We'll start the um Good evening everyone. This is the community preservation committee meeting for December 17th, 2025. Um we have a quorum. All attendees right now are in the room. Uh we have fairly short agenda
tonight, so we may be out early. Um and first on the agenda is administrative news mail and minutes. I don't have any news. There was no new coalition news um from last the last month. We do have some minutes.
I just had a couple things on the second page. Uh projects in the pipeline. it. We had a um an agenda item for budgets and I think like a should be
under that instead. >> Yeah. Um because I think we talked about some budget items and that's what we So I don't know if we can put another
bullet point in there with um and just put it well another heading actually will be heading number four, which would be um budget discussion. >> Um and then the second one number B, the Baptist church was mentioned. I didn't
know if we could flush that out a bit. I was looking at the AI minutes and we had an informal discussion. Um maybe just that one of the the points brought up the church representative is interested in learning about nonprofit
partners and it examples of adaptive reuse. Maybe we could just add something like that. >> That's perfect. >> Yeah. No for this the last thing no formal CPC application yet but may come forward in the future just so we know what we talked about
when the Baptist church was mentioned. So, is this under budget discussion? >> Well, no. The the Baptist church would be projects in the pipeline, but fiscal table and graphs. And maybe we could say something of I think it just says
it says the chair produced graphs, total project costs, and breakout by category. If we could put Unless we can just pull in this AI version of um reser if we talked about the balances and the buckets
uh fund balance. I don't know if we want to redo them for next time or good edits. >> I have uh projects in the pipeline a fiscal table on graphs and then another bullet chair produced graphs
that were shared showing balances in each bucket and overall budget. >> Okay. >> And then the Baptist church was mentioned as what should I add to that? Um if we put um an informal discussion regarding the property which will be for
sale even we just say no formal application yet but something may in the future Baptist church was mentioned by the formal discussion of property which may be for sale.
No formal application at present. >> Yes. Any other visions? I make a motion to move as amended. >> Second. >> We have a motion to approve as amended
and second. Um Oh, we can just do it. All those in favor? >> I opposed. Okay. All right. Thank you. Member updates. Does anyone have
anything they want to bring forth? Only thing I can say is that I went to a meeting with the town had administrator and a bunch of other people would talk about the tuttle house um which
um companies want to move. And um they um Jim said that he wanted he invited the housing trust to be at the meeting
because he wanted the palm of building off on us. Um which is a consideration that we're thinking about. But that's where it stands. It's just it
was a suggestion and I walked around looking and nothing else has happened. >> I heard that in January you're supposed to have a site visit. >> Yeah, >> we're going to get to walk through the building. >> Historical permission is too.
>> We're going to go with that. Yeah. >> Yeah. Just we're going to look at it to see if it could possibly be turned into affordable housing and then I have my doubts. >> Which what's the name of the building? >> Tuttle House. TTLE.
>> You can also get a haircut while you're there. >> Are you implying that I need one? >> No. Maybe by then you need it. So to add on to to follow up on what Bartlett was saying at that meeting of the different boards, um it was
suggested that the historical commission present our position be possibly before the other boards come to a decision so they could see what the historical commission position was and we voted on it subsequent subsequently to that meeting at the commission's last
meeting. And um I've let all the board people who were there um know that the historical commission deemed the title has to be his of historical significance and that uh that the historical
significance is best preserved on site on the current site. And then we gave some recommendations if they want to move it off site, they should consider or they should have certain things in place before they consider moving it. >> This is the one right across from CVS, correct?
>> Yes. >> Which has already been moved on. >> Well, was moved on side. Yeah. >> Well, and then in the um the 550 King process is accelerating.
They want to start in the spring in the first phase of retail which will would not affect T cuts but you know it's coming up and in a you know I at the meeting after the meeting I
talked with the development lead Morgan Pearson I said you know I mean my actual dealing with the Tuttle House should not be at site and there's a letter. He hadn't seen it, but he immediately
started thinking about, well, where could we put it, you know, and this and that. So, I don't think that's going to be I mean, you know, there's a lot of they they they bought the the property behind the um
gas station behind Archers, the little there's a house and then, you know, some retail. And he sort of pings, well, what about there? That would be perfect, right? adjacent to the common and you know so we'll we'll see >> they're um you know they're involved in
>> you know this other they do the first phase which is pretty complicated so >> be a lot cheaper for him too I don't think >> I really don't think we need to worry I I shouldn't say that in a public way but you know
>> like I I can't imagine using CPC bots That should be a developer outpatient. >> Great. >> Interesting. See what happens with that then. But by nothing till the first of the year anyways.
>> Yeah. And I mean then if it if it becomes affordable housing then it's going to be our you know the housing trust funds that Um, anything else from anyone?
Um, member member public input. We have no public Davis here. Dave Bar is here for the next item, the clean lakes committee application which we've received. Are you waiting for anyone else to come or
>> John's coming but him? Okay. And I think we we've heard a lot of the background, so I think we might be able to skip right to the um the real section of the what you're asking for. Um we do have we kind of talked last
meeting about the eligibility and we agreed that we that the med you know is eligible, but we didn't formally vote on it, which we can. We have the eligibility request in front of us. Um so why don't we why don't we do that first?
based on the discussion of last meeting. Anybody want to I move that we'll declare the the assessment of options to improve the effectiveness of forge bond drawowns be declared an eligible project for CPC funds.
>> I second that. All right, we have first by Bartlett, second by Lindell. All in favor? Okay. All right. So, Dave, you'd like to maybe, like I said, start maybe like on the >> Yeah.
>> So, we kind of went over the the background, the the the issues with the lake right now. >> Um, there are a handful of ways that we've been working to fight the utrification that is exemplified by the
high plant growth in the lake. um uh harvesting uh dry downs, benthic mats, herbicides, they've been working on all those. Um the uh draw downs have been used for the longest time in the
recent past um the last 12 13 years or so. uh performed by Clean Lakes Committee and Friends of Ports Fund. Uh and generally speaking, they've been
moderately successful. Um but um there are some a few things that are um limitations on that success. And so basically three main ones, right? Uh,
one is that the um the we're allowed to go down to just below 200 ft of elevation. Um, but uh we never get down there. The closest we've gotten is half a foot away. The average for the last
five years has been Hey, John. >> That's just has been two feet higher. That's been the average uh level. Um and so um if we could lower
the uh there's a graph in there that shows the um different depths of the function of the area of the lake. And um uh if we could lower the the average down to our our limit, uh we could
increase the um u additional draw down the lake bed that's affected by 10% of the um lakes area for each foot that we were down. So if we were able to lower it two feet to get down to the the
average down to the allowed minimum that could open up 20% more of the plant area um for to be affected by the draw down. The second issue is that um the lake fluctuates a lot during the winter.
That's more of an issue uh as the winters get warmer, which has been for uh two of the last three winters. Um with the warmer weather, uh the ice doesn't form on the lake uh as much. Um
the two winters we had hardly any ice on the lake. Last winter was better, but um the the winters are getting warmer. Uh so the ice doesn't form uh with the warmer weather precipitation more have to be rain which flows right into the
lake rather than sitting on the ice and sitting on the surrounding uh area as snow until the spring. And so when it you have precipitation, it goes around the lake and the lake uh rises quickly.
And the limitations of the flow uh the outflow uh capacity mean that it goes up fast and it goes down slow. So that um contributes to the higher average elevation of the level. It also
uh uh often means that when we do have cold weather, which is what it takes to um kill the exposed plants, the plants aren't exposed. the the water's up when we it's have to be it's have to be up when the weather's cold. So that's
another reason why it's um they're not as effective. And um uh the third reason is that um again like I said our draw down limit is just below 200. um that was put in place to protect the
um endangered wildlife um in uh Beaverbrook Wetlands upstream of the lake. Um but in u 20 um 23
the um uh where the beaverbrook comes into the lake at Beaver Road the covers replaced by a bridge and the uh lake bottom below the bridge is at 200 ft.
Um, so, uh, even at this point, even if, excuse me, the lake were lowered below that, the wetlands, uh, upstream of the lake wouldn't be lowered below that. It'd be, it's like a little dam at 200 ft. Uh, so it would actually be higher
because it needs to be higher for the water to come through. So, uh, if we were able to have better outflow that could allow for lower lake levels, uh, we could go back
to, uh, the state and see if we could get, um, approval for a lower lower limit on the on the target, which again would uh, improve the uh, uh
productivity because a larger area would be would be affected. Um so uh all of those things uh are kind of contingent on being able to have overcoming those things is contingent on being able to
have more outflow uh from the lake. Um and uh the application explains what the uh different uh structures are at the outflow. Um I won't go into it uh much
except to say that there's about a 900 ft channel between the lake and a millil dam. Uh they there are there's a slle way that goes around the dam. Uh and
there are uh there's a um auxiliary spillway that goes from the slle way into Stonybrook which is the stream that flows downstream from the dam. Um and to
uh affect the dry down we remove stop logs from the uh uh opening of that auxiliary spillway. There are uh eight and a half feet of stop logs. And when we remove them, that lowers, you know, that lowers the lake level to the point
where it's not going over the dam anymore. It's just going through the auxiliary spillway. And um the lower opening for the spillway allows the lake to come down. Um
uh so uh that's our our outflow during the draw down is also sort of a choke point uh for the outflow. Uh so what we're proposing is to uh do some computer assessment of the
flows um involved uh at the outlet uh or a couple of different possible configurations uh at the outlet um to see uh you know could could changes there.
What kind what kind of effect could changes there have in terms of the flow capacity leaving um the lake during the draw down? And then the second part of the study would be again computer uh
assessment uh computer modeling of the overall draw down cycle uh with uh looking at these possible changes in the uh outlet structures and using
historical historical data for one year uh to model the flow uh for the um for the draw down and modifying uh that historical data in some ways to uh also uh model wetter
winters and drier winters to see um what kind of effect those would have too. Um the the options that we're looking at to improve the flow out of the um uh out of the uh
the lake uh are three. Um, one is looking at the inlet to the existing auxiliary spillway and um uh lowering the opening and uh making it rectangular rather than round which would give us
more area uh and seeing uh what uh what would the effect be if we lowered that uh just without changing anything else. Um the second option would be to uh put
in uh an additional uh outlet um structure next to that current one. Obviously that would improve the increase the the flow but uh to what extent and how much would it would it
help and clearly that would be more expensive than the first option but uh it's it would be interesting to see how much improvement we would get. Would it be worth the extra expense? Um the third
option we're looking at is um uh what effect would we have if we lowered the uh stream bed of the outlet channel between the lake and the dam. Uh we did do uh a little bit of dredging there uh
a few years ago, 2022. Uh we got approval to to do that. Um, but we only lowered it by a little bit less than a foot down to uh about a foot below our target level. Um, if we uh
were to lower it more uh how much would that uh reduce the choking of the of the outflow um and uh improve the effectiveness of the dry downs? Uh all
of these different possibilities obviously would need to be uh if if they were shown to be effective and maybe cost effective would need to be uh
have wider discussion and approval and uh we need to be looking for funding. Um I would uh think that uh possibly some grants might be available to to do that
kind of thing. Um but uh so clearly if we decide that some of these look useful, there would need to be a lot more follow on uh both in terms of getting support and uh getting approvals
and getting funding. Uh but this would be the first step is to see to what extent would um would these actually uh be useful. Um so uh I don't know whether you want me to go over the other um sections of the
in terms of how this matches CPC goals and timeline sort of things. Yeah, I think that I mean I think the timeline and I mean the goals I think you know but the timeline and budget and how you've come to the 40,000 and
>> Yeah. Okay. Um so uh if this got approved um by you and then by town meeting that would be late spring. Uh so we would plan to uh start the work uh in
early summer and work with uh the contractor uh through the summer and into the early fall. Uh that should be uh enough plenty of time to uh to do this. Um we would collaborate together on uh whether that just exactly what the
specs were. We we worked with them last year and got an agreement on the specs and uh and the cost at that time. Um we'd like we did pair some things back to to reach that cost. Uh we might be interested in putting some of those back
in. Um but uh yeah, we'd expect that uh from early summer until early fall, midfall uh would be the the time frame for doing this. uh they have the computer models available, they need to modify them. We need to collaborate on
uh the data sets. Uh and then once we've done that, it's you know uh running through the models which is not a time consuming thing but then we'd have some time to evaluate them together and u
come to some conclusions. >> And is that all part of the $40,000 or is that >> okay? Yeah. Yeah. Um how we came up with the budget. Um uh like I said, we had started this project uh we had funding
for it uh for FY25 um from the water department and friends of Forge Pond. There were some concerns about um the um scheduling uh in the end which uh meant
that it didn't take place uh last summer. Um we had uh we were working with uh a contractor that had provided uh these kinds of services um uh to
evaluate use these kinds of models to evaluate flows in the outlet channel uh which provided the basis for the dredging that we did in 2022. So they already have the models, they've already worked the best, they uh have u
experience working in this area. So making some changes was uh it was cost effective, pretty cost effective for them to be picking up doing the work. Um we had an agreement with them. We'd worked through the uh statement of
work and specifications. Uh and at that time um we had an agreement to do the work for 30,000. Uh so we're asking for 40,000 but we expect it cost more just through inflation. Like I said we um
might want to put in some of the extra um things that we took out to scale it back for 30,000. Uh if it turns out it doesn't cost 40,000 obviously we we wouldn't spend that much. Mhm. >> Um and uh last
year the funding was uh matched between water department and friends of Forge Pond. Um when we talked about sort of these things last summer, uh the committee suggested that rather
than friends of Forge Pond matching it, uh it would be useful in a number of ways for Westford CPC to um if we could uh get funding from them, that would be useful both in terms of awareness and uh
socializing what we're uh making Westford aware of what we're thinking of down the road uh before we get to the point where we say, "Hey, here's something we'd like to do." And also, you know, uh
get funding, share the funding with them. Um, we went to their needs assessment uh meeting uh last month and they invited us to bring it back as an application
uh next month. So, we're we're doing that. >> What What happens if Westford doesn't Westford CPC doesn't fund it? >> Um, it doesn't work. >> We may get funding from friends of first pond. Um so I mean that was kind of the
original expectation but we agreed that your suggestion that uh there are a number of benefits having westward funded. Um so that's what we're looking to do.
Um so that was how we came up with the with the amount and that see the the um matching or the you know we got matching we we we're looking for half the funding from you and we would get matching from
hopefully C Western CPC for the other um and uh we have a few paragraphs about community support uh in the application Um the efforts that we're doing to
preserve uh the lakes um have a lot of support in town as evidenced by a um special session uh called by the town manager um August 24
uh Rob was in helping to get that organized but there were you can see there were like eight or 10 uh town groups that participated including CPC and there's agreement that you know this was something that was important to the
town and we needed to find ways to fund it. Um like I said the westward also is because the lake is in both and westward. Wester has also been supportive. Um um much of previous
historically uh Westford Health Thanks and Ponds collaborative which is cyst organization for Littleton Clean Lakes Committee has funded uh a number of uh the U mitigation activities on the lake. Um, and like I said, we're hoping to get
funding from uh their CPC. Um, and both Littleton and Westford Conservation Commissions are uh aware and approving of all of these mitigation efforts. Um, uh, all the different
mitigation efforts I mentioned, including the draw downs, have permits from from both conservation missions. Um so the the main thing we're doing I mean we're fighting that that the the growth the explosion of these uh invasive
plants uh but the the bottom line of what we're really trying to do is uh fight this accelerated utrification of the lakes. Um an example of accelerated utification is what happened to Mil
Pond. Um and um you know where we went from a 12 deep lake, nice clean lake to 3 ft uh very choked lake um which um in just a matter
of decades. Um and lakes are unique. Um they're um uh we we want to they're they're cherished. um uh once they're gone, you can't replace them, you know, uh if if
uh if conservation land gets overrun or whatever, there's more land that can be used or it can be that that that land can be restored. Once a lake is gone, there's really, you know, nothing you
can do. Um so this we're trying to preserve u these lakes which is um I think I think part of your mandate >> now when the final report is prepared who who takes ownership of that like
who's going to look at these models and decide and and do the draw down is that clean sponsion is that the water department function conservation or >> uh anybody's I mean certainly the clean
lakes committee uh friends of F pond and potentially Westford Health Lakes and Ponds collaborative would look at the results and uh see uh to what extent are these different options
uh uh improving the um success of the of the draw downs or would they and uh you know uh looking at that compared to the cost of them and seeing which which
things uh presumably we'd start with one maybe there only be one uh in the end right uh to see which one uh would uh we would pursue and then uh we would uh be
looking at you know what are the next steps to do that socializing it uh getting buy in getting uh permitting uh getting funding. Um
>> so who's in charge of the dry down now? Is there a lake >> clean lakes committee is formally in charge of it? Uh functionally the friends of porch pond implements it. Um
uh actually the um uh and for the last 12 years friends of work pond has physically done the work. >> Uh the mill was sold a year and a half ago and uh this year the new owners uh
asked that their personnel are physically doing the work. So whenever we have something needs to be done, we contact them. We say here's what we need to do can and we arrange we meet together and we say here here here and they go
um >> but friends pond and clean lace committee are doing the draw downs. >> So so the report would be like like scientisty kind of people that would
tell you three option. Are they going to give you advice or >> So uh the uh the group that um uh we've been working with uh are environmental engineering. It's an environmental engineering firm. Uh so they um have
these uh hydraologic and hydraulics modeling programs available. But that's a kind of a corner of what they do. uh they work generally in uh environmental engineering and uh lake management that
kind of thing. So they yes they would be working with us to assess which of these things would be uh most uh uh useful. Yeah. So and that was the you know the
the last phase was you know we would meet together with them before the report is is finalized to you know discuss it and agree on kind of what what we think what all
agree together on what makes sense to have in the report and and recommendations. We have another question. Um, >> you mentioned permitting. Is is is it the state only that does issues the
permit or do the towns? So >> um so all of these things fall under the wetland protection act and uh the it's a which is a federal uh act and the state has their own laws
related to it and the state uh asks the town conservation commissions to be the ones to uh enforce it to regulated to manage projects in the town that uh are affected by the wetlands
protection act. So uh the cons the permits are actually issued by the town conservation commissions uh when uh a project is proposed and notice of intent is provided to both the conservation
commission and the mass department of environmental protection. Um, the DP provides a a case number for the for the project and provides their input to the conservation commission on anything that
they think, you know, they should be taking into account. Um, in some cases, if there's uh endangered species involved, then there's another um state agency that needs to get involved and
needs to provide their uh their feedback, their input also. Um so um it's uh there the town conservation commissions are issuing the permits but
uh they're getting advice and review and uh agreement from the mass D uh and they're implementing mass D uh laws and
towns have they need to kind of create their own layer on top of the wetlands protection act which is can be like more stringent not less stringent and so um the town is um managing that and for
orange pond we have to get two sets of permits for everything we do one from the little conservation commission and one from Westford Conservation Commission. Great. Thanks. Yeah. Vocabulary you mentioned stop log at the
solo. What's a stop log? >> That's the term they use. Um it's a it's a a a board. Uh so so the the auxiliary control structure has
like a has a frame uh an opening with straight vertical sides that have slots in in each side. And there are uh aluminum uh boards uh one foot high, 2
in thick um that and 4t wide uh that slide down into these slots >> uh and there are eight of them. And uh when they're all in there, uh nothing much flows through that. And then we
take them out one at a time from the top to uh lower the um uh threshold for the water to to go through. So they're aluminum uh basically aluminum planks. >> Okay.
>> Yeah. >> I think you know 200 years ago they had actual logs that they were putting on top of the dams >> and to stop the water. So but they're not logs anymore.
Um what's um what's the likelihood that the money spent now will become um the first step in the physical construction. But a flip way of answer
the reverse way of answering that is would be is um are you confident that you won't be back for more design funding? Oh, I mean uh this would be the first step to see what of these what if any of
these options is effective, right? Um if if they are effective then uh we and and we were pursuing one of these projects uh you
would have uh planning and then you'd have construction. So yeah, those would be two two different phases. um to the extent that we could, I would look to see if we could get state grants for
both of those. Um if if we can't uh get state grants for the planning, then we might come back for u funding for for design work. Um we I don't I don't see us coming back for funding for
construction, although I suppose it's possible. I mean, I think it would be that's the kind of thing that I assume, you know, state grants would be um >> likely to to to cover, but but I don't know, maybe you have more information. I
mean, there's I guess there's a chance that we could come back for for either or both of those. Um, >> so it's definitely it's probably not design money. Mostly it's planning and feasibility so to speak or
>> No, I think it would be um I think it would be uh design that would be I mean this I see this as the the feasibility you know I mean there would
uh this would show us what would be effective right uh whether it's feasible or not would be kind of more of a socialization issue, right? Not something that would cost money, right? Um
it would mainly be if it's feasible, mainly a question of could we get funding for it? So that I think the next funding step would be design work and um then that would uh and I don't know whether
we would need to get uh commitments for construction funding before it would make sense to do the design work, right? Um but I don't know how
practical that is. We have to see something else. >> I think I understand what they're looking for. >> I do also. It's relate. Um, are you using the same application for Westford?
>> Mostly. >> Yeah. I mean it's it's excellent for bro and well done >> and I um barley asked about stop logs. I'm gonna say I enjoyed encountering
hographic curve which I've never heard of before the general concept anyway. So I I I understand but but I do you know with comments you know
to go for you need this to go forward with anything >> right >> and at that process of going forward man you know good luck I mean you talk about socialization you're essentially saying making people aware trying to get their support right >> this could be any number of
organizations or you know um uh governmental things. So anyway, >> yeah, >> you need this to to go forward with that. >> Yeah, it wouldn't be a you know a one-year thing to Right. It's be a
effort. It would be a process. Um but uh you know uh if we if we don't pursue these kinds of things then you know we're going to end up with lakes like Bill Pump.
John, Rob, did you have anything to add? >> Just uh to uh to supplement what Davis already contributed. Uh we appreciate you hearing this. Uh the amount of effort that goes into coordinating between the two towns
>> uh to move forward on anything on on uh is is just a mammoth undertaking. And Dave is right there on the front lines all the time. uh and the appeal to you, the appeal to Westford, the appeal to uh concerned parties, uh of which there are
many uh is something that I just think is a testament to their desire to have things as good as they can get them there. Uh the draw down alone uh is probably the most cost effective uh approach to managing the invasives that
any of us can conceive of. uh we let mother nature take care of of freezing things out and uh uh and and taking care of things. Even with this engineering, even with the potential construction and design of the solution, uh it still
balances out so that we're not constantly appealing to the town or to the water department or to owners that if we only had another $80,000 this year and next year and the year after that. Uh this puts all of that on the back
burner. Uh and and I think it's it's definitely definitely the best thing that they they can do and they have the ability to do it. Uh not always an option uh at every pond, every lake, but uh but here at Forge Pond, it's it's definitely viable. Uh it's being done. It's been done for what over a decade
now. >> Yeah. And uh there I I I see references to it having been done on and off uh as early as um you know early early to mid 20th century but you know on and off uh
and not um not consistently it's been consistently done for the last uh 12 12 years. Yeah. >> So this is all with the approval of added mill owners. >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, uh
>> just one more concern. >> Uh right. Previously, we worked with um uh the owner that, you know, converted it all to apartments and he sold it a couple
years ago and he was comfortable with us doing the work. Uh the new owners would prefer that their people did the work, but they're uh very supportive. they're aware of what the lake means to the
broader community and um so they're uh I mean they know what we're doing here and why and that's fine once we start talking about actual construction they'll probably pay more attention I suppose
>> a couple things about the mill um first of all I think it's fascinating um to have that, you know, because at the time when the mill was functioning, the pond, the landscape was a working
landscape. I mean, there was nothing arbitrary about it. It was and that that's really interesting to still have that piece. And then the other thing is I thought your last presentation when you were talking about lifting the stopw I would pay money
to be able to do that. You could do a fundraiser and get, you know, teenage boys, you know, to come and and you could raise some money doing that because that's every teenage young man, maybe women's dream is to watch the
water gushing, you know, through. So, >> we may not want to publicize so much that these possibilities are there. >> Well, oh, I see what you mean. Yeah. >> Actually, uh, when we take them out in
the fall, they are pretty stuck. >> How bad? >> Uh, they don't, you know, we have these long poles we reach in and pull them up with, and we tug and pull on those. We have to use leverage uh to >> That's why you need paying um hands
better than than the duck braces, right? >> All right. >> I would like to move that we approve the application for funding for the uh assessment of options to improve the effectiveness of forge pond
products. >> Second and second. All in favor? I opposed. All right. >> Thank you very much for us. You can let Westford know that we are approving it. We're recommending it to town meeting
and >> yeah, their schedule is uh that applications are due uh second week of January and then they have interviews through the middle of February
>> and then they put their heads together and see what they want to do. >> Yeah. Do a little differently than we do. Do you know when your town meeting is? Is it before? >> I don't know exactly. It's it's they're they're always around the same time. >> Yeah. >> So,
>> yeah. Thank you very much once again for all your work. >> This is >> um um I just had budget discussion if necessary. I haven't heard anything new. I did hear rumblings that the software
is still trying to get us um some free cash to try to get our 1%. Even though the there's a pretty big gap in budget right now, I guess um but they're hoping to still be able to fund it, but there's a long way between the town meeting, but I'll I'll keep my ear to the ground for
that one. Um Rob, did you have you missed our public input? Did you have anything other than >> meeting? Yeah. So just just briefly and I apologize if John stated this to you. I know over the
last year or so clean lakes has discussed um funding challenges etc. But a positive thing if you haven't heard is that the park and recreation uh just went forward and approved for the first time camp t that is their big
summer program over a half million dollars of revenues and they just agreed to do a a 1% um contribution in the same way that one year ago or for this fiscal year they took on a 1% with regard to the beach
membership fees. So the dam is starting to break so to speak and it's great to have big users coming to the table and just want to share that with you because I think in the past you have you know commented in discussion with regarding
diversification diversification of revenue sources and just want to share that with you. I think it's a positive step. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Yeah. It sounds like Queen Lakes is still on the docket for a line item. I mean, again, a lot could happen between
now and and May, especially with this 2 million gap, but um I I talked to this boy member not too long ago, said it was still in the process, so hopefully that goes through. >> Help you help you very much. >> Any project? I haven't heard about much
going on about projects um parking rack or clean bikes. So, I'm not really sure what we'll see. I mean, we had such a flood of stuff last year, but um we the historical commissioner probably have a small project and that
is to write a historical preservation restriction for the tut regardless of what happens to it. I think it should have a historical preservation restriction. >> And I think with the cemetery, we're going to try to if the fannins are still available, get another round of gravestone in while they're still
active. And then uh what is the status of the historic documentation of the orchard? >> That was already proved last. >> I know it's already the status. Oh,
>> so we have we developed macros forms for all three buildings. Um I think there's one form that still needs to be submitted, but we finalized it. So now there's three all three buildings are covered in or will be shortly. Um we
have preservation restrictions written for all three buildings. Um but we run into the same issue that I've brought up with some other things and that is the town cannot hold a
preservation restriction on itself. The historical commission cannot hold a preservation restriction if the town select board is managing owning the orchard. We would have to either hire a nonprofit
to to hold that restrict. It's considered like a conflict of interest. One town will another town. We'd have to hire a nonprofit, which we don't want to do because it costs like $50,000 per historic preservation. We went through this with um Robinson Road.
So instead, what we've what we're pursuing is a memorandum of agreement like a memorandum of understanding. Um we've written it up. Uh it would be between the historical commission and the select board. I haven't approached the select board yet because we're just
finishing up the language. I would run it by town council and if the select board agrees, we would have a memor memorandum of understanding that the historical commission would um review
any changes to the buildings. And the reason I thought that was necessary is because we're talking long term here. If the town owns this for 20 years, we want to make sure that nothing major is changed on the buildings. That's historic.
>> I missed the open house or the nursery that's there. Um, did anyone go to it? I've seen it, but um, yeah, Rob, what did you think? >> Very impressive. Yeah, >> everybody that was I'd say when I was there there were approximately 40 to 50
people so well attended and everybody was very very smiling faces really great expression of goodwill for Bransfield and seemingly quite impressed with regard to his initial months of
activity. >> Is he going to do retail again? >> Is he going to do retail there? I mean go and buy the >> I'm I'm far from an expert on this but that's my understanding and in fact he needs to do a certain he has to it's a very minimal sort of direct sale to the
to get to keep the um APR >> um valid uh at the select board meeting recently I think Matthew Nordhouse gave an update that they'd received a letter um from the state in which the tone of
the letter made Matthew realize that the state my words not Matthews he said it better u but this it seemed that the state was more serious than the select board had understood with regard to the
non-compliance that the orchard had fallen into and received notice on. So seemingly uh they've selects gone forward with a monitoring plan on the orchard and so
right now I think everybody feels like the select boards threaded the needle on behalf of Littleton residents with regard to bringing Bransfield binding him and feeling very good. Having said that if you roll it back 15 20 years
we're probably saying something similar. So it needs diligence and execution but it seems to be good first steps. >> Great. >> Okay. Um future meetings the next meeting would be January 21st which could be the
third third Wednesday. They're all my way. Does anyone have any any final I guess I want to say that the housing trust will be back looking for its
rental assistance at some point. >> Yeah, >> I think I mean we haven't discussed it. >> We will be here. And in terms of the planning board, we opened hearings for the first phase of 550 King and everyone here should be
interested in that. They're very excited about going forward with quite a bit of retail, some apartments, but I pointed out because that will be a big boost to our tax base, which may make all of this easier in the
future. So, who knows? But that's the dream. >> When do they expect that things would start? >> They they keep on talking about first quarter, you know. Anyway, so we're going through the site plan review of the f first phase which is primarily
retail which is really interesting because they were mainly interested in apartments >> and they found apparently by marketing it around the country a huge interest among national
retailers to locating in our little town. >> When you say national retailers, you mean the chain stores? you know, like let's use an example of Talets or something. >> Yeah. Not big box stores, but you know, smaller stores.
>> That's interesting. What's that >> from the dead? >> That's interesting because a lot of people were thinking, gee, they probably remain empty these. >> Who's going to go? No, no, they're not building. They they they're not telling us, but they're not building they're
building it for specific >> ah >> um I mean that's your understanding. You know they have these organizations buildings. >> They have I think they're they're talking to specific restaurants and a couple of specific probably Talitz or somebody like that. There's a there's a
couple of roughly 10,000 square foot restaurants. Um, and then there's some cocoa 5,000 square foot spaces and a whole bunch of one and two 30,000 spa foot spaces.
So, they're looking at a variety of things, but they um I guess they feel like they need anchors of some kind, but they're not even sure. Anyway, it's that scale development will
be a shock to the system, but it could boost, you know, >> the finances of the town. >> Is is that a 10,000 ft restaurant is that bigger than Tavern in the square? Smaller do
>> I don't know. because I don't have quite I don't have a >> Yeah, they're talking about some specific restaurant two stories, you know, open air this that they have beautiful renderings if you go to the website. So anyway,
>> Carol, um, a possible agenda item would be to hear from Bartlett reminded me this um, to hear from the housing trust on how the years spent. >> Yes, we do need we want to do that
report calendar year report. >> Yes, we are supposed to have that. We learned that at our >> and does that apply to other >> conservation, but I don't believe they've spent anything. I'll double check with Tim Pierce Cinema and the agent, but I don't think they spent
anything from their their money's >> I keep on thinking of it as a slush fund, but that's not an appropriate >> No, yeah. >> Don't say that. It's still there except for >> Yes.
>> All right. If nothing else, >> I move that we uh conclude our meeting. >> Second. >> All in favor of zooming four. All right. Thank you.