lot of subject matters but not not on this. But I think we want to understand a little bit more about the tick habitat
and uh and what the conservation commission is is going to do to try to help mitigate it. And number one was we're concerned about the grass. I mean not being able to cut the grass. Okay. >> So, >> and was October 22nd your preferred
date? >> Uh probably your next meeting. Yeah, that'll be fine. >> All right. Do I hear a motion to continue this matter to October 22nd? >> I'll make the motion to continue to October 22nd. >> Do I have a second? >> Second.
>> I have a motion. Maybe someone me >> Maryland. >> Um and uh we will hear you then. >> Thank you so much. >> Good luck with your tick. >> Can't be getting anybody. >> We didn't take a You didn't take a vote. >> Yeah, >> you didn't take a vote on
>> continuence. We got a vote on that. >> Do Oh, yes. Marilyn, >> yes. Buzz, >> yes. >> And cleaners, yes. Okay. So, that motion carries. We'll see you on the 22nd. Thanks. >> Thank you all very much. Thank you. >> Good night.
>> All right. >> Are we ready to move to >> Okay, we're going to move forward to public hearings. It being the right time of day. Um, we have a request for amendment to orders of conditions. This is continued
from an earlier date regarding 20 Marian Drive, one Royson Drive. Matt, you want to um brief us on that? >> Yeah. Do you want We have to officially reopen the the hearing
for the record. >> No. Is it continue it? >> Don't you have to open it to continue it? I don't know. >> I don't think so, but we could take a vote. >> Anyways, we had a a request from the applicant to continue this because we just got the peer review results back um
essentially yesterday. So, they only had 24 hours to review that. So, they're requesting October 22nd, I assume. October 22nd. That should be plenty of time for them to review and come up. >> I'll make that motion to continue to
October 22nd. Thank you, Buzz. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> All right, I'm gonna take a vote on that. Um, Dot, >> yes. >> Glean is a yes. Buzz, >> yes. >> Marilyn, >> yes. >> On Buzz's motion to continue to October
22nd. That carries. Thank you very much. Okay. Next, we have eight Melt Pond Road. >> Uh, we have 49 Old Mill Road. You're in enforcement public hearings. Sorry, 20 million shows up twice. >> We have a notice of in Yeah, it does. We
have a notice of intent for proposed addition of a porch, septic system upgrade, and a driveway modification within the buffer zone to uh BDW and the 200 foot KWPR riverfront area to an
intermittent stream. Uh this was continued from an earlier date. And this is 49 Mill Road. You want to update us on that? >> Sure. Yeah. This was another um addition
um on the septic system and we discussed at the last meeting that our last hearing that the project as proposed did not meet the standards of KWPR for structural setbacks or for septic components within 100 of well and
resource areas suggested that they come back with a more compelling uh plan and they did that. that came back with um extending the mitigation area up to Old Mill Road, providing more protection
against, you know, BBW. And they confirmed that the roof infiltration system is built to handle a 1-in storm. And they proposed a septic system
that is alternative treatment technology. Um, and it's here. It is a singular bio-kinetic WTS model 960 and it will reduce the 5day
biochemical oxygen demand and total suspended solids entering the leeching system. It's an over 95% reduction in both. Um, it does improve water quality in the effluent, but it does not appear to treat nitrogen, phosphorus or bacteria directly. Um, so it is not a
perfect system. I think if it was put in a place where there were more um open water or um perennial stream, vernal pool, things like that, the commission may want to see more treatment. But for this uh filing in front of us, you know, it still does not meet the same
standards it didn't meet before, but now I think you have enough mitigation shown that um you know, this likely mitigates the increase in actual flow seen in a one-bedroom addition. So, if the commission has no concerns or questions, I'd recommend approving the project through issuance of OC's with special
conditions already discussed at the prior hearing. >> Do you have any comments or >> unless the commission's looking for additional information? I think Matt summed it up well. >> Did this commission have any questions? I just have a curious question because I
was looking at the specs for the system and I saw where additional enhancements can transform the system into a denitrification system. Was that something you looked at or you knew you didn't have to or
>> Scott Fero with Grady Consulting did the coordination with the border health agent and I think Scott did have a discussion with Matt. I haven't been involved in the septic >> uh components of it. So I I not and it's not my expertise. So I I don't uh >> have a good answer for you on that.
>> Okay. Thanks. >> I'd also like to open the hearing for uh comments or questions from the public. Is there anyone online or um present here who has comment? Raise your hand. You see anybody with a raised hand? Um I
recognize Pine Dubois. Hi, commission and and thanks uh very much. I um I only want to bring up that um from my understanding this uh the tributary there flows to the Jones
River. There are a number of other um dwelling units. So, I'm not suggesting that you not issue a um order of conditions, but I do feel like you're setting a standard for what we do know is impact and the Jones
River is affected by nitrogen um with the TMDL required. So, I I feel like as long as you're you're thinking about the other downstream units that are also along here, this water is coming from the cranberry bog. It's part of a
bifurcated uh part of uh I don't know whether you want to call it the Jones River brook or whatever but you know uh we need to consider the nutrient load as as a very significant factor in this. It's not
it's not alone and it's not unc disconnected from the larger ecosystem. That's all I wanted to say. >> All right. Thank you Mr. Bwa. and would you please identify yourself? >> Well, thank you. Good evening everyone. My name is Adam Brodsky. I'm a local
environmental and land use lawyer. I've been asked to assist the applicants with respect to this project. I simply would like to draw attention to Scott Ferra, our professional engineers letter to
you, uh, in which he describes the, uh, innovated alternative system and renders a professional opinion, um, that the treated death will have no adverse impact whatsoever on any of the interests protected um, by your local
regulations for riverfront to an intermittent stream. Again, this is not subject at least to the riverfront requirements in the state wetlands protection act. This is a local requirement and you know critically in his letter um says that the proposed
system is going to result in a 94 to 96% reduction in biochemical oxygen demand BOD certainly over existing conditions a 50 to 82% reduction in TSS total suspended solids and a reduction
in nitrogen and he used a median average of 65 mg per liter to 12 milligrams per liter. Um, this is not going to have an adverse impact on that intermittent stream. I just want to make sure that it's clearly stated in the record. Again, we recognize the commission's
jurisdiction. Um, and um, again, the the applicant without my envir involvement, you know, decided to propose the innovative treatment to provide additional protections here. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Um, >> can I add a little bit to that? and
thinking of of setting, you know, precedents. That's part of why I brought up that I think in another location, this this wouldn't cut it. If this was a new build, it might not cut it. I think if this was a new build, you may be saying, you know, you're going to have to add some treatment to this. We want
to see that there's not any detrimental impacts here. Um, but I think given the situation where there already is a house there, there already is a septic system there, what we're talking about is a is a one-bedroom increase. And does what they showed throughout all of this
between the three different types of mitigation, you know, counteract that? And I would say probably yes. My question as I said was one more of curiosity given that nitrogen is such an issue >> and where it again they're marketing it
makes it sound like it's an easy additional enhancement. I was just curious if anybody else had a take on it. That's all. >> Mr. Boy, do you have another question or a comment? >> I just like to answer that question. >> No, sorry. I I take my hand down.
Thanks. Sorry. >> Okay. Um Buzz. >> Yeah. So the the issue with going to the nitrogen removal is it greatly increases the cost and maintenance of the system over time. >> Similarly, there are phosphorus removal
systems now that use a media and there's yeah I think there's a lot of a lot of maintenance to that as well. Well, and again, we're always looking for opportunities to try another approach to allow something to go forward. So, I
>> just looking for more education. >> Anyone want to >> I'll make a motion to I'll make a motion to approve the NOI with the previous conditions that discussed uh based on the revised plans and mitigation. >> All right. I'm going to ask for um a um
motion to close the hearing first. Do we have a motion to close the hearing? >> I'll make that motion. >> Do I have a second on that? >> Say yes. Dot dot. >> Okay, we have a motion to close the hearing. I'm going to take a uh made by
Marilyn dot seconded. Um and um Buzz, >> yes. >> And Colleen is yes as well. Dot Marilyn. Yes. All right. So, the hearing is closed. Now I'll make Now I'll make my motion to approve the NOI as discussed on the amended plans with the mitigation
uh per the uh and per the order conditions as previously discussed in our standard order conditions as well. >> Great. Do I have a second on that? >> Second. >> All right. I have a motion to approve the NOI and it's been seconded. I'm
going to take a vote on that. Dot. >> Yes. >> And Colleen is yes. Buzz >> yes. and Maryland. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, that motion carries as well. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Good night. >> Um, excuse me. Just for my notes, what was Scott's last name? >> F A N A R.
>> Thank you. >> Consulting. Thank you very much. >> Thank you guys. Is that it? >> Uh, enforcement. >> Uh, enforcement. Okay. And we did 20. 20. So, we're going to move to 8.
>> No, we do 20 Marion again. Okay. Because we have to open it and continue and then allow them to Yeah. fulfill their request to continue. So um
I open the matter of um 20 Marian one drive. I just find that on my notes. So I reopen um a hearing for request for amendment for the proposed installation
of a sediment for bay and rain garden within >> that's the public hearing for the amendment. We're just doing enforcement. >> All right. >> It would be I think earlier it would be in the action it after the action items for it.
Oh, so I open the matter of the enforcement on 20 Mary. >> Perfect. So, um September 25th, I went around in the rain with our intern to do some compliance checks on uh known
construction sites and um there was a significant release of sediment from 20 Marian Drive into the impounded section of Smelbrook. Um, and uh, the owner of the site, Larry, was there. And so we
talked a bit about it then. Um, and I told him to that we'd be discussing it tonight. And then, um, earlier today, he requested continuence on this matter as well as the amendment so that he would
have time to discuss it with his lawyer. Um, it's something that the commission doesn't have to do that. If the commission in any situation feels that they need to discuss something or issue something on enforcement, they have every right to do that. I just wouldn't recommend it. Um,
so I know he already did take some steps. You know, I talked with him about kind of how he would need to go about stabilizing the site better and he has already come in with more silt sock. Um, as to whether that's going to do the trick, I'm not sure. I gave him some
other ideas as well about how to stabilize the site when you have open dirt for long periods of time. Um, so my recommendation would be to to continue this to October 22nd um for further discussion on continued non-compliance.
>> Can I can I ask a question? >> Yeah, let's hear it. >> So, I feel like this is about the fifth or sixth time that we've had this discussion about runoff into that brook. It's actually more.
>> Okay. So, at what point is he going to wrap this up over there? >> I I don't know. I know we've asked him that before. I think what they're building right now is the third building out of five. So I think that's that's
why it's important to discuss with them because you know there was a time that the commission was was threatening with you know revoking the permit and >> and we have grounds to do so.
>> So I I think that there's a lot of conditions on this permit. This was not a permit that was issued lightly and then the conditions have not really been followed um in a lot of ways. So in some ways portions of the site have already stabilized which
is great and ultimately when the whole site is stabilized everything might be great but for now um it's continued. I mean, when I was there on the 25th, there were two workers in different, I don't know, excavators, bulldozers,
whatever, pushing uh dirt around in the rain um on a rainy day. You know, it was just it was a lot of exposed dirt, a lot of exposed dirt piles, and then when we got significant rain later in the day, everything moved because there's nothing there to contain it. And
>> and this is repetitive. This isn't the first time something like that has happened. I think to Buzz's point, >> right? Yeah. >> Yeah. I just think um for for the commission's best, you know, best effect, best protection,
it's probably best just to continue it procedurally, but you don't have to. >> It's just better, I think, to have him here to speak to it. And >> and in the meantime, he has taken steps to improve the stability of the site at a minimum.
Did he have notice of this hearing? >> Yeah. And he he requested um continuence. >> Okay. >> Because he he was Yeah. he was going to be away and he wanted to have time to go over all the facts with his lawyer. >> Does anybody want to make that motion to
continue this to what? October 22nd. >> I understand the procedural wisdom of doing it, but I do it begrudgingly. A second. Do we have a big cruding second? >> Was that an actual motion or >> kind of Okay. Yeah, it was. >> I'll make I'll make an official motion
to continue it. >> You didn't like my motion, Buzz. It was a motion. >> I loved it. No, I loved it. I was feeling the same way, but I loved it. >> Buzz has made the motion. And do we have a Why am I is my motion not Your motion is okay? >> Poor wording. U
>> You didn't actually You didn't actually say that you continue it. You could say begrudgingly continue it. So, >> why don't we just go with Buzz's motion. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> So, Dot seconded. There we go. >> All right. We have a motion to continue to October 22nd. Um, going to take a And
it's been seconded by Dot. I'm going to ask for a vote. Dot. >> Yes. >> Clean is yes. Buzz. >> Yes. >> And Marilyn, >> yes. >> Very good. Continue. We'll see them on the 22nd. We moving to um Smell Pond.
Yep. >> All right. Eight smelt pond road. >> Uh recently I had a few minutes to go through our filing spreadsheet and look for projects that were ongoing. Um
trying to see if there were any who had expired permits or anything that hadn't been done yet. >> U so I reached out to a few where I we had issued a permit a while ago and not had any um movement on and 8mell pond was one of those. It was a um addition
that was permitted I think in 2022 on Smell Pond with alternative technology septic. Um and I reached out to the homeowner Dan Pepe who's here tonight. And I just asked I said, "Hey,
your permit's good for several more years, but I haven't heard anything and I haven't had, you know, recorded conditions or anything like that." And he said, "Well, it's going great. It's almost done." I said, "Well, actually, you're supposed to do X, Y, and Z before starting work, so let's do a site visit." I went out and did a site visit.
Um, he had already taken some steps. He sent me the picture of the recorded orders and conditions, which had been recorded right after they were issued. It was just wasn't provided to us. Um, he made up a sign, put the sign up, and then when we got to the site visit, there was no erosion control, which he said he had installed the erosion
control. He just didn't realize he had to leave it there for a long time. And so, um, there was some dirt piled up across the driveway, just different conditions there were not great. And so I gave him some advice on
what to do before this meeting in order to make things as best as they could be. Uh, which he has done. He sent pictures of erosion control in place where they're supposed to be. Um, he got rid of the dirt pile. Um, I have some pictures. If anybody wants to see pictures, I can put stuff up on the
board. Um, if the commission wants to see the site, we can do a site visit. You can see stuff. Um, he can speak to um to any of anything you have questions about. Where the dirt was piled up. If the commission remembers that site
behind the house was Smelt Pond down slope, but across the street, which is a dirt access road, there were wetlands on the other side. So, where the dirt was piled up on top of the hill, it has gone down the hill. I kind of told him just leave that there. It's right up to or in the wetland, but going down there with a
machine to remove it probably does more damage than than good. So, in the meantime, I said just get rid of the dirt, throw some wood chips down for stabilization, um, and just leave it until the commission can review things. And then the last portion of it was
there was a concrete patio underneath the decks that were being replaced or resurfaced. and um he's working on that has been removed and being replaced uh with pvious pavers and which is I think
great and it's an improvement just wasn't permitted. So that's kind of another part of it is that >> um nothing back there seemed to have moved which kind of blew my mind. This was after I'd already gone around to all these other sites and seen all these storm water issues and even without erosion control there. There was stone
dust where the patio had been perfectly leveled waiting to finish the stone work and nothing looked like it had run off. So that was a that was a good thing. So he's here if you have questions. I can pull up pictures if you want. You can see the site if you want, but
figured at least procedurally you got to bring them in front of you. Does the commissioner have any comments or questions? >> Well, do we want to hear from the person? >> Yes. If you if you want to hear from him, I'll call him up. >> Please identify yourself for the record.
>> Papy, the homeowner at a small pond. Uh, yeah. So, I guess there was just some mis thing where I didn't Yeah, I we got we got approved from the commission and then I just didn't send the paperwork in or do the next steps, but I did I sent Matt a picture of when we originally put
the silk fence in. I had like one picture that kind of showed it, but um I mean obviously that wasn't inspected at the time. I just had a picture on my phone from when we did it. Um and he said that was like he showed me a couple of the conditions. the sign. I made the sign up and then um what was the other
there was another one that was oh the the filing with the registry deeds which I did I just didn't send you guys a copy so I sent Matt a a picture of that and I can bring a hard copy in for him >> but yeah then that the the original
um erosion control was in place um the last I took the last piece away when we um took the se old septic system out in I don't know the beginning of this year maybe March Um, and then yeah, what else? And yeah, I just I didn't replace it in the front. Well,
when we put the septic in, I mean, the lot's really small. This is pretty much where the septic is. There's the street, and then the only area besides where we park our cars, the stage is the pile of dirt that was left was uh right on the other side of the road. Um, so that's why we put it there, but Matt suggested getting rid of it um instead of putting
silence around it. So, I got rid of it last week and put my chips down and that's where we're at now, I think. >> See if the commissioner has any questions or comments on this? So far so good. >> Anything from you, Buzz? No.
>> No. >> All right. Is there anything the commission wants this applicant to do? >> That's that's up to you. I don't know. Um I think you have unpermitted work going on in the back in this form of um what seems
to be a good project if it is truly pvious pavers. >> That's the other thing. It's not stone dust. It's 38 crushed stone which >> Oh, perfect. >> So it is it is impervious. >> Uh the stones themselves though, the blocks too. >> Yeah, I sent you the I think I sent you the information on the the pavers themselves. >> I don't think I have it, but if you can
send I mean I guess you don't have to send it to me now. I guess my point on that is that's got to be permitted somehow. So whether that's I mean I don't know I don't know if something like that can be done under admin review. That might have to be an RDA. Um >> but you would want to see some sort of
filing on that just so that it's legal. >> Um otherwise that that is at least a beneficial project. It's not like adding anything that that shouldn't be there. Um and then he's going to follow up and finish the mitigation plantings and that sort of stuff and coordinate with me on that. So yeah, I don't think there's
anything like you've heard. I don't think there's anything, you know, nefarious there. It's just we've have we have these issues and I know we've talked in the past about trying to maybe do things in a different way where when people sign for a permit, they >> sign that they understand and that they'll read all the specifics cuz this
>> this happens and it especially happens when a homeowner is doing a lot of the work themselves. when um it's not being handled by the firm that went through the permitting process and said okay to all the different conditions. So yeah, >> do you have a sense of whether an
administrative would be sufficient? >> I don't know. Um I've never done anything quite that substantial and I would have to check the setbacks and everything like that. It's it probably requires an RDA filing >> so might as well.
>> Yeah. Um, so you could set a date for an RDA filing and if they don't file an RDA, then you issue an enforcement order. I would just say give them a little bit of time to do that. >> How much time? >> What's involved? I don't know what's involved with it, but >> um,
>> not a ton. It's It's a form that you have to fill out. It's a >> Is that through you or the registry? >> Yeah, everything's through me. >> Okay. >> Um, >> give them a couple months. >> I can get it tomorrow and start whatever the process is. You know what RD stands for? >> No. No. >> Matt,
>> request for determination of applicability. It's the lower level of permitting. Like before you did an order of conditions that requires survey grade plans and a little more expensive filing fees. This is it's cheaper and easier. You don't need plans and all that stuff. So >> easier. Perfect.
I can I can follow up by email and I can just send a >> email saying, you know, you have until such and such a date to file an RDA or we'll issue an enforcement order. >> Okay. >> Does that make that does that work? >> Yep. Yeah.
>> I picked uh >> you'll need >> December date. Is that fine? >> The first meeting in December. >> Sure. >> Do we have that date? I'll just look it up before I email him. >> Okay.
Did you have a question, do um he'll have to get help filling it out. Engineers or something. >> RDA form is not too bad. >> Okay. >> You should be all right with that. >> All right. Well, if you do run into trouble, you have some time to figure that out. And
>> yeah, I wor I worked with Grady on the original project. So, if I need something more than what I can handle. >> Yeah. Okay. All right. Right. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Did everybody have a chance to look over those July 9th minutes? I could hand
them back down. Okay, great. >> I I don't know if we can vote on that because I was absence. >> All right. Well, we'll just put it aside then. >> Let's push them to the next meeting because you wanted them printed earlier anyways. >> Yeah. Great. That sounds great. >> Yeah. So, you and I were you were and I
were absent from that. We're going to have a little backlog on minutes no matter what because I now have, you know, I have somebody working on on getting our backlog of minutes done and every one of these meetings and it's it's going to be tricky. We're doing our best.
>> You are doing a great job, Matt. Do you want >> I'm not doing anything with the minutes. >> Well, you're overseeing it. >> Um, you want to update us on the storm water issues? >> Yeah. Um,
like I mentioned, I went out September 25th to go check out uh storm water stuff in the in what was a pretty good rainstorm cuz that's the good time to go see if everything's tight. Yeah. >> Um and I had not been on site at either of the offtarillum
um sites since going to do uh you know pre-work checks and both sites had erosion control issues had storm water with sediment going past the erosion control. Um, so I
issued $300 citations to each one of the builders and said, "If you want to go to the next conservation meeting and and tell them that you shouldn't get fined, you're welcome to do that." And then um had conversations with both of them and
then realized that typically I do give people more of a warning or leeway system. And in this case, I just reacted with, "Hey, you messed up. Here's your fine." Um, because it made sense in my head that when you have a builder that's not in compliance and you hit them with a fine,
next time they'll know you're serious and they'll pay more attention to their erosion control. Um, but I did. I told them that I would rip them up. So, I did. >> All right. So, there's your update. >> Thanks. Anyone want to ask a question on
that or are we all set? Okay. Are we signed? >> I think we are. Yeah. >> Did you have anything to discuss? >> No. >> Did you sign in? >> You don't have to say. >> You don't have to sign. Okay, cool.
>> Just ask him. >> All right. Our next um regular meeting is going to be on October 22nd, 2025 at 6:30. Do I hear a motion to adjurnn? >> So moved. >> Do I have a second? Second. Um, we have
a motion made by Marilyn, seconded by Dot. Take a vote on that. Buzz, >> yes. >> Kina's a yes. Marilyn, >> yes. >> And Dot, >> yes. >> Motion carries. Thank you all very much. It's been a pleasure.