Okay, good evening everyone and welcome to the July 28th meeting of the Lakeville Conservation Commission. Um, we are being recorded by Lake Cam tonight. Is anyone else recording?
Seeing no one, we will begin by introducing ourselves. >> I'm Mark Minton. I'm the agent. >> John Leblanc, >> Michelle Bashard, Nancy Yates, >> Joseph Chamberlain, >> Mark Knox, >> William Ranos.
>> Okay. First on our agenda tonight is 52. >> Call the meeting to order. >> Oh, call the meeting to order. So moved. Second. 52 Clear Pond Road is a request for a certificate of compliance for SE 192 960
which is a septic system and I am not seeing anybody here to represent it. So >> continued >> or do we >> wait a few minutes? Maybe someone comes
in the door. >> Uh well, no. We'll either continue it or we can either we could do it or we could not do it. You want to continue it until the um applicant is here.
What is >> Well, I would make a motion to move um this agenda item to the end of >> the hearing for today. So, if the applicant shows up before that hearing. >> Okay. >> We have a motion and a second. >> All in favor?
>> I. >> All righty. Okay, next on the agenda, five quick shan circle And this is a request for a determination for the in installation of an ingground pool continued from
July 14th. And I hear that our um that John and the agent went out and did a site visit and you should be very happy. >> Good evening, Madam Chair. For the record, Joshua from
>> Yeah. So, uh quick recap of where we left it. It sounded like the commission wanted to get some eyes on the project. Uh, your agent and uh, John went out, they reviewed it. I'd be interested to hear their opinion of it. There was some
discussion from Mr. Knox about kind of rearranging the erosion controls. >> So, I have a a new rendering here that I'd like to hand out. >> Did you go to >> I didn't go to the site because at the meeting that we had on July 14th, I suggested that some erosion control be put over near the retention pond as
well. Okay. >> I also reached out to >> Thank you. Thank you. So, as you see on this new rendering, we had erosion control outlined in orange and we just ran it up till you get to
that vegetation on the south side and then on the well southwesterly side and then on the north side we continued enough just to cover the edge of that embankment right back to the shed.
Okay. So, is everybody good? >> Yep. >> Yep. >> So, are we looking for a motion for a negative three determination? >> So, moved. >> Second. with um do we want to add the >> Looks like Mark had some >> right
>> concerns. Yeah. Oh, I just Yeah, I uh John and I went out um and I passed out basically what was provided last time. Um the one thing I also included um the applicant had included
uh some other potential measures um so that um to address any concerns that u commission might might have limited work. It's on this This is from the applicant, too, but I
don't know if the commission wants to include those or it's something you're you're planning to do. >> Yeah, it was part of our original application or if the plan is to move forward with those things. I you you can include them as a condition, but as we
presented them as an applicant, that's that's our intention. >> So, a negative three determination, we can do some conditions. So um we would definitely want to do that. Your erosion control is inspected by the agent.
>> I think stabilization could be grouped under erosion control. Yeah. I don't I just wanted to point that out that again they were provided last time and in in addition to the response to
uh Commission Member Knox's um suggestion that has been addressed. Well, I think maybe instead of putting them all on there, we can do inspection of the erosion control and all of the
conditions stated in the original >> application. >> Rather than putting them all out cuz on RDA, you're really not supposed to put five conditions. So, if we just say he inspects the erosion control and
conditions included in the application. Everybody good with that? >> Okay. >> Yep. >> A second. >> All in favor? >> I I >> There you go. >> Thank you guys. >> You're welcome. Feels weird to check one off.
>> Okay. Yep. Make a motion to continue the hearing for 30 Howland Road to our next meeting Tuesday, August 11th, here at the police station at 6:30 p.m. >> Second. >> All in favor? I I
>> I Okay, next on the agenda, 15, 16, and 17 Shore Avenue. All right, Mark. This says discussion and possible vote. Did we do have a
Did we actually get a filing for an RDA or is this We got an actual filing for an RDA? >> Might want to pull one of those microphones over. >> We Okay, you're all set. Okay. Um, we received a request to for the
commission to make a uh positive determination um, >> which we did in the previous meeting. >> Correct. So, what followed was uh, and I
wrote up tried to summarize what's happened since. So, the commission directed the agent to to write a letter to contact the the parties involved. Um, and included in that letter was a request um
for um Mr. McKay, the owner of um 17 Shore A, to file a after the fact notice of intent and do so by June 30th uh and attend the July 14th
meeting to discuss the matter. Um those two milestones weren't met, but then you can see from what I've written up here that there has been progress. I've been in touch with um Mr.
McCay who's come into the office had phoned. So there's there's some some progress there. I would say that said I I received a phone call from attorney um Michael Wiggins this last week, which is
why this is on the agenda tonight, I believe. Um I don't know if you all have this. I think you have the letter in the packet. So that letter stated that that attorney Wiggins and his clients, I'm assuming, wanted to come in to discuss a
possible way to address the situation. So I I I think there's quite a few people here uh with an interest in this matter, but um so >> just to be clear, they
um Madam Chair, we laid out we discussed the letter. The letter went out. We laid out those two time frames and they >> nothing they didn't file an NOI by the 30th >> when they weren't here at the last meeting. Correct. >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> That's correct.
>> But he did you send it with a green card or you just sent it in the mail? When he came into the office, did he say he received the letter? >> I And I believe Mr. in case he's here. But yes, he came in um that would have been uh July 6th that when I think he
came into the office is what I have in my my notes. But and then we spoke this last week again about progress or when he when Mr. McKay came into the office, I recommended that he contact an
engineering firm to help him complete the NOI. And my understanding is that's that's in in progress. But um so to we the file the dates for the filings
came and went, but there's there's been some progress. But again, the the the >> agenda and >> no, excuse me. I just Are you finished? >> Yeah, I'm I'm finished. I it's it's it's
been kind of a to a lot of moving parts in this one, but >> shall we call it a work in progress? >> All right. So, first thing I'd like you each to identify who you are and your address, starting with you. I'm James
and Kate and uh my address is 1564 Street in Random Maps. >> Your your address in Clark shows >> and I have Clark's address is 17 Shore Avenue. >> Okay. >> My name is Frank MH Avenue and 16 Avenue. Oh,
>> sorry. 15 Shore Avenue. >> 15 Shore Avenue. >> Lydia Low. I'm with him. >> Okay. Mike Campbell. Um I just bought 16 Shore. >> All right. So we have 15 16 17. Okay.
>> Should we have them sit in the position that >> Yeah. No. Two steps back. >> Okay. So you were supposed to contact an engineer and come up with a plan because obviously that pipe is discharging into Long Pond and you need an after the fact
notice of intent. >> Absolutely. I I contacted the the company right away as soon as I got the letter. Okay. >> I got the letter late. Soon as I got the letter was in July when I go down the song. He gave me the number to contact two people. I called the first one. He didn't call me back. He called the second one. He called me back. He gave
my name. He said he's going to send me a contract. And I thought it was, you know, I thought I'd done my job and it was all set. So then I follow up with him the other day. I contacted Mark and then, you know, we have a contract in place and I'll get you guys. >> You have a contact in place with who? >> Jamie. I had seen it.
>> Yeah. Okay. And did he give you a time frame? He did not. He sent an email to both of us that he was on it and I'll do I'll do it every time. >> All right. So, when Jamie called, >> did you explain? >> Yeah, Jamie had questions about what
what was the what the commission was looking for to remedy the situation. Basically, an after the fact notice of intent to address this the the the pipe. >> Okay. So I think at this point I think
you should just maybe as a board if everybody's comfortable request an update and try to give us a timeline. >> Well, but this letter from the attorney says they have an alternative. >> This is a different attorney, >> right?
>> Whose attorney is this? Michael Wiggins. Okay. Is he not here? >> He's not here. >> Okay. There's there's also an attorney James Marsh that is representing Clark Shores.
>> Oh, so the association's involved in this too. >> Yeah. >> Well, that's who came in and asked for the positive determination. >> Okay. >> Correct. >> Clark Shores. But why this is on the agenda tonight is is the letter that we
received from um yes right from from Mr. Mark's attorney requesting opportunity to come in and speak discuss the matter and and
then the letter says they're um they have a a proposal. So, >> well, I think that uh Mr. McCay working with a local engineer is probably the avenue we want to see happen. And I think that um
once a plan is developed, I think that these folks will need to work out how whatever needs to happen gets executed and we'll wait and see. I don't think we want to direct that process as far as the workload. Um so if work needs to be
done on is it the Lowe's >> uh Mark >> Mark? >> Yeah Mark >> uh on their property by Mr. Beay through the engineer. I think they just he'll need to seek permission from them and just get the work done to rectify the
problem because from what I understand it's it was done not without their knowledge. >> Correct. And this requires an engineered plan to resolve. >> So I I think that we're working toward that and I don't think that we want to go with
>> I think it's the timing um an engineer an engineered plan to ensure proper drainage and treatment for any this is discharging into Long Pond. >> Yeah. >> I think we need to >> it all >> Mr. McCay this has all been conveyed to
the engineer you hired? >> Uh yes. >> Okay. I spoke to him, told him all this. I told Jamie, the engineer. >> Yeah. So, I I just think we need to wait for a a response and maybe try to prompt a followup from them, please. >> You'll get you'll get me following up. Trust me.
>> So, we will we'll put it on the agenda for our very next meeting. That's two weeks from now. >> I think they'd like to say >> I'm going to give them a chance. >> All right. >> Um, we're going to put you on the agenda for two weeks
>> from now. And we all probably need to give a little push to >> get this some kind of >> you may have heard us talking prior to the meeting. We have an agenda item tonight about continuences. So we're
continuing the hearing. Contact Mark. If anything changes or if you have an update, just contact Mark. That would be super. >> Okay, your turn. Okay. So, um my name is Frank M
and along with my wife the owner of 15. My family has been at a since 1973. So, um we're actually in the process of selling our cottage. We were under
agreement with um with the buyer and um unbeknownst to us, Mr. McC illegally installed the stream on both sides of our property
on the lot at 16 Avenue. >> Is that where the house is? 16. >> Yeah, the house is at 15. >> Okay. All right. >> Right. And so 16's just a lot. >> 16 is a lot. >> So, um, no, that's not correct. 100%.
>> All right. It's not your turn. >> So, anyway, um, we have just sold 16 the lot to the camps of Mike and Terry. So, they are the current owners of the
lot where the crane pipe originates. Um, and the pipe originates on 16 rings. It goes on the road. >> Yeah, we we've seen the pictures of it. >> Okay. >> We just want it rectified. >> Correct.
>> That's exactly what we want. And because it's on our private property, our our request is we would like to not have it be draining into Long Pine. Can we just take it off of the cut it off of the property and cap it?
>> I would say your concern is noted and that information should be passed along to the engineer to satisfy the correction. I don't that would have to come from an engineer because we don't know what damage if you cut it off and water is still going into it from somewhere. I
mean >> I don't because it's running from from >> you have to cap it on the inlet where it is on 16 by property. >> This is crazy. >> If you cap that must own this property then they wouldn't have
>> as a lawyer verify it. >> All right, that's enough. >> Okay, listen to me. This is a civil matter as far as that's concerned. Who owns it? That is not our problem. Our problem is there's been a pipe that's been installed illegally. We can't tell you you can cut it off or you can do
anything. Whoever put that pipe in, I assume it's you. >> Needs to do just what we said and that's how it needs to work. You can't do anything or you're going to be in violation. He needs to we need to get an
after the-act notice of intent to decide how we can rectify the situation from what's happening of whatever is going into Long Pond. >> But I think 16 Shore Avenue is actually beyond the
>> beyond the jurisdiction of the commission. >> Yeah. Beyond that area, >> it doesn't matter. It's affecting the resource area. >> So then it becomes our problem. cuts and caps it then it will no longer be effect. That's that's >> it's affecting it right now. I'm
advising you nobody does anything or you're going to be in violation because whatever is happening is affecting the resource area for sure. It's draining into Long Pond. So >> that's what we're trying to stop saying
she'd rather cap it on. >> But it's not your determination to decide how to do it >> from his from his property. >> No. No >> board of >> health problem for us. >> You know >> this is >> our job is to make sure the resource
area is not affected >> and that's what we >> and it is being affected but it's not any of our determination of how to fix it. It's needs to come from an engineer and it needs to be an afterthe- fact notice of intent. And as far as who owns it or the sale or
anything like that, that's a civil matter. That's not our job. Our job is protecting the resource area. So, does anybody else >> I keep questioning, have you been anyone been in contact with our board of health?
>> I mean, are they kind of the people that would be telling you what to do here? Have you been to the our board of health, Board of Health agent? I don't think the board of health drainage there. >> No.
>> If they want to come up with an engineered plan, >> we would have to pass approval from the board of health, right? >> No. No. It's draining into a resource area. It has nothing to do with their septic system. I would think
>> we don't know that. >> That's true. I don't know where it is. There's no septic system on that lot. It's an empty lot. Matt, >> my question. >> Yes. The reason the pipe was put from 16 to 17 is because it was cool enough water in 16. So if we cap that, we're going to flood up, >> right?
>> That's exactly my point. >> That's what the engineer would solve, >> right? >> So if we were to have the cap, we would bring any sludge or anything that happened from like what we've seen a couple weeks on raintorm bringing it down. >> We got one of those coming up tomorrow,
don't we? Can I say one last thing? >> Yes. >> The same project was done a week later. I have a video of it if you want to see it. Right in front of his property and it goes into the beach over there. Not they're going right into a public beach
done by Mr. Marsh and uh uh James Alita back there. That's something that that you guys should be looking into. It's the exact same thing. >> All right. Well, let's do one thing at a time. We're here tonight to talk about N5 16 and 17. >> Those things have to get reported to us
if it wasn't planned and >> and Mark will look into it >> and they get reported to us all the time. >> You could you can send it to to to us at the conservation commission and make a complaint and we'll we >> if you'd like to are are you speaking on
this? >> I'm speaking on behalf of Clark Shores. >> Okay. So then somebody needs to move so he can come up to the microphone. Tell me Jim Marsh on behalf of Clark Shores. >> Okay. >> Um just a quick note. Um
I just want to call I have nothing to do with anything. I'm a lawyer. I'm not an engineer. I don't put range pipes in the ground. >> Okay. >> Um I think there's a problem that's come up tonight that's going to be an issue going forward with any design or um any
after effective attempted file here. The problem here is we have two properties for which aren't owned by Mr. McCay which are being impacted because the pipes excuse me because the pipes installed >> you're going to be out. >> I apologize.
>> Okay. I'm sorry. >> When he's when he was if he were to file a notice of intent, he needs to consent to the owners for which the work is, you know, requested to be permitted. I'm seeing that you're going to have 15
and 16 not consent to this pipe being installed or having already been installed and remain on their property. I don't think he he can get the signatures from these these owners to submit this notice to >> first I'll prove I own the land and then
we can go from there. >> I'm seeing that's a that's an issue here. So to go through this process of having an engineer look at this, I think I think the pipe has to come out. These people don't want it there. Their suggestion to you tonight was we can cap
it and leave it in place. And that might be the the least invasive way of trying to deal with this, but to have a notice of intent come in after the fact, I don't think you're going to have the permission of the owners to do that. I see that being a problem.
But we understand that is a requirement that anybody that gets work done in their property needs to sign that notice of intent. >> So you're right. >> So if they don't then what he he won't be bringing that in. >> Yeah. So where do we go from there? You think >> we'll find out.
>> Yeah. >> I don't think we're going to decide that tonight. >> Okay. >> We're going to wait a meeting or two and see what he wants back. >> I just want >> and I'm positive that his engineer understands the ownership factors involved. So >> yeah, I know I know Jamie Bet very well
and I've had him on any of my projects. >> We see him frequently. >> Really? Well, what's learned with respect to that >> the state act as well as local bylaws for towns? >> Agreed. >> Yeah. >> So who actually owns the property where it discharges into the pond? That's the
other thing. >> That's 15 15. >> We owned both properties, but it was a trespass. We didn't have anything to do with it. And all we're asking is can we get it off of our property and stop this dumping water in
>> but whether it went on illegally or not it's there and they own the problem of what's discharging into Long Pond and I don't know exactly how we're going to solve this but there needs to be some kind of rip wrap or treatment or something needs to happen so that
whatever's discharging illegally into Long Pond needs to stop immediately. Yes, >> some sort of there. And I think >> some one of the photos I may have provided to you when I was here before shows some sort of ground. Um, but the
the discharge should stop I think regardless. And that's what the thought was to cap it on both ends so that it would be it's not a perforated pipe from what I understand. So if there's no inlet, there won't be wire, you know, being piped through the pipe all the way
down. So you don't get lot into the >> Nancy, could I ask a question for you? Sure. >> To Mr. McKay. >> Yes. >> Mr. McKay, you understand that what we're asking you to do is come back with a plan >> to rectify this problem.
>> And you also understand that you can't work on other people's property without their permission. So, your plan will somehow make it happen. >> You'll get a deed showing and a letter from their their attorney. I've already been through this with these people. >> But, but you understand that
>> if they're in ownership of something and you can't prove that, >> you won't be able to work there. >> 100%. >> Okay. >> 100%. >> So, I think he's I I think we need to wait and see what he comes back with. I think we're at a good point where we we understand I understand everybody else's concerns,
>> but I want to give them a shot and let's fix the problem and >> I'll fix it. You got it. >> We're good to maybe continue some discussion of this at our next meeting. >> Hopefully, you will have something for
us by our meeting on the >> 11th. 11th >> 11th. So we will it's not actually a hearing or anything. So we will continue discussion we will discuss discussion on 151617 Shore Avenue at the meeting of
the 11th and see. >> Yeah. And that doesn't require any vote because it is >> ministerial. It's just a >> chairperson can put that on the agenda. So we will see. >> We just need to It sounds a lot more complicated than at first we thought. We'll see in two weeks.
>> But Matt is right too. If you just cut it off and take it out, you could have flooding issues. >> It's there for a reason. >> I get like I said, I get both scenarios. It's >> we don't want to go back to the pond, >> right? >> But then I also don't want to damage the
property to fills and things. Oh, but we have the owner of 16 wants to do it for that >> and that's >> and then whatever needs to happen in the future can go through a full process. But >> we we would like >> both owners just >> we would like to remediate the
encroachment the legal encroachment on our property and in doing that in doing that. So, if Jamie's doing an engineered plan, there will be some kind of a survey and it will be an engineered plan. All right. So, hi. >> Good deal.
>> Okay. >> So, >> thank you. Thanks for coming in. >> Thank you so much. >> See you in a couple weeks. >> Appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> Appreciate it, >> James. >> Yeah. So on Tuesday, August 11th, >> two weeks,
>> yeah, there's no possible resolution with this intent because it's not it's not his property. Well, there there is depending on what comes back from the engineer, but we can't tell you what the time frame is going to be until we get some.
>> We'll have a better idea on the 11th. >> Quick question. >> No, unless you identify yourself. >> Your name? >> Okay, there you go. Um, if so, if he does that paperwork and it's not his
land, then he can't do anything, right? >> There'll be a survey on an engineer plan. There'll be a survey, so it will probably show whose land it is. >> Yep. >> I'd be shocked if there's a plan in two weeks, but there may be discussion.
>> There's no plan and no filing. We'll still discuss it. We'll still have it in two weeks. No, we'd probably continue it for another two weeks. >> But that's but this could go on for >> So what I would suggest is your problems
with him are are a civil case. You should >> Well, that's a separate from what we we need to deal with. >> So we're only dealing with the discharge into the pond. We're not dealing with the fact that he went on your land without permission.
>> And we're not trying to deal with All we want to do is take it off. you know, sell the property. >> I understand that, but it's not within our purview, >> but you then you would be working within. So, you would need a plan if you were going to do anything
>> or Yeah. >> But he wouldn't because he's outside of the >> very close outside of the um >> the area. if he just removed it and kept it so that it's not >> climbing the the water shed.
>> But we can't the >> But how would that solve your problem? You still got a pipe in the ground. >> There's no dump. There's no drainage happening. There's still this little thing, you know, on the property. But there was >> Please, please don't all speak at once. People keeping minutes for these
meetings. Can't >> And I think I think we're done. I think we made our decision. So, um, thank you for coming, >> Jessie. >> Well, I I I just for what it's worth, I've been I've been pursuing
uh Mr. McCay and I've been pursuing this and making calls and trying to move this as quickly as I can, including going forward. So, I mean, I certainly I hear I hear your situation and I understand
>> and I would say you well two weeks. >> Thank you. Um and I would appreciate any consideration. Thank you. >> Good night. >> Good night. >> Good night.
>> Okay. Clear out. >> What is it? Eight. Is the meeting over? >> I know. >> Okay, I'm ready. Okay. 150 Bedford Street. I make a motion to continue this to the meeting that will be held on
Tuesday, September 22nd here at the police station at 6:30 p.m. >> Second >> 9:22 26. All in favor? >> I >> Okay. Zero Mix make a motion to continue
the hearing to our next meeting here at the police station August 11th at 6:30 p.m. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Okay. >> One more time. >> Off Montgomery and Green Lot Circle, I
make a motion to continue that hearing also to our next meeting August 11th here at the police station at 6:30 p.m. >> Second. So polite. All in favor? >> I I
>> Okay. Okay, we're done. >> You're on a roll. I wasn't going to take it from you. >> Nothing was cut and clear tonight. Everything seems muddy. >> Um, >> all right. So, Village, >> I I can tell. I'm sorry. No, >> I just had a question about because of
our last thing on the meeting. >> Yep. >> Agenda. Clearly 150 Bever Street reached out because they asked for a longer September 22nd. >> They're making an agreement with the town over an ement on the property. So it's just not moving.
>> Did we hear from zero or off Montgomery regarding the continuences we just made? >> Both. >> They we heard from everybody when they were pressed >> not voluntary. >> You sought that though? >> Yes, I did. Um >> Okay.
Uh um off Montgomery is Kevin Davis is the engineer. He had reached out and said he's still waiting from for the Army Corps of Engineers. He didn't ask for a continuence but that was Monday I guess yesterday. So I'm like yeah well
how about >> Kevin Davis at ET engineering guy. >> Yeah >> he sat on the end of the Yep. Okay. >> So he did reach out. I would >> curious to nobody reached out though you sought that just to confirm >> yes >> the continuations but I'm just asking
that question just for our discussion later when we discuss the continuence policy. >> All right curious >> like to bring back up 52 Cleopon Road. >> So um I saw some pictures. Are you looking to not approve it just because it hasn't
really uh stabilized? Yeah, because the enforcement order still has a long way to go and it's part of it. >> I don't know how we can give them a certificate of compliance. >> Well, and which is separate from well
um none of none of the wetland vegetation. There's been no plantings. Um Steve Schmile wanted another uh wanted uh um the owner to to rake the property one more time because it was
compact it. Uh and there's also supposed to be a a border delineating the wetland from the house and the septic and that's not in um I was out there the other day but so it's not the restoration's not complete >> and it's the sale of the house is what
bothers me. There's nothing >> once it's sold, >> right? There's nothing on the deed. >> It all transfers. Yes, >> it does. But then we got to go after the people for the enforcement order. And do does anybody even realize? They might think, "Oh, it's off the deed. We're
free and clear." We found out um Mark found out from D and I had called Trisha Cassidy and um we cannot record the enforcement order on the deed. so
that it transferred. Um, but she did advise us to write a letter to the bank saying why we weren't that the septic system's basically in and doesn't seem to have a problem, but because there's an enforcement order on the property, >> which the septic system pipe went right through,
>> right? >> Um, >> did the board of health sign off? >> Yes, they did. I asked >> after they made But the thing is, >> we're not signing off on the septic system. We're signing off on the stabilization of the work that went through the wetlands
>> which it hasn't stabilized >> which it hasn't which is part of the septic system. So how can we give them a certificate of compliance when that area has not been >> finished the plantings? >> Pardon? >> Finish the plantings that >> I'm agreeing with you. Okay.
>> And I have no problem with you saying no. >> Okay. >> But I think it should be followed up maybe with a phone call or >> something to say this is why >> you know it. So to to make sure we're on the uh right side of this, we we are dealing with two
different things. We have an enforcement order that's halfway there, but then through that we had the after the factish NOI for the septic system with the line that goes right through what's supposed to be our replication. >> Mhm.
So even if >> which is within the buffer zone >> the line >> it's in the wetlands >> right well okay it's in the resource area excuse me >> so we would be in the right to say at least
until the work related to the septic system >> was the plan of stabilization from the reinfor the the enforcement order that's I I think we're in the by denying
it until do does everyone else feel the same? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. They haven't met our order of conditions, so we're not going to release it. >> Very simple. And here's what we need to see. >> And even on a septic, if you know, it requires
two years of >> you know, of growth that builds up. Yeah. >> So, we're not even close. But even on a septic system when it's still all dirt and stuff, you don't get a certificate of compliance until it grows in. Even on a regular septic system. >> Yeah. >> I mean, I would at least like to see the
construction portion of it done. Steve had a lot of things that he requested regarding the the delineation of the border, the plantings, which aren't and then you there was some rework of the grubbing the soil to to
loosen it where it was compacted, but >> those are really the completion of the NOI. >> Well, um Trish, um Trisha Cassidy from Middbor had a um case exactly like it. And so she had sent me a bank letter to say, you know, if it was holding up the
sale that you could explain the work has been completed, um, but a certificate of compliance cannot be issued at this time due for the uh, need for a restoration. >> But >> from what Lori said, it's already sold.
So the bank letter is not going to help. I mean, we would have given that to help >> a sale. >> A sale. Yeah. Right. >> Yeah. >> But it's already sold. >> So bank letter is not going to help.
>> I guess I'm wondering did somebody get away with one and >> well the violation goes to the land. So they're still responsible for that work. >> They are. >> But does the new owner know that? >> Right. Well, that's my thing. So now they know it's still on the deed. They
must know it's still on the deed if he's looking for a certificate of compliance because the order of conditions is on the deed. Doesn't come off the deed until we give him a certificate of compliance. So, it shouldn't come off the deed until the deed is done, >> right?
>> Which is going to be a while. So, we're looking for like something to grow like grass and top before we issue >> everything that they said they were going to do with the >> the restoration >> restoration including wetland plantings and stuff like that >> because just the plantings alone are >> stabilization is always the operative
word once it's stabilized >> and their letter says stabilize the work's been done and wood chips have covered the whole area that's not what the plan was replication and remediation of the impact >> that was the enforcement order the notice of intent was for the septic right Yep. But that went through
>> with the pipe went right through the restoration. >> So I think we want to go ahead and deny their request and ask that they come back again when there's proof of more progress towards the work that's required. I >> would say when it's complete. >> Yeah. Yeah.
Mark. >> So, I spoke to D because I I I was curious whether or not you could file an enforcement order with a registry of deeds. You can't. But when I spoke with D, but the suggestion they made was or
not a suggestion, but they stated that you can issue the commission can issue an enforcement order for failure to comply with an enforcement order. But he's complying. >> Yeah. >> In the He hasn't stopped complying. It's
just he's not moving at the pace we'd like him to move probably. Right. >> But but the rest >> But it's then it's separate from giving a certificate of compliance because the restoration is still not done. You maybe
I'm missing something here. >> No, we're all on this I think we're all on the same page. >> Okay. Well, at that point they also recommend that you you need to talk to town council because the avenue to to
get any um a remedy would be to pursue legal action against >> that would be a different address we have a problem with. I think they're making good effort and making progress and they've Steve's still involved, right? >> Okay.
>> He gave us a plan. He's got to fulfill the the requirements of the plan. Okay, >> it's pretty simple. >> I'm just throwing out a bit of information. >> Violation on top of violation. >> Well, and and then
then to put enough set I piece. >> So then I if we think we're pretty good, then I'd make a motion to um deny the request for certificate of compliance for SC 192-96052
Clear Pond Road. Um, and pending the completion of the remediation and restoration work, we would rehear filing a request from the applicant. >> Say again, pending >> completion completion
>> of the stabilization >> of the restoration >> restoration work as requested. >> Is that a you're making that as a motion for us to >> a motion to deny their request for a certificate of completion at this time? at this time >> pending the completion of their
restoration work. >> I will second that motion. >> All in favor? >> I time >> and we'll just tell them to we'll put them on the agenda when they are done and ready to come back. >> Do what it says on the little sheets of
paper. >> Simple enough. I mean, it's pretty easy. Okay, meeting minutes. Try again. Pineest Pinest. >> Oh, Pinerest Village. I skipped it. I'd like to skip her. Um, I talked to Greg Maroon today and I talked to Sean Conway
yesterday because we're having a really bad weather coming. They're doing more reinforcement. Um, Mark and I also talked to Ed and he showed like where the low points were. We got an asbuilt finally from Jason Yonquist and the low point in the road
and he made and wants to put in a scupper and a new it's going to the peer reviewer the as built to figure out what's happening and what needs to be done to rectify the situation. But in the meantime with the big rain coming
again and after everybody I'm sure saw that video of the flooding um they've installed John and I went and they installed the hay bail line around the top of the road. Um they have they're putting double hay bales across the road
because they're not doing any more work in there. So they don't need to use the road. So they're reinforcing it again today for whatever could happen to us in the next two days. Excellent. Thanks for the update.
>> Award this bills and terms. >> S again. >> There's a proposal for >> pay review. >> That's wrong. >> Oh, okay. >> And that was done for Kong and Kathy said they can't pay it. They're still holding money. They're still holding like $5,000.
So there's money for the peer review, but since we piggybacked on the planning board um the peer that has to come back and say planning board/com to get paid and
the questions that we asked I was talked to Michelle and Kathy and the questions we were asked was it because did it not work because of a design flaw? law or because it was installed wrong. It's not working. So,
we need to figure out in the peer review why it didn't work. So, we're just trying to protect it in the meantime or protect the downhill neighbor people in the meantime. >> So, sandbags
>> further. >> So, how do these minutes look? >> Are we doing minutes now? >> This is the under >> this is the same minutes that you were >> right. We have we have re these are as they should be.
>> Lake Cam was not present to record. Okay. >> Minutes were based on >> member Bousad recording. >> Okay. >> I'll make a motion to approve the conservation commission minutes from April 14th, 2026. >> Second
>> as amended or of >> As I hold >> right right here. this as we now have. Yep, it's correct. >> Choking long enough to >> got a motion. >> Yes, I got a >> motion and a second. >> All in favor?
>> I >> All right. Last continuation policy. It seems like we're chasing constantly people
and we need to make some kind of a policy that who's ever presenting to us and isn't coming request a continuence. I don't know how to make that happen. We have a part-time agent and it takes time
to be chasing people down all the time to see if they're coming or not. And with all the continuences, we've had four continuences going on and on and on. It's not as members I've already discussed. It's not fair to a butters who keep would keep showing up and it's
not fair to us because I have like four or five files in my car. I don't know what to bring. >> I'm not bring I don't think it's fair that we all have to bring a stack of every single one that might come or might not come. We need to know who's coming so we know what information to
bring or like I think it was last was it last meeting that I'm sitting here where we have something that came I didn't know they were coming. I didn't have the plan. So um it makes us makes me look unprepared or it makes us look unprepared if we're not if we don't know
who's coming. So we need we also will run into the issue that we had not last winter but the winter before >> where things continue continued people were away on vacation whatever it was it just happened and then we end up with a
three and a half hour >> 4hour long meeting because everybody stacked up to the same day so we really need to be able to schedule our our time about our >> true >> especially on bigger projects >> and the applicant is the one who is
responsible for reaching out and communicating. It shouldn't be on the secretary or on Mark or any of us to check and see if they're coming. >> So again, >> they need to request a continuation. Otherwise, it looks like we didn't act on it. If they went to appeal or
something like that, they're like, "Well, you didn't act on it for 3 months because there's nothing in the chain of the record that shows right now. We ask for it in writing, but we shouldn't have to be doing that at the last minute or
the day before the meeting or today. >> Yeah. So, is there any kind of disclaimer? I know they sign giving permission for us to access the the property. Is there a disclaimer we can >> We just need to make a policy when we put it on the website that says whatever
we just decide here tonight. But in a sense, if you are unable to if you're unwilling or unable to attend your meeting, you must reach out to the conservation office to request a continuence in writing prior to the
Thursday, prior to the meeting date. If the commission doesn't hear from you by that time and you don't appear at your hearing, your request will be denied and it will be on the applicant to refile when they are ready to present in person. We should send it out to our
regular engineers too. So we just don't >> Second is that is that well well enough put together what we had in mind. >> Sure. >> So should we write it up and bring it to the next meeting and vote on it if it's a policy? >> Yep. >> Yeah. Whatever we do, it should be
policy. I was just thinking uh a different avenue might be at a meeting say we're going to give you we're continuing until our next meeting. Do we give them one warning? >> Nope.
>> Unless it's bad weather, something's reasonable, you know, not someone's control. If it's bad weather, we don't. >> No, we reserve the right to deny your application. >> I like that. >> If we feel >> we deserve >> you have >> we reserve
>> neglected to inform us. >> No. Well, I think what we say is we that this is the policy. If you no no call no show essentially, right? we're we're denying your application unless >> there could be exiting circumstances.
They reach out afterwards and say, "Hey, I was in the hospital or something." >> Maybe then we go ahead and at the next meeting vote to resend that denial and hear them at future date. That's why we say we reserve the rights to you tonight
>> because if we find out that you know >> John's like >> I think we just tough guy all of a sudden >> we just deny it and then we >> how why do we have to hold their hand? >> Yeah, >> deny it. >> They can just refile.
>> Yeah, they can refile it. >> I feel like they have to leave and it's a simple email to send out. >> They can make a phone call. They did all that work to file the application. Send it an email. It seems okay. >> I I do feel like we probably could have foregone one of our summer meetings if
we didn't have to come in and continue five hearings at everyone. >> Yeah. When you were putting the agenda together, you said, "You know what? Can you wait until the second meeting >> July cuz we got nothing else >> and we're all volunteers." So, I mean,
>> and it's just as simple as them sending an email. Well, that brings another item. >> Is there a is there a point at which we do not allow them to continue anymore >> if they haven't made substantive progress and they're not meeting the requirements laid out for them?
>> I mean, how many continuances are we giving? We're giving them unlimited now. Well, if you look at it, the ones that we're looking at, okay, 150 B Street, they can't help themselves because they're trying to make an agreement with
>> government turning very slow on their behalf. >> Yeah, but that's a documented issue. So, set that aside. It's documented. We know the reason. >> All right. Same thing with off Montgomery and Green Lot Circle. They're waiting for the Army Corps of Engineers. Once again, the um arms of government
don't work at all sometimes. >> Yes. Yes and no. See, in that situation, we continued them thinking >> they were doing stuff when they hadn't even reached out to through the proper channels through the Army Corps. >> That's true. >> So, we spent almost 3 months getting
nowhere and they weren't doing anything. They were just hoping we would change our mind on the status of Upland or not. >> But now they finally have their application into the Army Corps of Engineers and they have somebody working on it. So, >> but how about if you
they need a a documented reason? >> Oh, now you're asking for big stuff. >> Oh, we don't something like that. They don't us keep continuing it. We tell them when they're done with the Army Corp engineers, give us a call. We'll go from there. >> Maybe not a I didn't say that right. Not a documented reason. An update. An
update. So, where are you? They just >> you do have to have a reason for a continuence and continuences can be denied >> if there's no progress or good faith effort to show progress. >> We never have. >> No, but we
>> What was the place at the industrial park that was on the agenda for >> two years? Kenneth Welsh >> the 310 Kenneth Welsh did >> and then what did they do? >> Expansion of the parking. >> Then they did nothing >> and then they did nothing. Yes. We carried that forever.
So I think we can write this up pretty >> so a reason for a continuance slashprogress report >> a checklist like for example 15 1617 sure they need to get drawings from Jamie two weeks it's not really two weeks once we have the drawings now we
schedule to put on the agenda >> but at that point they'll be putting an NOI in >> but I would tell you even if that plan came in almost two days before the meeting I think because of the circumstances of this whole thing. >> Here we go. >> Here we go.
>> Once it comes in, if it's two days before the meeting, it's not that meeting. It's the following meeting. >> Correct. >> No, but I'm saying if they're on the agenda, we we do that all the time. Vote to look at the plan. I don't know we've ever voted not to look at the plan. >> We keep saying we're not going to, but that's a separate issue.
>> It is. Well, that's what I'm saying. I'm looking at all this that's going on here on 15 16 17. >> But with that, >> Yep. They're on the agenda for next time, >> but it's not a public hearing. It's not. Right. >> We're trying to >> get the notice of intent.
>> Right. >> And that's what's going to then put it on the agenda. We're just at this point looking for updates. >> Right. Right. >> And I'm guessing that in two weeks they're not going to have a plan. >> No. >> Ready? Yeah. Reviewed it. Now it goes on, >> right? >> Well, they're going to have to survey
the property so that doesn't happen overnight. >> Jamie will tell you that. Yeah, >> he'll he'll he'll tell us when he thinks he can make it. >> Yeah. And we will Mark will follow up with him. >> Yes. The agenda is not a placeholder. >> I think we can we can work on a a draft via email between now and the next one
and then we can vote on it. >> So, but I think from this discussion um and your points, Nancy, I think that we probably could through process narrow this to I think it's time to deny this one. We could, you know, when we look back in
retrospect at some of the stuff we've either talked about currently or John brings up the industrial park one, >> the what >> industrial park 310 Kenneth Welch where how they were going to expand the park and then they were come up going to come up all these plans and then
>> nothing happened. They just repaving the existing now. >> So anyway, >> same thing happened with Brock >> with that language that you jotted down for reserve the right to you know, >> deny the project
>> or or you don't have to deny. We reserve the right to >> say no to a >> offer some leniency or we can say no. But I think we're we've developed we know which ones need to be denied
>> like a checklist. We we reserve the right to deny the project. saying checklist, >> you know, >> there's no progress. If there's no reason for continuence, I mean, >> I like that >> under circumstances such as don't make
it so that if they don't meet the exact checklist, then we're forced into a >> question. The question I have is not for work on anyone. How do we make a checklist? Like for example, we do say that this is what you need. You need to have a toz. How do we follow up inside
the office that that person has given us a toz and he's ready for needed help? >> Well, I think they do that. I think Lori and Mark do that, right? >> They have that process. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. They do that today just with general >> Well, I ultimately I think we're just looking for that email on Thursday. >> Yeah. >> Right. That's all we're looking for is
the email on Thursday. Not going to make it this time. Can you push me to two meetings out? And maybe it's something we don't have a hard set, but we say, you know, we if it's been three months of an email every Thursday with no reason, just continuence, that's when we
say we're going to pull the trigger. You've got you've shown no substantive progress. So, a reason for continuence or a progress report would be good reasons for continuences. Maybe we shouldn't continue it when we talk to the people and to say when you
have what we ask you to do resolved call us and we'll put you on the agenda then instead automatically put >> that's our rule is you have that's the D that's the hearing's open we got to continue >> yeah you have to continue it to a time and date specific >> okay that's the benefit of the >> abutters yeah because of
>> once they notify the abutters then it's on the abuters to keep up with things with this and when Lori has proper notice she can put it on the agenda that it's going to be continued so they can see that and they don't have to show up 20 times.
>> That's why So, all right. So, I'm back to John. That's an eye cuz that's why then people stop coming in. How many times have we had somebody come in for the second meeting? >> They come in for the second meeting and oh, sorry, it got continued. We got the
last minute, >> right? >> They emailed us. They called us an hour before the meeting. that's happened. >> So, they have to request >> in writing >> in writing a continuence by Thursday of the week before the >> Yep.
>> Can we make the requirement for them to do the butter notifications again? >> Well, if they have to file a new one over, they have to do about butter notices, right? >> Yeah. If we end up denying, they have to refile. have to read about it. >> But then it's going to be case specific,
>> too. Like um well, we haven't seen the people for off Montgomery and Green Lot Circle. >> Like poor Donna, >> right? >> How many times she come here expecting to see it? >> Yeah. Well, 160. Yeah. Oh, God. Right. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. >> So, >> all right. So, we'll draft something. >> Okay. and bring it to the next meeting. >> We'll do input like we'll put it out to to you guys and you can add or subtract or whatever. Okay. Um before we close, I
do have uh one update on 160 Bedford Street. Two months ago, Mark, two months ago, did we send the big fat packet to D? >> It's probably two months. >> Two months. All right. So, two months
ago, Mark and I came up with a package. I wrote the letter. He put the package together of everything we've done in the last two years because 160 Bedford Street is piling up again. You must see it. They're bringing in more stuff, more stuff. So, we compiled everything that
we did in our part power, the enforcement orders and everything else, and sent it to this fat green card. I don't know how much it ended up costing because we did it with a green card. they had to sign for it, the DP, the board of selectment and the planning board because nobody
seems to be doing anything. So I wanted to document that at least we were trying. So about I also at my APC meeting I had Jonathan Hobble here who's like kind of second at D and mentioned to him I had sent that in. So, I think he must have tweaked something because I
immediately got uh within maybe a week, I got an email that said, "Oh, we've received your information and we're reviewing it." Okay. So, then about a month later, I get a call from and I
sent it to Gerard Gerard who is the area direct director of Southeastern Mass Dero. So from him, I get a phone call a month later that says, "I would love to help you basically, but I'm retiring in 2
weeks." >> So took him six weeks to tell you that. Do you want to come? >> So I'm going to I'm going to pass this on to my replacement. So, I believe it was last week, early last week, I got a
email or a phone call, a a message, a phone message from the replacement who said, you know, we've reviewed your information and we would do you want to do a Zoom or this or that or whatever.
And I um my choice was on the message I left back cuz we're playing phone tag right now is we want a face to face. So I'll let everybody know when it's a face to face in case anybody wants to go with me. >> Yeah. >> When I go >> I'll go
>> on a face to face at the EP and say >> okay. And the letter was very nice. It wasn't accusatory anything. Was looking for guidance. >> Here's the facts. I worded it very carefully. >> Nancy, can I ask you a question? >> Sure. >> You that citizens pos um petition um
wetland bylaw that you >> presented and it got passed. Did that have anything in it about teeth about >> Yeah. >> being able to enforce? >> Yeah. Enforcement. And I already went to ask town council the question if there was something else we had to do >> because it I don't know.
>> So, does that have to be reviewed by the attorney general? >> The attorney general should be coming back any day. So once that's approved, can we find them? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Well, there you go. >> But D can find do way better than us. >> I know. But at least we can do something,
>> right? >> In the early days of who conservation commission used to use that possibility as a purpose. >> Would you rather deal with the friendly locals or state >> or the state which has finding power? But there was a question that came up
about the bylaw and the enforcement part because that's like chapter 40 or something and Trisha Cassidy had said, "Are you sure that you have that already?" Because I don't know revolving fund. I don't know if you remember that nobody had a revolving fund. So we also had to include that part where the town
can have a revolving fund. So >> but I went through town council and she said, "No, soon you're good to go as soon as you hear back from the attorney general." So good. >> Usually takes about two months. So it should be soon. But in the meantime, if D go in there,
>> what? Ajourn. Okay. Second. All in favor? >> I I >> And John, I have a question for you. >> Yes, sir.