25 Let's see who's absent today Commissioner Jim Franklin is absent today Um and Commissioner Brian Payne is also absent today Commissioner Buzz Artiano is um appearing virtually
Um Now I'm gonna open the meeting Take a roll call Dot Yes Megan Yes And Marilyn Yes And I'm Kina I'm here as well Please note that we're doing a hybrid meeting
And Buzz Yeah you skipped over me Yeah I did You get that big cross there Okay It is as an additional announcement before we start The Kingston Open Space
Committee is still seeking a new member The committee assists conservation in overseeing the management and use of conservation properties to help all of us better access and utilize these resources in a positive way
This is an opportunity for a resident to assist in implementing the town's open space plan Help improve parking and trails and identifying future conservation and passive recreation priorities for the town and other
benefits You may inquire by calling the conservation department at 781585 0537 or by emailing Juliana Denim at [Music]
jdeum m kingston at kingstonmath.gov gov That's J D N U M at K I N G S T O N M A.gov Jim just entered the Zoom Oh thank you
very much Hi Jim Have we signed all the documents i did Yes Yep We had an invoice from Benomi Welding We print today WVM Mason uh certificate of compliance for the Eversource Carver of Kingston reliability project and orders of conditions for 105 Monks Hill Road and
two Branch Avenue Okay so we're going to move on to action items is the first action item The request for certificate of compliance for 18 Old Mill Road Yep All right Let me just find it here
So we're reopening a hearing on that meeting Okay All right It's inconsistent with my notes but All right So is there a representative from 18
from the um is there a representative here is that you there is not Do you have any comments Matt yeah this is uh one that was filed months ago and before we scheduled a site visit the
representative told me that they had realized that one of the orders of conditions had not been followed completely during construction and they were going to be hiring a contractor to complete the work appropriately and then get back in touch with us and requested continuence and
then requested continuence again And at this point they didn't provide any information on your information there just because I thought we could kind of deal with this at once It should just be stated that what you're voting on is both of those requests So in other words the denial applies to both correct to
both requests And um I'll accept that amendment to my motion Yeah All right I'm going to open a public meeting We're going to discuss the request for determination of applicability for 19 Pineh Hill Road
This is for construction of an addition to a single family house within jurisdiction Um is there a representative here yes Would you like to come up um identify yourself for the record and if you have any comments feel free to make them
Good evening 31 Mark Lane Plymouth formerly of Kingston It's nice to be here and honorable board members thank you for your time Matt especially thank you for your time this morning for the site visit Um I am proposing uh in Ernst the
uh the addition as described Uh it's for your it's your judgment of course it I don't feel is encroaching any more on the sensitive area than what has already been constructed Uh that's
my basic stand but if you if you I'm here to to uh take take advice meet your requests and uh hopefully go on about the project Okay Matt do you have any comments yeah Yeah
And I just realized I don't know that I had this digital at all the plan So I can't pop the plan up on the uh you did not on the screen I have hard copies here for everybody if anybody wants to look at them now but I don't have them
available for Buzz and Jim to look at But what I can do is pull up the photos from the site today So this is an application for an addition to a single family house um in the periphery of jurisdiction um in the
100 foot buffer zone to a cranberry bog which for these purposes may technically be either a bog or a BBW Um property was legally developed in 2005 through an NOI and orders of
conditions COC was issued in 2007 um house doesn't necessarily appear built exactly to what the plan was but that portion is out of jurisdiction Um most of the property is out of jurisdiction Deck was not built exactly
to plan either but again with negligible effects as far as the 2006 plan of record Um so bottom line COC was issued property was legally developed Um not perfect but but probably good enough um appears to be minimal impervious surface
within jurisdiction Um the proposal it's a minimal increase There's only a small portion of the addition that's within jurisdiction Uh the proposed structure is well outside of the 50oot no structure setback in KWPR Um proposal appears to meet all the standards of WPA and
KWPR Um couple notes wetlands were not delineated Um it says on the plan that they were taken from the record plan probably back in 2006 boundary is unlikely to have changed It's a active farmed cranberry bog edge Um so they're typically pretty bound to
topography um and pretty easily checked off aerial imagery I did take some quick measurements off Axis GIS and it appeared to support what's shown in the plan as far as what the setbacks are Um approximate tree line on the plan appears accurate but there also appears to be an unmarked delineation
between established maintained lawn and a natural area to the west Um there's a line that extends from the area of the shed to Pineh Hill Road Proposal calls for no clearing of natural vegetation It's all going to occur on the lawn area Pretty much what's shown right now on the screen That's the I believe western
side of the house That would be the side of the house that put onto it The wetlands are off to the back behind that row of pine trees Uh there is a shed of questionable legal origin has been in place since at least May 2010 uh between the limit of work
and the wetlands It is outside of the 50ft no structure setback but it's unlikely to have ever been permitted Um and then just from the site visit today I noticed up against that tree line So there's the shed up against the tree line which is still outside of the
50 foot from the cranberry bog That's looking towards the cranberry bogs from the row of trees You can see the dirt bog road in between this property and the bog And that is um another likely unpermitted area There's just a patio um
up against the tree line um looks like roughly maybe 10 ft by 10 ft So about 100 square feet of impervious surface So one of my thoughts on this was that if you're permitting a addition to the house it may make sense
to also be permitting the shed and the patio there Um you may want impervious surface numbers on that but I suspect that they're all still well beneath 15% So um like I said proposed
structures well outside of the 50oot no structure Everything appears to meet the standards of WPA and KWPR There's just the matter of unpermitted previous work Um commission could issue a negative 3 DOA or continue the meeting and ask for more information such as maybe
impervious surface numbers something along that line But the applicant should add the shed and the patio to this filing Um as neither one of them were likely permitted and I think both would be permittable That's what I got
comments from the commission And I could pull up the um aerial imagery of the property right now if that would be helpful to Jim and Buzz Would you like that Jim buzz we always like pretty pictures All right
smile Just give me a second I'll pull up the town GIS Any questions while I'm doing that do you know what the patio area was was it pavers yes Yeah Okay come on Easy Okay there we go So
here's the house right here This is sort of that delineation line I was talking about uh between managed lawn between the shed and the street This area here is the managed lawn This over here is natural vegetation Um there's the shed I'm not so that you can see the
patio Oh there it does show up there Yeah 2021 This is the patio area here roughly 10 by 10 Um here's your wetlands here the cranberry bog and then there's the bog road in between row of trees So
the the addition runs on this side of the house right here And it looks like it's about roughly 40 feet long Yes Yeah Actually with that little L it's it nets
out to 48 48 in the back 48 in the front Correct All right So I can What what's the addition for the homeowner's mother moving out from Ohio Okay Got it
So you're at about let's say about roughly there That's your that's your footprint on the addition With that you have to move the propane tank There is a propane tank buried
currently where the addition would go Um it is outside of jurisdiction and would stay out of jurisdiction So they'd be moving the propane tank closer to the road propane tank is not currently in jurisdiction and only a corner of this
um only a corner of this area like over here is actually within the 100 foot buffer So only a small portion of this additional and this has a full foundation He's in the Oh yes who was that okay [Applause]
I mean I I like the I mean I'm it seems pretty straightforward That's a very delineated wetland line if you will You know edge of a bank of a blog I mean it's pretty straightforward Uh you've got a road with you know equipment traversing on it I don't I wouldn't consider that a you know obviously it's
a wetland and it's a buffer line but it's not a pristine forested area between him and the bog area Um I agree pick up the shed in the patio now and get it on a plan of record Um I'm assuming we could just make that order part of the order conditions when that
they do the foundation as built that they have to pick those up and show those at the same time so they don't have to bring out a separate survey crew Um they can pick up the shed and the patio at the same time That's my two cents Jim did you have something you wanted to
add yeah I had a question Um as far as the addition is concerned um is anything changing on the um the septic or is is this septic is it sewer um do we have to contemplate any
upgrade to sewer um uh septic um septic design that might complicate this a little bit further uh if that was a question Uh no current cons there is no current concern for an
upgrade Uh it was built for a fivebedroom and currently it's uh recorded as or assessed as a threebedroom and that indeed is what it is So it should have should be well
accommodating any proposed bedroom Okay Um I'll just um I'll just piggyback on what Buzz said Um I I don't see any real issues with this as long as there's no changes to the subject Any other questions from the commission
i have no questions Any questions from members um public here or online all right Are we ready for a motion do we hear a motion and uh Kina just to piggyback on what Buzz was saying that's that could be easily added
as a special condition just at the shed and patio or on the ads before it's cleared Just categorically put them on unknowing I don't know whether they were permanent Just do it postf facto Fine Yeah And again the purpose of that is to
to establish what's on the ground now so that later on if other mysterious sheds show up we can say "Hey that wasn't there." Right Understood Uh need that be deline need that be surveyed or just uh Yeah you you you're
going to have to have a surveyor out to do an asbuilt for that foundation anyways So I would ask that that just be included Okay Okay On the surveyed asbuilt plan showing the exact location of both of those the patio and the and the shed and showing their dimensions
Very well All right So this is an NOI or an IDA no this is a this is an RDA So that we'd be issuing a DOA but we could issue a DOA with the special condition that we need to see the the asbuilt and that the asbuilt should show
um the shed and patio The alternative is just to have the plan that was just submitted to us updated before we issue the permit Yeah I mean it I think it's straightforward enough Um my two cents So in RDA we just close the hearing and
then we go right to a vote or we go with a vote without closing the hearing I don't remember There's not even a hearing It's just a meeting All right So I'll make a motion to approve the RDA with the conditions that the existing shed existing patio is clearly shown on
the asville plan of the addition with all dimensions and locations and properly located on the lot in relation to the lot boundaries uh prior to issuance of a do we issue a certificate of compliance on these or
not nope There's almost no followup on DOAs That's scary Yep I'm going to withdraw my motion Yeah I'm going to I'm going to request I'm I'm going to request the applicant bring in a plan that shows the location
of the existing ship in the patio prior to issuing an RDA Uh and it needs to be done by a surveyor and stamp So the way that could work then is I hate to I hate to spend I hate to spend their money but where we don't have any way to follow up We're going to do it
the hard way So essentially the way that could work is the commission could vote on issuing the DOA tonight with that caveat and I prep the permit for the next meeting which isn't until May 14th Um
theoretically I could get four signatures on that in advance of that to expediate the process for them but we would not actually put the permit in their hand until we get the updated plan with I think the shed is actually shed is already on the plan Yes correct Whether it was permitted that's the
question It's just adding the the patio to it I I've moved on So if it's just a patio um so the shed's on the plan There's no dimensions Well I'm going to go backwards again I'm
going to make my motion again So I'm going to make a motion to approve the RDA with the stipulation that the the patio is located on the plan Physically stake out the patio I would have never frankly thought that that was an issue Uh but if it's a matter of percentage of
property impermeable I understand Yeah it it's more it's more not the imperial It's more we just want to document what's there today because things have a way of creeping up on properties over the years and if we don't have a plan of record on the file then it's difficult
for us to be enforcing people Well with with due respect and I'm being asked a question is it a hardship sure I'll say it's a hardship but uh I I I will approach the engineers tomorrow and
ask respectfully if they can get out right away and if they could please enter it onto the plan within a week or so Yeah they should be able to pull that from the existing foundation They should just be able to pull that with tape measures and do offset So with the tape
my motion stands There is a second All right we have a motion on the record and a second I'm going to take a vote Dot Yes Jim yes Megan yes Kenus yes Buzz yes Marilyn
yes Well that's unanimous All right then Thank you for your consideration Thank you I will do my due diligence Get Webbby out there hopefully within a week Nice to meet you Miss Harris My pleasure Have a nice evening Thank you too
Um do we want to open the hearing will we move and is that section A 1801 all right Because of the time which is 5 minutes of 7 um I'm going to open um a meeting
um for 18 Orchard Lane This is a notice of for hearing and this is a notice of intent for the proposed demolition and rebuilding of a single family house and moving of a shed within the buffer zones
to coastal and inland resource areas Do you have any comments Matt so um commission I believe received everything that they asked
for at the last meeting except I'd like to see just share my screen So this is the updated mitigation plan So now instead of just having it over here
it is now down in this downs slope area for better protection of the resource areas Uh we do have conservation posts indicated on the plan Um and I reached out to the water department to ask about
plantings on the water man and they requested that plantings stay five feet away from the actual water man itself So that is also shown on the plan Um then we have we have the updated plan Now um
only issue that I did not bring up on the last hearing is conservation restriction post detail Um this is the old style depth of three feet one feet above We don't do that
Everything's two and two Um so I sort of put down as a special condition that um it should show two feet and above ground That could either be changed on this at the commission's request or we
can just put that in the special conditions Um I had to do that on a recent permit that we issued anyways Um that's just the standard that that we do Other changes were the detail was put on the shed
stating that the shed would be moved by hand which is we did that over here blurry for some reason [Applause] There we go Existing shed to be removed
or dismantled by hand So I believe that's all We did receive the variance request So that's all set And yeah so I think at this point he has provided all the information that the commission either requested or suggested
and I believe now everything meets KWPR and WPA I'd recommend closing the hearing and issuing OC's approving the project with special conditions Uh we can run through the list of special conditions again I know we discussed a lot of that last week Um would be would
it be helpful just for the record we definitely we yeah we definitely need to hear the special conditions again Conservation posts in perpetuity Um also like I just mentioned 2 feet above ground 2 feet below Detailed allowance for maintenance of the mitigation
area Um proposed additional stockpile of silock should be reviewed as part of the pre-work ESC check Any dumpster use must be covered uh the usual outdoor chemicals and fertilizers blurb Plus from the last meeting it was discussed um no
fertilizers in mitigation area and I believe no fertilizer within 50 ft of a resource area Is that that was what was discussed last week I believe by Marilyn And language regarding not confirming the stream type that was discussed at
the last meeting And um the last thing that I know we discussed at the last meeting but we didn't discuss as a condition was uh requiring removal of the yard waste and whether that would be before construction Any anything else from the commission on
that anything um from your Mr Guy no I want to thank Matt for providing the format of the variance request He was very uh helpful to give me the detail to make that easy to write and that's uh thank you And any comments from the public
present or online all right Do I hear a motion make a motion I make a motion to close the hearing Second Do we want to condition that um to the um Just going to close then we're going
to No motion to close the hearing Yes Yeah Okay We have a second on that Dot Yes Jim yes Megan yes Kenas yes Buzz yes Marilyn okay the hearing's closed Now do I hear
a motion to So I make the motion to approve the project with the aforementioned special conditions Okay we have a second on that Second We have a motion to approve the project
and uh issuing and issue order of conditions Um it's been seconded Dot Yes Jim Uh Jim Z Yes But um just real quick Matt I'm going to need um I'm going to need
one of those sign off sheets for missing the um the meeting but I reviewed um the online footage So could you just make a note of that correct Mullen Mullen rule form for Jim will be on record Okay
great Megan yes Colleen yes Buzz yes And Marilyn yes And the Mullen rule we all know what that is Great Thank you Okay Thank you very much All right Have a good night Have a good
night Thank you All right Pull my nose real quick I'm sniffling over here We all good We moving on to the John Howard Yes I will now open a public meeting to
discuss the request for determination of applicability for um map 48 lot 16 on Howland's Lane This is filed by the Pilgrim John Howland Society U Matt do you have any comments
yep So at the last meeting uh and I'm just sharing my screen again At the last meeting it was discussed that it may be difficult to issue the permit um given landscape work happening within the 30
foot So they did provide an update to that plan removing landscape activities from the 30-foot buffer So that's what we have now on the screen for um the most
recent update from March confused I think it was March 29th the update Either way now we have the update here Um nothing happening within the 30- foot buffer So now we have nothing that violates any standards of KWPR
Yeah March 26 And at this point I recommend the commission issue a negative three determination of applicability as the applicant has now shown a proposal that aligns with the performance standards of WPA and KWPR Do you have anything to say
um are you both the applicants you want to come up do you have any comments to make thanks Just say your name for the record Uh my name is Peter Aaron Stam executive director of the Pilgrim John Holland Society And as Matt mentioned we modified our plan to stay away from the
buffer zone keep all the um any work u or modifications out of that area U and it it it will the plan will still work for us And I I didn't follow what Elden you were asking about the brush
Yes Just use mechanical cutage to the brush Do I need to repeat that reiterate that for the record Sure Um part of the uh it's in the notes in the plan but
part of the process will be using mechanical means to remove some of the brush Okay The underbrush All right It does also I see an added note saying um plastic coverings will not be used in
future archae archaeology digs and any visible plastic material will be removed Yeah We also uh talked about in this project any plastic that comes to light will will um remove and then down as we move forward
with other projects um any any remaining plastic will be removed from the ground I will note um I've talked to other archaeologists that's still a pretty standard it still is procedure because I asked you know if there was some alternative that we could use and
it's tricky has to be something that uh stays in the ground doesn't dissolve etc etc are there any comments from commissioners on this any comments from the uh public
online Can I hear a motion that would be a motion to approve the request and issue of the negative3 determination of applicability I'll make that motion Okay great In a second We have a motion and it's seconded Let's take a vote Dot Yeah And
Jim yes And Megan yes Kina say yes Buzz yes Marilyn yes passes Thank you very much gentlemen Thank you very much Nice to see you I should have that permit for you in a couple weeks On that note I may ask commissioners to
sign documents um sometime before the April vacation week just to try to get things out to people um without having to wait for the May 14th meeting So just come in and ad hoc signing Yeah Either that or I can drive around town and find
everybody one way or the other We'll have to vote on what's more convenient for the commission Um so we're going to move on to the ME and have a nice evening gentlemen Thank you very much Nice to see you
So we're going to open a public meeting and to discuss the request for amendment um or deviation for 126 and 131 to 137 Ring Road This was submitted by Beiel
and Thomas on behalf of Ringroad Solar um LLC And for the record the filing um number of that is number SE037-0889 and 0890 Do you have any comments Matt no Um this was the thing
where they were going to go check with the state electrical inspector Um I checked before our last meeting and was told that they didn't have an update yet Um I did not receive anything and didn't reach out to ask for anything for this meeting I wasn't sure if they they'd be here or not um tonight I know their
lawyer reached out to town council to inquire if um he was interested in getting involved in Oh really one way or another Um and I assume they're just still trying to figure everything out So I think
um continuence to May 14th and if it continues to kind of get kicked down the road I can let them know that they may be in danger of having it denied for lack of information Okay Do I have a motion to continue to May 14 i'll make a
motion Any second second Have a motion's been seconded to continue this matter to May 14th Um Dot Yes Jim yes Megan yes Colleen is yes Buzz yes Marilyn yes All
right that's um May I ask a question regarding that continuence Will we be expecting input from our town council no not unless you asked for it Well they asked for it I didn't think it was up to them to ask for it but not uncommon for lawyers to reach out But his response
was he CCD me on the response and said I haven't been asked by the commission to weigh in Exactly We haven't asked him I Okay Thank you So with that added into the record before we take a vote on this All right Take shall we take another
vote no it was just anformational thing Okay Just a comment All right Well it's been unanimous to continue to May 14th Um is there anything else any enforcements no there's nothing else
except for when the next meeting is and adjourning A 40minut meeting When's the next meeting god bless us everyone Would you say May 14th all right The next meeting will be held
on May 14th 2025 starting at 6:30 p.m The time is now 711 Do I have a motion to adjurnn so moved Do I have a second second We have a motion and a second Dot Yes Jim yes
Megan yes Is a yes Buzz no I was going to say that myself Notice it was too It was too quick I don't know what to do now I know And Maryland Yes Okay Well um there's a
majority So the meeting is adjourned