Awesome. All right. I'd like to go ahead and officially open Town of Littleton Conservation Commission. It's May 19th, 2026, and we are um using Zoom tonight. So, we've got a full agenda. So, we're
going to go ahead and get started. What I'd like to do is to approve the minutes from May 12th, 2026. I know there there were quite a few there and I didn't know if anyone had any uh omissions or corrections to those.
>> I agree. >> Okay. Um if that's the case, can we have someone make a formal motion to approve, please? I'll make a motion that the commission approve the meeting minutes from May 12th, 2026 as printed.
>> Second. >> Oh, wait, wait, wait, wait. Oh, yeah. No, that's fine. Sorry, I was looking at something else. Yep. Um, no, the date, one of the dates is wrong. So, on the draft copy it says May 13th
and on the agenda it says May 12th. >> Should be the 12th. >> 12th. We can change that. >> Okay. As amended, just make um formally make the change. Okay. Sorry. Go ahead. >> That's right. All right. We'll do we'll
do a roll call vote. All right. Carl, >> I'm not I >> Ed. >> Sarah. >> Sarah. Say word. I >> myself I. It is unanimous. >> Okay, great. Um let's see. We're going to go ahead and start with continued
request for a certificate of compliance 18 pleasant DP204-1024. Um Tim, can you fill us in on that? >> Yep. We got Tyler here um who's the property owner and um Tyler submitted a uh document that I'm going to share here
and it was shared with all you guys as well as a waiver request for the um fence that we talked about at the last meeting. >> Yeah. And can you sh you'll share the fence photos too? >> That was very helpful, Tyler. Thank you. >> So that's this document right here. And you can see so the red line is the
perimeter of of the fence. Um the 50 foot buffer zone is this dash line. So it does go through the the 50 50 and that's why um Tyler submitted a waiver request for this. Um you can see these are the photos um that Tyler provided.
>> So Tyler, you're muted at the moment. Yes, unmuted now. Apologize. >> Great. Okay. Um, so commissioners, this is um the second discussion on this. Uh, I think everyone knows the situation here. Do we
have any comments or questions for Tyler? Who's the current owner now? >> No, I think it's pretty clear. Tyler, I think your your narrative was helpful and also the the photos were helpful. >> Absolutely. Happy I could provide some
insight. >> Okay. Tim, do you have any questions on the waiver that was submitted? >> Uh, I do not. >> Okay. And it seems consistent with a previous filing um where offense was allowed
within the 50 for preventing children from getting into the um >> right >> the body accidentally. >> Okay. Tyler, going forward, please note that if you need to do anything else to just come to the um commission first. >> Absolutely. I now have the file that
shows the wetland um borders and the 50oot buffer. So absolutely any uh further work will definitely be uh brought to the board before uh commencing. >> Okay. Um commissioners, what would you like to do? >> Do we have to vote?
>> Yep. They're looking for a certificate of We never uh issued the certific certificate of compliance with this and it would need a minor modification. So then I'm assuming we need a motion to do a minor modification on the original
plan to allow for the fence as a result. >> Is that is that right? >> Correct. Yep. >> With associated waiver. >> Yep. >> With associated w. Yes.
>> Second that. >> All right. Um we'll do a roll call vote. Carl >> uh come out right I >> Ed >> Ed folks I >> Sarah Sarah Seawward I and myself I it's unanimous good luck Tyler
>> thank you very much I appreciate all your guys' help >> okay thank you next is a request for a minor modification 64 Beaverbrook Road um lot one which is D20 204-1018
and lot three which is D20 204-1019. Um you'll see that in your packet that was submitted there's um information from Dillis and Roy pertaining to this. Who's here to speak to this? >> I thought Sean Keenan was going to be
here to speak to this. I don't see him right now. I think he plans on being here. Um not sure if you want to table that discussion and see if he shows up later or if you want to take that on now. Let's let's
hold and then we'll go we'll move on to the draft treatment plan approval for forge pod uh the invasive species control DP 204-0872 and that also was in your packet as well. >> Yep. So, if you guys can remember back
in December, Dave Bark came in front of us um requesting approval as a condition in their order um that before they they do the method of of treatment, they get approval from the commission yearly. Um
and so the commission said at that point, come back to us when you have uh a plan that was approved by the awarded uh contractor for the work. Since then, um, we're in the middle of finalizing or 90% there anou between us and and
Westford to basically tie into their existing contract that they have with Solitude. It's a multi-year herbicide treatment um contract. Um, and so that's what Dave's going to be going over. I just promoted him over now. >> Hi.
>> Hi, Dave. Um yeah, we have uh Westford has a contract for several years and there's anou between the towns which has been approved by the select
boards pending uh town council approvals on both towns. Littleton town council has approved it. We're waiting for just waiting for the Westford town council to approve it also. Um
you had asked me to come back with a uh preliminary plan for the treatment. Um and what we're for sure planning to do is um use Priscilore to treat uh
Eurasian mil foil and variable mil foil in the areas where it is present. Uh I think we'll use a combination of last year's surveys and this year's surveys to determine where it will be uh applied.
Um the draw down for the winter was quite successful. So, uh, the plants are just barely starting to come up now and, uh, we would need to do the this year's
survey, um, by the end of the month, um, because we want to do the, uh, treatment in the first half of June and, uh, they generally would want to do it a couple weeks ahead of the treatment. And so the um
survey this uh this month will probably be a smaller area than is actually uh growing or that would be coming up um because of the success of the draw down. So we may uh
um look at the in each area kind of the the the largest extent of either of the two surveys as a uh to decide where to where to apply the um herbicide.
Um Priscilla is a systemic herbicide so it should last for several years. Um the other main um invasive plant we species we have is fan wart. Uh we have 60 acres of
Eurasian mil foil, 24 acres of variable mil foil and about 14 acres of fan wart. Um, we are thinking of possibly doing a treatment with a contact treatment of
the fan wart with flammy oxen. Um, we're waiting to uh hear back from Solitude on the extent to which we might have to uh delay that treatment um
because it might uh have a interference with Pilicore and um we're also waiting to um it uh we might not have the funding to do the second treatment. Um theou limited
Littleton's contribution to $40,000 which the it may be that the it look it looks like the Priscilla treatment will be about $80,000. So that'd be $40,000 for Littleton. So uh we might have to
just stop there, but we're not sure yet. And um so we are presenting both of them to you to see if you had any issues. Okay, commissioners questions. So, we've got kind of two motions here. One to
approve as originally um Dave had presented, but also what we're calling under consideration as well. So, any any questions on any of this? Um I thought the attach from TRC the U
maps were helpful. Thank you. >> Yeah. Yeah. Thanks. Yeah. Okay. Um Tim, does all this seem fairly in line? >> Yeah, both are EPA approved. >> Okay. Any other commissioners have
questions on this? >> No. >> Okay. So, Tim, what would you like from us at this point? >> Just a vote for approval for treatments for this year. >> Okay. We have someone that would like to
make a motion for approval. I'll make a motion that the commission approve the treatment plan for Lake Madawanaki Forge Pond for invasive species control for the upcoming season. >> Second. >> Okay, thank you. >> All right, roll call vote. Ed
>> Ed Bullseye. >> Sarah >> Sarah Seawward I >> Carl >> Carl Malberg I. >> And myself I. It's unanimous. Thank you Dave. >> Thank you Dave. >> Okay. Thanks a lot. >> Okay. Next, a vote on a commissioner signature authorization for department
invoices. Tim? >> Yeah. So, this is just an annual um vote. Right now, we have Andrew and Kyle authorized to sign off on on our department invoices. Um so, if you guys wanted to change that up or or run it back with the same commissioners, just
need a uh a vote on that. >> I would stick with the same commissioners. They're doing a great job. >> Oh, thank you, Carl. Kyle thanks you in absence. >> Okay. I would make a motion that we keep the signatures the same with Andrew and
Kyle. Please >> second. >> All right. Roll call vote. Ed. >> Edi. >> Sarah. >> Sarah Seawward. I >> Carl >> Carl Melberg I. >> And myself I. It's unanimous. Thank you for the vote of confidence everyone.
Excellent for your Thank you for your service. Okay, we're gonna hold off on discussions at this point at 7:45. I'd like to entertain the public hearing and I see that Matt's with us. Um, notice of intent zero zero Taylor Street D. Oh, does not have a D. Scratch that. Um,
Habitat enhancement. >> Okay, I'm promoting over Matt and Scott right now. Um, and if there's anybody else I should be promoting over, please let me know. >> Hello. >> Good evening, Scott.
>> How are you? >> Good. How you doing? >> Introduce yourself. That would be great. Um, Matt's not moving over for some reason. >> Yeah, he said he might be a little bit late, but it looks like he's here. So, I'm Scott Myers from Oxbow Associates
>> representing this project. We filed the notice of intent on behalf of Littleton Electric and Water Department with Matt Silverman. >> Hey everyone. Not sure if you can hear me, but I'm here. >> We can. Thank you. >> Thank you. Do you want to say anything, Matt, or do
you want me to just describe the project for the commission? >> Uh, yeah, if you don't mind, Scott. >> All right, that's fine. Can I uh share my screen or do you have anything you want to can share, Tim? Or >> if you want to share, Scott, that would be great.
>> All right, do that. And then stuff going on. Oh, there it is. Okay, we'll start out with this. This is the cover from the notice of intent. And the purpose of this project is two has
two components. One is uh to build a small pond down here in this area. And the other is to build a dry sandy patch up here for both for the rare species conservation mitigation required for the
uh well project the Trumbull well project. So I don't want to talk too much about the details of the species just cuz it's all public record. But we have a pond and an open clear area here. So I'll show you some more details of
that. Uh let's see. So this is the pool that we would like to propose. Um the access would be from down this temporary construction access that was used uh for some of this other construction area
here. So, we come down here, go out this way, and then dig down about 10 ft in this area here, which was selected to try to keep it uh farther away from the
wetland over here. So, it's just on the outside of the buffer zone, but because it's fairly far away, we have to dig down, like I said, about 10 ft to get to what we think is going to be where the groundwater is. And then we're proposing to take then we've already done some
test pits out there. So it's very sandy soil and we'd like to just relocate that sand to this other sandy habitat that we created for another project a few years ago. So these patches here where it's a little bit low, we could use some more sand and we don't have to truck it all
the way out of there. And let's see. The next part about that pond is that Well, wait. Let me show you this one first. No. Uh yeah, this so the design of this is to have it so it has a deep
area here that will hopefully hold water maybe all year long but if not most of the year and then a slightly shallower shelf here that would be like a not quite as deep but would hold water most of the year and then ideally we'd have
the water up at this level during uh the spring so it'll be pretty deep and this could be used for all sorts of uh species, amphibians and reptiles, um as like a seasonal pond uh that can
be functional for a lot of the vernal pool species that we uh know about in in around town. And then the planting plan takes advantage of that bathimemetry or the underwater topography. So we'd have
uh you know deeper area here that we'd have some emergent plants in and then more uh emergent plants uh planted in this whole area here both woody and uh herbaceous and then uh you know almost
upland species in zone three up along the very edge of it. Uh so it would be stable, it' be native plants, it'd be diverse and uh we think it'd be a really uh complimentary habitat feature in this area.
Uh and then let's see where's the other one? No. Aha, there. Here we go. So this is the other area to the north. This is near where the proposed where the well is
being constructed right here. And you I know some of the commission went out there on a sitewalk a little while ago to review this area. It's pretty densely forested right now. It's next to the wetland, but it would be
very complimentary to this uh nice wet expansive wetland habitat here uh to have this sandy area after we remove the trees, remove the top soil and then keep it exposed uh sandy exposed to the sun.
uh this would be dry and sandy and a much needed uh Zurich type of habitat in this area away from any traffic and any dangers associated with you know development nearby here.
So those are the uh two components of the proposal that we have before you. As Sarah explained, we actually don't have the D file number yet, but hopefully we'll get that soon. and I'm here to answer any questions.
>> Matt, do you have anything to add to that before we entertain questions? >> No, I would just say um we're happy to do another sidewalk with the commission if they'd like to see the specific areas again uh with the changing of the seasons.
And then I don't know, Scott, if it's worth mentioning just when we'd potentially be looking to do the work because I know um we have some state agencies involved as well. >> Yeah. So, this would probably not be
until the fall or even the winter um at this point just because we're coming up on some the active season of some of the rare species out there and we want to not do the work during that active season.
>> Scott, quick question on the sand that's going to be moved over. Does that have to be screened or is all that just moved right over? It should be. No, we're not planning on screening it. It just be put in a truck and or a bucket and move moved over by machine.
>> Okay. Thank you. Commissioners, questions or anybody have questions? >> Sarah, was your question in regard to uh the second site where the >> Yeah. Um, Scott, can you show where that
sand is going to get located on on your map? >> It's the one up top. >> Let's see. Okay, so >> this one that's for the pond. That's the only one where we're Yeah. Got the this
the other one, the second site already has existing sand. You're just removing vegetation. Correct. >> Yeah, that's right. Removing the vegetation and whatever top soil is there. Yeah. Yeah. We're gonna expose the sand. >> How how close are these two sites?
>> Uh, well, on this image Yeah. I mean, it got to be not not too far. Like maybe 2,000 ft, 3,000 ft away. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yep. And and I will
say I point out this dark spot right here is is a a quasi natural pond. It may have been created during the gravel mining operation for decades back there, but >> it's a it's a good habitat feature
that's used quite a bit and we're we're we're looking to add another one like that. >> You know, you have this pond here, but that's really a detention basin. So that gets a lot of >> right >> input. But this this this these are clean. >> So two
it's I mean it seems like a reasonable distance still it's still a a hall for these but it's I mean it seems it seems like it's it seems reasonable to me. >> Okay. >> I mean kind of at the furthest extent
right these guys. >> Yeah. Well, >> without getting into the details of the species, but >> I think it'll be they the little ponds >> and the sandy areas go together nice. >> Yeah. Yeah. I I I I agree.
>> Yep. >> Yep. I agree. Thank you. >> So, when you're doing the work, you said they were endangered species. You're going to wait till almost the winter because of that. How are we protecting them when you I mean in theory when
you're going to do it, haven't they already beded in or they might have already started to bed in for the winter, >> right? Well, not in not in the areas where we'll be working. The two areas we'll be working are both upland areas
and the the species doesn't use uplands in the winter. >> Okay. So, your transportation in won't have any effect on anyone then? >> No. Okay, thanks >> commissioners. Any other questions?
>> So, I think um Scott and Matt because we don't have the D, it sounds like the commission is in support. Um, and Tim, I guess with their permission, we would once you have the D number, just let us know and we'll put it on as
a administrative discussion unless something changes. >> Okay. >> To the plan or to something else. >> Yeah. >> Does that make sense, Tim, or no? >> I'm not sure that I follow it.
So, well, because they don't have the D number, we don't just keep adding it on to all the next uh meetings that we'll wait to hear from them when they get their D to see when we will put them back on the agenda. >> Yeah, we move them down to the like the
bottom of the um agenda where it says like the the continued. >> Yep. Um I didn't see a waiver in the um notice of intent. I'm not sure if I missed it. Um if it if it's not in there um can you guys submit one uh by the
next meeting? >> A waiver request? >> Yeah, for the um I guess for both the work for the uh >> the habitat improvement up there and then also for the access um >> okay >> by the other site.
>> Yes. Yes. And I'll double check that. Um and if you didn't get it to you, I'll get you get you one right away. >> Perfect. Okay. So, with your permission, we're going to go ahead and continue this for a future date.
>> Permission granted. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Have a nice evening. >> Thank you very much. >> Appreciate it. >> Okay. We're going to jump back to discussion items. Um discussion. Lakeshore Drive parcel U12-14-0.
>> Yep. So, I threw this on the agenda um just to discuss, you know, it it this matter still hasn't been discussed in a joint meeting um with us and or with you guys and um select board um I think Chase had been talking with Karen and they wanted to wait until town meeting
was over with um to have that joint meeting. But for the time being, I think it it would be beneficial if we um made the expectations clear. What are we expecting with that parcel right now? Um, in terms of docks, are we
are people allowed to to reinstall their docks? Um, if they took them out at the end of last year, um, is that area that has been historically mowed and maintained by those of Butters are are we okay with that being maintained for the time being until we come up with a a
definitive policy for that parcel? >> Commissioners, what are your thoughts? I don't say until something to until we've made decisions. Stay there with the status quo. >> Yeah, we we we haven't we haven't made a
decision yet. I I I agree. And the only thing we can do at this point is just stay status quo. But we do need to we do need to uh either put a timeline on a decision or
get it on the agenda again. >> Very helpful. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, I guess questions you're going to let people mow as well in those areas. >> So, I wouldn't say that the commission is allowing it, right? We're not saying
we're encouraging you to do it, but we're also saying that we're not going to prevent you from doing that for now. If that makes any sense. >> The better way to put it. Yeah. >> So, we're not saying don't do it necessarily, but we're not encouraging you to do it.
>> Okay. All right. So, Tim, I guess what we'd do is is ask and circle back around. It's hard cuz we're um without three commissioners at the moment for this hearing to go ahead and reach out to the select board to see when the next
opportunity is for meetings. >> Sure. >> Okay. >> Um just so you know, um I just saw that Sean Keenan is here. If you want to take up that discussion item that we we tabled before the next one as well. We have a couple minutes before the next one can open. Okay.
You want to go ahead and do that? >> Sure. Okay. So, that is the request for minor modification 64 Beaverbrook Road, lots one and three. And I'm promoting Sean over right now.
Um where we left off with this um was that we uh the commission requested that a document be submitted to show how the proposed um change in in covert structure meets the Massachusetts storm
water standards. Um and so that was provided in your meeting packets. Um, and I have that here ready to pull up if you if anybody has any questions or if you'd like me to share. >> Did you promote Sean over?
>> I did. Y >> Can you hear me? >> Yep. Yep. We can hear you. >> Oh, how you doing? Sorry I'm late. I I had a hard time getting on. >> That's okay. Sean, if you want to introduce yourself again and just kind of go over where we've been from the
last hearing. >> Uh, I'm Sean Keenan. I own the two lots that were separated for Beaverbrook Road and I'm in the process of putting the cover together to get across the stream that comes from the condos onto the property behind uh house number 64, the
existing house. Um, the original plans had a box cover which had a full solid bottom and then a removable top and you'd have to excavate it pretty pretty deep to put that in and then fill it back in with soils, you know, that match
what what we're taking out. And there's alternatives now that the cost is no difference, but the impact on the environment is way less. Um, so I I'm proposing to do a three-sided box cover, which has pre-cast footings that we
would literally set in on both sides of the stream and then drop a U-shaped box over the top of it, >> I think. Um, and that also goes back to why we're considering this as a modification in that the net result is
actually more in favor of the site as well. So, commissioners, if you kind of go through some of the information that was submitted by Dillis and Roy, that will support that as we discussed in the previous meeting as well. Commissioners have um any questions for
Mr. Keenan? >> No, I'm good. >> Sarah, one thing that I do want to note is at the last meeting the commission um was hesitant to approve without seeing a stamp plan from the engineer. Uh, I spoke with with Sean um and he kind of
wanted to see that the commission felt favorably about this before he spent the money to to get that um uh engineered plan stamped. Um, and so if you guys want to make a motion, if you're, you know, feeling good about this, if you
want to make a motion to, um, approve the mon modification contingent on a stamp plan being provided to Lauren and I, um, that could work. >> So, my Tim, my only reservation would be that for the actual public hearing for
this project, I did have to recuse myself because I'd missed two meetings, so I didn't vote on the actual order of conditions. So, I probably shouldn't vote on um this change even though it is kind of minor. Um but then if I recuse myself, we no longer have quorum to
vote. >> Yeah. >> Uh so, >> and that's that's understandable. We appreciate your um transparency with that. So, Sean, you're hearing this kind of live. So it seems as though it seems
as though you have the general um support of the commission and it would be, you know, requested that you have that plan done. Um unfortunately we don't have enough to vote on it tonight, but you do, it sounds like you do have
the support of it. We meet again in two weeks. >> Okay, great. I appreciate that. It's going to take three to five weeks just to get that engineering done from Lamar. So, it's not something I could have just popped in for this meeting, but I just wanted to before I spend the $3,000 to have them design it. I just wanted to
kind of hear from you guys that I'm going down the right path here. >> Okay. >> Appreciate it. Thank you. >> Thank you. Have a nice evening. >> You, too. >> Okay. It's now 8:03. We're going to go ahead and open up the public hearing. Notice of intent, 359 King Street. D.
No, no D number. Okay. Site redevelopment. who would like to speak to that? >> Uh, good evening. Mark Arnold with Goddard Consulting here on behalf of the applicant, Dwight Long. Um, I believe there should be others in
>> um the wings. Um, one would be um >> Reagan. >> Reagan. Yes. Um, and then Dwight um Wong. Um, I don't believe Shawn Malone is joining us tonight. And then um
and I'm not sure if Joe >> I don't see Joe. So you have >> Joe. Yeah. >> I don't believe Joe is joining. >> Okay. Forward. But yeah, if if Reagan and I are here, that's the the presentation team. >> Okay. And Dwight should be here as well.
>> Yeah, I am here. >> Yeah, that'd be great. >> Excellent. >> Okay. >> Thank you so much. So, this is Mark Garn with Goddard Consulting. Here with me is is Reagan, our landscape architect, along with Dwight Long, the applicant. This is for DP 2041035.
The DP number was issued this afternoon and I will be discussing those comments as part of my presentation. Um, so just to give a quick background here of the project, um, I'm going to share my
screen. Oh, looks like I have a settings issue. My apologies. Um so this project um um has has some history with the commission um in terms of the uh an
enforcement matter that occurred last year. So just to bring the commission back to the background of the site had um a field in the back with mature red maple trees that were in the buffer zone to boarding Virginia wetland. There was an enforcement matter issued by the ad
commission. Um we issued a restoration plan. There was further discussion and we also told the commission we were working on a notice of intent and wanted to fold that restoration plan into that. So the intent of this notice of intent is to rectify that enforcement matter in in terms of creating a a firm plan approved by the commission with an order
of conditions that actually requires all the restoration work to be completed and appropriate to address that enforcement matter but also allow for other activities to be approved by this commission. the um property as a whole. I think uh
can you now see the screen? >> Great. So, uh is going to be called Bluebird Farm. Um it's also going before the planning board. Um just a quick reminder aerial wise, we have a wetland system that comes through the middle here. There's a wetland system that traces along the side here. We have an isolated wetland in the middle of the
field. And then you can see here the field and um this this is you can kind of see a little bit of the trees um here even though it's not leaf out in this aerial photograph here. And um large scale layout here just from a a survey standpoint here is the u property itself. You've got an existing single
family house up here uh barn back here. Barn here. Gravel driveway. Gravel driveway down to this bridge here. Wetland systems coming off of different um roots here coming down here. There's a little bridge wet down here. wetland here um goes into the field here. There's an isolated wetland in here.
You've got your 100 foot and 50 foot buffer zones, red and then blue. This isolated wetland was looked at um by the conservation agent with um Andrew from our uh team who did the delineation to determine if that was still actually isolated or if it was BBW and it was
reviewed in the field to be determined to be isolated vegetated wetlands. Um uh in terms of um so that's the existing conditions. Um again we'll address the prop uh enforcement or as well as as part of Reagan's uh presentation on the landscaping which you'll see is quite
robust in the back of the property to provide uh robust restoration there. The activities proposed on the property. Sorry, let me just get to the right screen here. Here we go. Um is to propose to cons uh to tear down the existing barn that's in the back here.
um construct two um units here, convert the existing barn here into another unit, and also convert the existing front house into um two additional units using the existing gravel driveway. We're creating a roundabout um parking area with additional parking spots,
driveways to these two new units here. Those units will be serviced by a common septic system that is located here. And um we'll also have storm water management with infiltration systems located in the rear of these two units
here, unit 2 and unit one. Uh there is a proposal to um use a PA system to along this back of these units here. And that's to um basically um convert the existing gravel path to kind of a PA system. So that way it's more walkable,
usable, and also less erosive. Um, we have a raised garden bed system here that's allowed for communal gardening in the back and uh maintaining the existing gravel road that comes down here to the back fields. Uh, so this is the actual
limit of work right here that comes down through here, snakes around and comes up through here. So we do have some work inside your 50ft buffer and that is basically work inside this existing gravel pad area behind this barn here. Uh we do have a small conversion of
gravel to this PA system inside your 50T right here. Everything else is outside the 50 and inside the 100T which is basically this unit here, the back deck patio and then a little bit of this deck patio here and this infiltration system
there. Uh let's see if I've got just make sure there's nothing else. So this is the utility plan. So you can see this is the system septic system here. they'll be outside um the buffer zones entirely. And that is um the proposed work. And then
this is just a quick graphic of what's happening inside your jurisdictional areas in terms of the work there. I think they they missed this little section right here where the papers, but this is basically what's kind of disturbed in general in terms of your buffer zones here.
Uh so there's no work proposed in the back of the property inside the plan set. was included a a conceptual plan. This plan right here, um this is only for a zoning proof to show how many units could be built if you built a big roadway and everything else and complied
with zoning requirements. Um it's basically to demonstrate whether or not that could be done and then we're allowed to do a cluster development by bringing everything to the front. And this allows us to keep the back of the property um as um exist uh and maintain it the back as an existing agricultural
um field. Those are the proposed activities and then I'm just going to quickly walk through the DP comments that were issued. So the DP asked that the applicant should provide additional information regarding the original rip wrap placed within the stream near
flagging C25, C-27, D1, D7. So that's this area right in here. Um it's it's not really rip wrap per se. It's been stone that's been placed there partly because this um is a town drainage that comes off here. So I think the commission is familiar with that. Um and it comes off fairly fast and erosively.
Um and so the stone uh was probably was placed here historically. U wasn't recent. Uh mainly just to keep kind of erosed there. And although it's hatched like rip wrap, it's very vegetated in there as well. Um so it's not really a rip wrapped section per se. I think that was just um a little bit of um
misunderstanding of understanding the actual physical conditions on the field that DP had, but it was a good comment by them. Um they also asked about the um information about the stream crossing. Um it appears that a portion of the field closest to C13C soon is mapped as
a wetland resource sorry by mass mapper. So again they're just asking about the delineation making sure that it's accurate. Um we did walk I know the isolated vegetated wetland um with the agent previously. Uh basically we've done pretty extensive soils throughout this area to confirm whether or not um
wetlands extend into different areas there. Uh but basically based on our souls uh we believe the delineation is is accurate there. Um and again if the commission wants to discuss that in the field further um that's definitely um up to your discretion. Um the commission uh
there comments also asked about um some storm water comments. They were about standard 4 in terms of volume calculations and also about TSS removal. Um and also told I mentioned that the commission um can consider incorporating the O andM in the storm report as a special condition in the order of
conditions. So um I did speak with our engineer today. Um he basically said that the comments are are pretty routine. He can definitely get those addressed in a revision of the storm water report to address those comments. Um and again we intend to respond to these comments in writing um for the record and also DP so that they are
aware of um what we presented here tonight. So, those that's a high level overview of the proposed project and then I'm going to turn this over to Reagan uh to present the the landscape plans. Um Reagan wasn't sure if you wanted your um these plans or if you had
different plan set >> Yeah, let me share my screen. Just >> Reagan, if we can hold on just one second. What I'd like to do is to entertain questions from a construction standpoint for Mark first before we move into that to see if the commissioners have questions, please.
>> Absolutely. Can you go back, Mark, and just highlight the buildings? Are those residential dwellings? >> Yes, they are. So, you have you have unit one here. A little bit of it cuts the buffer zone here. This is unit two
um in the side here. And then, um this barn is being repurposed as a unit. And then there's two more units up front here. So there's no proposed new barn being built on the property? >> No, there's no new barn. Nope. So we're
we're taking down this barn shed building here and then putting up these two units here. Um again, this is all within that that it's a landscape disturbed ground gravel lawn um area here with some large trees scattered about.
>> Okay. Um you had mentioned just out of curiosity agricultural land. How many acres are going to be in egg versus wetlands? >> Uh open space is going to be 5 acres in the
back. You can see this hatch back here, this crosshatch that is the 5 acres in the back. Um and basically it's everything. It's all it's it's it's it's outside the limit of work and and or a little beyond that basically. So, it's basically the the
most of the 50 foot on this side and then everything on the other side. >> Okay. Thank you. Commissioners questions. >> Did I see a full >> or is that on someone else's property? >> It's on someone else's property. This is
This is This property right here is an existing single family house property next to us, but it's not part of the project. >> All right. pool because the pool goes into the >> Yep. So, this is this is existing conditions right here. Um, so you can see here's the existing shed, barn,
garage barn here, and this is that adjacent single family house. >> So, you're tearing buildings down, but are you also taking down trees and all? >> So, you can see here there's um there's a 12 there's an 18inch elm right here.
Um, but there's um there's nothing else in this area here. This is just basically grass slope. The gravel driveway is right here. Over here um you got some trees down here. These I think are staying. And then there's a tw I think one or two of these trees over here is coming down. Let me just pull up
the grading plan so we can take a look at that. So the trees that are there's a bunch of there's a bunch of trees in the in the uh outer 50 to whatever buffers under here that are being kept. Um, I believe this 20 maple is going to be kept because it's right along the
existing pathway, so that can be preserved. There's trees along here. Um, I I think we'd have to talk with the project team about which one of these are staying. This 18-in maple is going to come down, obviously, and I think some of these might come down because of the pipes.
Um, but there's and this is 18inch elm there. So, it's not a heavily forested area. And again, this is outside the buffer zone. So, I don't in the buffer zone itself, I I don't know if we're actually taking down any trees. I don't think we really are. I think I can check
this 14-inch maple here, but we can definitely um update the plans to clarify which trees are being removed in the buffer zone, but it from my recollections of this property and also this plan, I don't think we actually are taking down trees in the buffer zone. >> And the gravel drive already existed
that you're not adding that, right? >> Correct. So, I'll take you back to the existing conditions plan again. You can see here this gravel driveway comes off the back of this barn. It runs through here. You can see it it goes into your 50 right here and and runs around here. And we're basically maintaining that
basically by we're kind of basically we're defining it with the PA system rather than having it be a gravel path that can kind of like wander widthwise. Um, so you can kind of see here it kind of widens out and narrows down and we'll now have a definitive path actually with the PA system.
>> That that'd be helpful if you can tell us how many trees total within the buffer zone. >> Yep, we can. Yeah, I'll make I'll make a note to make sure that we um cover that um in our responses. Uh, again, I don't think we're taking any down in the buffer zone, but I will doubly check
with the team. Okay, let's go ahead on to landscaping. >> Great. Thank you all. Good evening. Rean Andreola. I'm a landscape architect and senior project manager with lesson Samson. Uh give me one moment. I'm just
going to share my screen. Um did this pop up? Okay. Can everyone see my screen? Yes. >> Okay, great. Um, so actually I just did
want to clarify one thing that Mark said. Um, we will be having some additional plantings in the NOI, but I wanted to remind everyone that we did already go through um, a pretty robust restoration plan that was approved and has since been installed. Um, so just as
a reminder, we had gone through this a couple months ago. Um, so you can see all the plants on this plan um, were approved and installed. it was 129 trees and 43 sh uh shrubs that were proposed um as restoration for the enforcement
order. Um so moving forward into our current plans, we do have these shown on here and just shaded just so you have um the context um relative to the rest of the proposed work. Um but again, these have all been installed. Um, so we do
have um a additional restoration um plantings out here. Um, and actually out in the back of the field, again, those aren't in buffer zone, but just wanted to identify that along the back here, we do have proposed trees. Um, you know, all native
deciduous. And then if we scooch to the next plan here, um, give me one moment. Here we go. Um, so we really have very minimal within um really very few in the
buffer zone. Um, relative to this proposed development, the majority of the trees, as I noted, um, all those native trees in the back of the property are technically outside of the buffer zone. Um, but that's 29 trees and 13 shrubs on the rear. Again, outside of
conservation jurisdiction. And then the rest of the plantings um the majority with the exception of these few little bits here um fall within the buffer zone. The rest is outside and again all um native plantings. Um we have
identified a raised garden um bed here approximately 20 by 40 ft set on existing you know created with on-site salvage stone um to create a stone wall and then a small um fenced in area on
top of that for uh the residents here to be able to utilize as their own um garden um that is outside of the 50ft buffer. Um but really besides that the restoration plan was already approved and installed. So um the additional
plantings within your uh jurisdiction are very minimal um and just related to these small foundation plantings. And again, if we look at the back, I mean, obviously, we will have to access through the um over the stream and through the
buffer zone to get to the back and install these, but again, that would be similar to the method in which the rest of these restoration plantings were installed. um and in with small equipment passing over this existing crossing um similar to you know the way
the applicant and property owner mows you know this field currently and small you know farm equipment is able to go over this in small pickup trucks. So the access would remain the same through here. Um but all of this restoration um additional restoration plantings um or
screening plantings would be outside of the buffer zone approximate to this isolated wetland here. Um but again there is no um buffer zone associated with that. So um >> okay let's go ahead and see um commissioners any questions for this
planting that's proposed so far? No, I'm good with that. Sarah, >> so Mark, historically, what we would do is ask you to put some um stakes out, especially the area that is in the um 50
that you're asking for a waiver. Um what is the basis for the waiver? >> Uh the basis for the waiver um is one, it's an existing disturbed gravel path already. Um so we're basically taking a gravel path and putting pavers in
instead. Um the the uh also it would definitely reduce um erosivity of soils by having a a harder surface there just to to to keep that narrow path um stable. Again this very small area in there 0 to 50 that's existing gravel. Um
so those are the the the two primary reasons um for that. It's I think it's just a a prudent just kind of step to kind of create that that li and it also it also lastly it defines the the disturbance in that location versus allowing it to say gravel which can be
which can change and fluid and people add a little more gravel and it gets a little bigger and the the paver system kind of creates a definitive footprint um that that really can't be changed easily quickly or and can easily be identified on a plan because it's actually a a solid object versus a a fluid object which is the edge of
gravel. So, has there been an option proposed to renaturalize that? >> Um, we would not propose to renaturalize that because we needed to access um around the back. So, I I if if if this I mean it could be left as gravel, but we
would like to extend it cuz it kind of it we we extended it to where um it widens out and that's just and again it just focuses that that um that pathway, keeps it on there until it widens out behind that existing barn. So that way they can they can use it underneath that barn is um make a workshop and stuff
like that for um the farm. So um that's kind of the purpose of that. >> Okay. Commissioners, what would you like to see in order to help facilitate a sitewalk? What would you like to see statewise?
>> If you could go back to Yeah. Go back to the original plan. Thank you. Sure. Okay, commissioners, we got a full night. We got to keep going. >> Definitely stake the uh corners of the houses that are closest to the buffer
zone. >> Okay. over within the buffer zone and the the septic systems. Other commissioners, what would you like? >> Okay. When would we like to when do you think um Mark you'd be able to have it
staked out? Um I would I would I would think we need at least two weeks potentially um as a survey. Um >> so why don't we leave it with your permission as this that when you have it staked um connect with Tim and then
we'll try and see when we can get out for a sitewalk. >> Yeah, that'd be great. And just just to clarify um the corners of building are great. I'm guessing you want the limit of work >> staked. Yes. >> Um and then and I heard a septic. I'm not sure if that's up in this area here.
It's more than 150 ft from the wetlands up in this disturbed area, but >> that's fine. If the septic's not closed, that's fine. >> Yeah. So, we'll definitely get the the buildings, the back deck areas all in one footprint there. Um, and the limit of work.
>> Okay, great. So, it sounds like you're going to be pushed off two meetings because we meet in two weeks and probably won't have that done for then. >> I I think that's appropriate. Um Dwight, just to confirm, I'm not sure where the planning board schedule stands with
this. Um but I think if we continue out two meetings, that would give them time also to start their process and um have meetings and discussion. Sorry, Dwight, you're muted. >> Sorry. Um yes, that sounds like it'll work just fine.
>> Okay. All right. So, June 23rd, please. >> Okay. Thank you. Have a good evening. >> June 23rd. Thank you. >> Thank you. Have a good night. >> Okay. It's 8:26. We're going to go ahead and open the 8:15 public hearing. Notice of intent 16 Pickard Lane, Cobb Pond. No
D number control of um nuisance aquatic vegetation. Tim, you're muted. Sorry about that. I'm promoting over the applicant right now. >> Hi there. Can you guys hear me?
>> Yep. Thank you. If you can introduce yourself, that would be great. >> Sure. Hi, my name is John Burilli. I'm here with my wife, Jennifer. Um, we live at 20 Picker Lane on Cob Pond. Uh, I believe also on tonight is Melissa from
the Cob Pond Association. Um, is it possible for me to share my screen? >> Yes. And I will move Melissa over as well. >> Great. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Great. You guys see that? Okay.
>> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Uh, appreciate you giving us the time to present tonight. Um our discussion is around the excessive lily pad growth at Cop Pond uh and the proposed treatment for this overpopulation.
Um what you're looking at on this picture here is a current Google map of the pond. You can see it barely looks like a pond. The dark areas are the open water and the rest is all lily pads. And so this area around here is open because
we have a an active beaver and that's his lodge. And so there's some opening around there, but the rest of the pond is a mat of lily pads. And so while they control the lily pad population uh is certainly beneficial for the pond and uh
the surrounding ecology um the excessive growth is is detrimental and reduces oxygen levels. Uh prevents sunlight from getting down to vegetation below. uh creates a forest of roots, makes it difficult for fish
and other aquatic life to navigate through and also just prevents a natural movement of water creating a stagnant environment which can lead to fish kills and um excessive mosquito populations. We have been at this um
uh at our current home since 2019 and we've had at least one fish kill actually about 3 years ago. Um and so we are hoping to avoid a large mosquito populations. Obviously we all know the
dangers and the nuisance of transmitting diseases from mosquitoes. Um this water body of water from what I'm told um from people who live in the area for a long time used to be a great bass fishery. Um
but as a fly fishing fly fisherman myself there's no bass in this pond anymore. there's barely any um bluegills uh so very little fish life uh left in the pond. So uh our goal is to prevent the
overpopulation of this lily pads um the you know having kind of hiked the area extensively around this pond the vernal pools uh dry up that in the surrounding area in the summertime. So, it's really important for this water source to stay
healthy and we're hoping that regular treatment um will reduce the lily pad population. So, our goal here is to um stop the aggressive spread. Um this treatment was
used prior to us moving here in 2019. Um Solitude Lake Management had regular treatments. was done by Emily Cobb who was the previous resident at this on Cobb Pond and she took care of these
treatments for years. So this is not a new uh request but really just to resume what has been done prior. Uh and our proposal is uh to use solitude lake management again to do a sonar or fllorodone treatments. Uh these would be
three treatments over the summer to um reduce the uh not not eliminate but reduce the lily pad population. Um and the I guess one of the benefits of the sonar treatment that is slow acting and
so there's not a it reduces the risk of oxygen depletion by a quick die- off. So it takes several weeks for the um photosynthesis to stop and the liies to to fade. Um so that is our quick presentation and our ask is to be able
to resume that treatment. Solitude would do the um state D permitting. Uh our hope is to have that treatment start this summer. >> Doesn't the water department have a well near Cob Pond? >> Pardon me.
>> Doesn't the water department have some >> Yeah. So there was a proposal for that. they was um they were going to use some of the land. Uh but I believe that has been uh >> No, I called them. >> Jennif Jennifer said that she called and
they're no longer pursuing that. Well, >> okay. All right. >> I didn't see it happening anytime in the near future. >> They still they still own land there. Um, I think the
association bylaws gives them access. I don't believe I don't know if they own it or they just have access to it. >> Okay. All right. >> They do have land um just a short distance away, but yeah, absolutely. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Sure. Any other questions I could answer? the um the particular type of lily pad. Do you guys know if it's a native variety or if it's um like a European frog pad or whatever? I I know that's a pretty aggressive one.
>> Yeah, I don't >> I can find out. >> Yeah, I don't know the answer to that actually. >> Yeah. Um that's a good question. Our goal is to not eliminate but just to to reduce them. you know,
>> the habitat. >> Yeah. We'd also like to, and I don't know if this is part of this current ask, but we also would like to include a uh a small uh fountain to airate the area and and part of the pond just to help reduce the growth as well.
>> Commissioner's thoughts on that? I think the aeration would be great. Um, so we're you currently do not have a D number, correct? >> That's correct. Yeah. If we use if we go forward, Solitude said they would get
the the D permit. >> Okay. Okay. So, it's a little bit carp before the horse. Um, we can give you some um some thoughts on support. It sounds as though
we we can go through the commissioners that are here. I would be in support of the treatment. Um we can't without a D number, we can't give you a formal vote. Um but commissioners, what are what are your thoughts on this kind of as we look
at it from a cursory perspective? >> I I I would think that because it's been treated in the past that I don't have any problem with continuing that. >> Okay. Thank you, Andrew. Ed, >> I'd also support the project. Oop,
sorry. >> No, no, go ahead. >> Oh, sorry. I was just gonna say I would also support the project. >> Anything about the DP can only be a good thing, >> right? Okay. So, that's what we can give
you at this moment. Um, you can go back to Solitude and tell them that if they want to go ahead and and file for that. Um it will take a little bit of of time to get that D number and to get that filed, but and then um just come back to
us as that process is going forward. Um you'll want to be in contact with Tim to watch that time frame. So we historically meet every 2 weeks. Um we can start to get you once solitude is filed with D. Let us know so that way we
can start to get you on the agenda. It may get continued until you get it. Um, but once you have that number, you would come back in and present. >> Great. >> Thank you so much. >> Okay. Great. Thank you for joining us. Good luck. >> Thank you. Have a good evening. >> Good night.
>> Good night. >> Okay, it's 8:36. Um, continue discussion enforcement order 6 Spectacle Pond Road. Who's here to speak to that? I'm gonna promote over Mickey right now. So Mickey, if you want to go ahead and
introduce yourself and bring us up to date of where we are, that'd be great. >> Uh my name is Mickey Json, the owner at Six Spectal Pond Road. And uh I don't know if you have the Tim, do you have that plan? The restoration plan. >> I do. Yeah, I can share that. Give me
one second. Mickey, if you can just bring us up to date what's been done since we last met and what you're proposing. >> So, the only thing I've done so I put the sil fence up, I put the waddles up just behind this the uh sand pile that's
currently there now. Half it's gone now. So, we've been working on that since the last meeting. Um, it's probably I'd say 10 to 12 feet away from the existing BM currently. So, we're working we work from the front first and now we'll work
from the back to try to get it away into away from the um outside the 100 foot buffer zone. Um, we didn't do anything else cuz when I met with Tim, he said not to do anything else besides move the sand. So, I currently haven't done anything else, any um waddles.
um around the rest of the property yet, but I'm ready to do that now. But I need to move the existing burn back like we talked about last time and put the wards on the back side of that.
So, if it I'm really here to if I'm ready to move forward to move those those two uh boxes on the right side, the debris pile on the right side so I can move the existing BM back to create
the new BM that's on the um plan here that we're looking at. And I proposing >> clarity when you say to move it back, you may want to define whether you're moving it back towards the wetlands or back to where it was supposed to be.
>> No, it's it's right it's right on the the the verge of going down. >> Yeah. Because some some commissioners may not know the site as as some do. >> Yeah. So the burm existing right now is right along the top of the hill and the hill goes down probably 30 feet. Um, so
there's no way to put the straw wles behind that without the straw waters falling down the hill. So we need to pull that berm that's going to turn into the permanent burm back so we can put the that dotted line there is the is the erosion control the wartles.
So we can put that in and create the new burm and loom and loom the new burm. And I'm actually proposing on the left side where he's got the hand there proposing to bring that BM further down than the on the existing um pro plan and
on the right side just to kind of basically trap the rest of the property so no runoff can get off this property creating a BM around the whole property from 100 foot buffer to 100 foot buffer.
Is that um where the concrete forms are right now? >> The left side is kind of where the new the new proposed is is where the where the forms are. Yes. >> Okay. Just so people can >> um I know we don't have the photos back
up. Commissioners um question down sorry before I forget down the bottom there's a circle at the bottom top there where a little wash off went off went down from previous I don't think it was me but it was there but um we're proposing to rate
that out and just have it grow back to natural natural vegetation Tim on this plan is there like a sequence or anything here like order of go for the site. >> We got construction notes.
>> Okay, Mickey, do you want to go over those with the commission? >> Let's see. Let's pull it up so I can read it. I >> got the uh spinning rainbow cursor of death here. You always read through it or
>> well I think yeah because some of the commissioners haven't seen these notes. >> This is all construction and be shall be removed from the site and disposed in accordance with the federal state law. All stock by material shall be located outside the 100 foot buffer which that's
the pile we're moving. All disturbed areas that are not pavement, roof area, gravel, working area shall be restored within a minimum of 4 inches of loom and seed grades shown on this plan refer to final finished grades.
The earth and berm shall be seated with New England conservation wildlife, that's a b that we're talking about, mixed with uh specified by New England wetland plants or approved equal. No construction materials, structures, material stock piles or any invasive
materials or debris shall be stored on the proposed burm. The construction sequence shall be as follows. Install erosion control and sediment control measures which that I can't do that. That's what I was just talking about. The burm has to be pulled back in order to install the straw walls behind that
existing burm when I bought the property that's been there for I don't know how long. Um then it says excavate to subgrade and cut sections. Bring fill sections to subgrade using excavated soil. Install building foundation underground utilities. Building pad utility
utilities include wells. There's no wells. Town water. Um gas. No gas. Electrical utilities, drainage, and proposed septic system. Place compacted base gravel for the paved areas. Rough grade areas to be loom and seated.
Install pavement. finalized grade loom seed and mulch disturbed areas and then plant trees, shrubs, ground cover as indicated on the plan. So those trees are along Spzco Pond Road that you can actually see it
on this plan I think. Um if you go along Yes. So those green dots there are the proposed trees. That's the last part of the sequence. Seven seven trees supposed to be along
Spectical Pond Road. So >> in the sequence >> septic system >> uh down by Spec Pond on the right side. Keep going to the right of the building right there.
That's that's well well past the 100 foot buffer. >> Okay. But >> so in the sequence it's it's proposing a pullback to do the erosion control before we do any more construction which that's what I'm talking about. We need
to pull back that existing burm a little bit. I'd say at least a foot to foot and a half back in order to install that that dotted line which is all that erosion control straw wles. And that's what I I talked with Mickey
when we went out there after the last meeting and I wanted to really make sure that we're on the same page as as Mickey after reviewing the initial filing. The understanding was that that existing rocky burm area was going to stay and the waddles were going to be at the foot of that in between that existing rocky
burm and the new burm. So, if if you guys are okay with that rocky burn being essentially pulled out and put to grade um with this new one coming in, I just want to make sure that we're all on the same page with that. >> How are you going to do that if you
don't have the erosion controls behind it? Isn't that the existing burm that was there? >> Yeah, just like Tim said, it's just a rocky, >> right? But that's the one that was built >> on on the site originally. Correct.
>> That's been there. Yes. >> Right. So that's the one that was approved. >> I I didn't order prior prior for the site before ownership changed. >> Yep.
>> I guess I'm missing something. I don't know why we're moving that BM. Well, because I'm listening. It shows the the plan shows the erosion control right along that top of that hill. So, that's why I'm proposing to move it. I mean, I don't have to move it. I could build the
burm the new burm right in front of it. >> But the existing burm doesn't have any loom or anything on it. >> If I were to loom that existing burm that's there, there's no way to hold the loom on the backside because it's just going to go down the hill
because it's it's right on the hill. I think you you went out there, Sarah, didn't you? Yeah. Yeah. I'm concerned touching the original. >> I mean, if you want me to leave that original and just >> put the new one right in front of it, I'm I'm fine with that, too.
>> But I'd have to put >> commissioners. I I don't know who's been out on the site or not. Um, >> so I mean would I put the erosion control in front of that existing twoft burm? It's kind of kind of pointless cuz the burm was already like a twoft
burm. >> So the second how what's the dimensions of the second burm going to be? >> The same thing. It's a two foot tall burm. >> I think it I think it was initially proposed and approved as like a just an extra layer of containment.
>> Mhm. >> Yeah. I this site's been been a process and plant for 30 40 years. Um so not I mean that's how it's always been used like that. We're just trying we're trying to improve it by putting a burm there with with loom.
>> Well I I take some regard with that because in your red hatched area if you go onto aerial maps you'll go back 10 20 years that that area has been encroached upon. So,
there's definitely more going on on this site than there was a long time ago. >> Okay. Well, I mean, um, what whoever owned it previously, I think Dan Lang said, um, we haven't done anything more than he has, >> right? So, but now that you're the owner
and >> Yeah. >> Has to clean it up. Okay. >> No, I understand. >> Yep. >> Um, on the back, >> you want me to leave BM? I'm I'm fine with that, too. >> And so, just to be clear, we're going to
move the um metal like the ConX boxes that are out back. >> Yeah, those are on the top right corner there that is. So, that area is going to be What is that ultimately going to look like back there? That's in the resource
area. >> It's just going to be natural gravel after we move that. We don't plan on doing anything with the ground there besides continue that burm. The burm stops where it is now. We're we were we were going to continue over to the to
our property line there >> to go over to Spec Pond Road. >> Yeah. Over to the right there behind the existing loom pile. >> Okay. >> Cuz currently there's no burn back there. So I I guess my question with this
because we're under an enforcement order, I I don't feel comfortable approving the whole plan. I'd rather work on this on sections to make sure because I don't think by planting seven trees that is like for instance the
planting plan I don't think is um adequate for what needs to be done on on the site. I'm interested to hear what the commissioners have to say on this. Well, the plants are along the trees. That's all those are outside the 100 foot buffer.
>> I understand that. But we could ask you to plant in the 100 foot buffer. >> Okay. >> So, commissioners, Andrew, you're muted. Carl, you're muted. What are you planning on building there
ultimately? >> Well, that's already approved though. So, >> contractor base. >> We're Yeah, we're just here for the order. So I I agree with Sarah that we could
ask you to plant within the 100. >> So you're saying half of half of the sand berm is gone. >> Half of the what? of the not the burm, the pile, the sand pile that's there. I haven't been out there. >> Half's gone now. Yes.
>> Okay. And so >> it's not on the it's not against the burm like it was before. It's we pulled that back about 10 to 12 feet so far. >> Okay. When do you think that will be? So that's stockpiling in the resource area. Correct, Tim?
>> Uh currently. Yep. >> Yeah. half half's outside the 100 foot buffer now and half's half's in it. It's kind of it's kind of the pile's kind of in the middle of the 100 foot line right now. >> Okay. So, I think it might be helpful to just for us to just back up one step and
come up with what the order of go is in terms of to give you guidance of what you need to focus on foremost. I think obviously getting in the top right corner the things out of the you know the concrete
stuff that's gone over to get that out and get that cleaned up. Um, obviously continue to remove the sand that's within the resource area. And in that lower left corner, uh, removing
the construction material that's there that's that's in the resource area. >> Okay. >> So, can I just say you guys are fine with this area just being raaked out? the stuff that migrated. >> Yes. Thank you,
>> commissioners. >> Sounds like a plan. Remove the material that's washed down and uh get that uh bottom left corner uh uh settled and we can kind of figure out where to go from there. >> Okay.
Time frame for this. So what what are your thoughts so that we know when to because this is a process we have to keep following the check marks along the way. When do you think you'll be able to report back to the
commission where you are now? >> So what so the to move move the sand pile the the boxes that debris on the right rake out the bottom and move to and move the um the concrete forms. Yep.
>> Um, it's probably going to be a couple weeks. I mean, we were going pretty good on the sand pile, but of course, my loader broke down yesterday, so I get that fixed. >> Okay. So, Tim, what is the date of the when we go out to meetings? What's the
date for that in June? >> Uh, June 23rd. >> Okay. Can we um have a report on June 23rd? And then if you have questions along the way, just connect with Tim. >> Yeah. Yeah, we can plan on that and then I'll I'll just I'll update Tim if
somebody's I don't have that pile move. But do you want us to have a meeting anyways in two weeks? >> Yep. >> Just to see tell you. >> And just bring in pictures that show the sites in question. >> Yep. Okay. >> Updates. Okay. Thank you. >> Do you don't want me do anything with
the the burm the burm yet? Like continue on either side or do you like am I leaving that existing burm? We never really you guys didn't decide. >> I think I' I'd rather have more commissioners come out before we remove that burm. >> Okay. >> I think let's let's continue with what
you're doing. Get the site continually cleaned up, but I'd like to have perhaps another sitewalk to really look at that when you have everything cleared out so they can really see the burm. >> Okay. One question on the bottom left corner. I don't know if you can pull
that picture up a little bit. There's a retainer wall we have to do. That's out. It's part of it's in the at the the bottom of the um >> Yeah, I'm trying to zoom in. My computer is being slow. Sorry.
>> So, >> what's your question? >> Oh, there we go. There's a retainer wall like off the back left corner of the building. You see that? There's a retainer wall that comes off and over then down. You just had your arrow on it. So the
back left corner of the building >> and that was approved. >> Yeah, this is the plan. Yeah. >> Okay. You can't start that until you have your enforcement order complete. >> Okay. I was just asking because I need a bunch of fill in the front there and I was going to use some of the fill from
the back but >> Yep. >> Sorry. Where is that located? >> Right in the background. >> Your cursor. >> You're right. Right on. Hello. >> Yeah, right there. Right. So, if it's without if it's outside the hundred, is it outside the 100 or is that within?
>> No. Part of it, the corner of it is goes right through the 100. >> Oh, I got you. That's this. Okay. I got you. >> Yeah. >> Okay, we've got to carry on. Thank you. >> Sarah, one before we leave this one quick comment. Um Tim, if you can go up.
Um, I just want to make sure when we talk about raking out the wash out, it's clear that we're talking about manually raking that out. There's not going to be heavy equipment involved in that. >> No, no, by ma by hand. Yes. >> Okay. >> Yeah, >> sounds good. That's all I had. Thank you. >> Okay.
>> Just for more clarification on on that, when we say rake out, like just dispersing it or like raking out removing it entirely? >> Well, you're doing it to remove it. So, raking it out to remove it. Okay. I
wasn't sure. >> Yeah. Just being clear. >> Yeah. Maybe not a a great description. Maybe a better way to say that would be to remove the wash out. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thanks for that clarification. Okay. Um
let's see. It's 8:56. We're going to go ahead and do the 8:45. Continued discussion enforcement order eight blood road. Who's here? >> Voting over John right now.
>> John, your name's on twice. Okay. Okay. John, when you're on, if you can just say hello and reintroduce yourself, please. You're um muted, John.
>> Can you hear me now? >> Yeah. >> So, >> John, just talk a little bit so we make sure we don't have that feedback. >> Is it working better now? So, you're lo you're logged on twice. Do
you have um >> you may have your a cell phone or something, too? >> Oh, yeah. Right here. >> Okay. >> Let's give that a whirl. >> Better. >> Yes, 100%. Okay. I think I was on the
the app and the web site right at the same time. >> Yeah. Okay. Um so we had some people had an opportunity to go out the last couple days. Thanks for um accommodating that. What we'd like to do is to kind of go through where we are. Tim, I know that
you had spoken with D. So if you can just go ahead and start with those comments, that would be appreciated. >> Sure. So, what you guys asked at the last meeting was if I can reach back out to D and ask them about the um the no
disturbance time period, right, on the area that was dredged because initially they said it should be the the commission's discretion on what that time period should be. Um and then you guys asked, you know, what is what does the EP think? What would they do? And so I was able to get
in contact with them. Um today I spoke with the circuit writer on the phone. Uh and she said initially when they were um meeting internally to discuss this they were considering recommended that it be a no disturb area forever. Um but what
they ultimately recommended was that the commission implement the a no disturb time period of of at least one year um from the the date of the um the dredging to allow to reaturalize. So that was the update that I had from from D to share.
So the the really the concept is renaturalizing under the water and then Okay. All right. That's that's helpful. Um so John, we had some commissioners go out that aren't with us tonight. Um I
know Michael had gone out as well. I've gone out. So, I think what we originally had spoken for at the last meeting and that's why we wanted to go out was to kind of look at where um feasibly it might be able to put some plantings in.
Um and obviously your it's a tighter lot. So, um with your wife and I, we had kind of looked at both of the left side and the right side as you're facing the water. Um, commissioners, I welcome any
thoughts or comments about um, plantings. It was interesting to go back cuz the water obviously the last time I've been is much higher. So, you can see kind of like that higher um, water line as well.
Commissioner's thoughts on this or direction? I mean, my comment here, Sarah, I wasn't here a couple weeks ago, but I'm very supportive of the planting idea. I think it gets at the core issue in the lake, which is sedimentation issues. So, to
the extent that we can deploy planting to ensure stabilization of banks. What I will say though is, as I often do, I I'll defer to the wisdom of people who know plantings better than I do to determine which ones make sense here. I understand the soil can be a little bit
finicky in this area and I'm I I it's not obvious to me what the right to plant things would be. Um but in general I like the idea of shrubs and ground cover to stabilize soil. >> Right. And we saw I don't know if any of
you were watching earlier tonight with um the firm the Weston and Samson and Rean who we've worked with before in terms of does renaturalizing of of sites so that you can see kind of like examples of plantings and and how they work in
conjunction with one another as well. Um, when I, as I said, when I was out on site, I think the left side and then the right side, there's some opportunity there, especially with that bank that you have, um, to help put some plantings there, which would help stabilize that
that bank for sure. And then on the left side, um, over by where some of the plants were on the property line as well, there's some opportunity there as well. Tim, did you get that email I sent you
with the planting plan? >> Um, let me take a look. Give me a second. John, when did you send it? >> A few hours ago. >> Yeah, we And so that's it's hard because the process is so that way the commissioners can have it to review it
as well. If he does have it, he can show it, but just to know that the rest of us haven't seen it because the goes out days ago. Do you want to >> walk us through what what that was? >> Uh, it's got pictures and dots of kind of where the spaces are and some
different options with with native plants. We went off of um this page Lauren gave us the pollinator page. >> Great. Okay. >> Added a few other ones. I think I believe everything is native on our thing that we had. >> Okay. Post.
>> I just threw it onto a uh a document here. I'll share it. Thank you, Tim. >> Y >> All right. >> So, Lauren had suggested using the area that we had a wildflower garden last year um
>> to replant something a little more sturdy in there. So, we kind of color coded some ideas of stuff to go into that area. Um, sizes and amounts are, you know, can vary. Um, the option two is that lower slope area closer to the
water. Um, that is, if you zoom in a little bit, you can see the property line stake in the upper right corner and the lower left corner. So, we don't have a ton of property available over there. So, I think we only have about one row worth
something. We had a few, you know, three gallon or so high bush blueberry and low bush blueberry staggered. I'm pretty sure you need male and females of those. Um, we could they're just different varieties.
Um, and planting that slope there. And that's kind of what our thoughts are. The far side, we can put something there. I just really shady. I don't know if anything would really take super well there. There are shade tolerant plants. I I think I like I like this area, the
option two, because it could also help with um waves as well to help stabilize that bank. I'm not sure, obviously, this is not my realm of expertise, if if blueberries are appropriate for that because you want something that's really
gonna have kind of like really good robust root growth as well. And that's why I I would always defer to someone who who does that um full-time. I I would agree Sarah in terms of what plants, but what I see in
option two is very much what I envision in terms of restoration because it will hold that bank in place and it will prevent some amount of sedimentation. So whether it's high bush blueberries or low bush blueberries, I like you will defer to people more experience. But
this option two is much more what I was thinking as well as potentially some plantings again whatever makes sense on the other side sort of uh as you're looking out to the lake to the left. >> Carl, I know you know a lot of trees and plantings. Do you have thoughts on on
this? Um I I think the I think the blueberry would be fine. I was thinking if if you turn the whole soil, uh willows are always used for uh for
embankments. And there's there's several other species. I can't think of the species now, but there are there's species specifically uh that send out a lot of roots and they're very fast growing. Um, I think that's what Chase was
getting to. Um, but I I think you He really needs to consult with an expert on this. >> Carl, what do you think about >> But good. >> Oh, sorry, Carl. I was going to say, what about like a sweet pepper bush? Um,
I mean, we have tons of it on our shores in the conservation areas and it spreads and smells amazing and holds the banks very well. Sweet pepper bush would be fine. It's um it's it's is it is it it's a marginal wetland
species, I believe, isn't it? It's on the edge. So So it it would be appropriate for for that setting. >> And I think it might have a better shot than maybe a blueberry shrub.
I mean if if if it can serve if it can serve multiple purposes you know um it would be you know if the plant can serve multiple purposes it would be it would be good too rather than you know if it's um in addition to holding the bank and
>> it would be interesting if there's if there's a way to put them in conjunction I think John what you're hearing is that we've had success with different varieties but we really do defer to we're not here to tell you what to plant. We're just here to give you suggestions.
Um I like option two in addition to planting on the left side. Sorry, I don't know which direction that is. >> Um >> you're talking over near that pink >> bleeding hearts >> that bleeding hearts bush that you saw. >> Yes. Yeah. >> Yeah. We could plant something over there, too.
>> Yep. Exactly. >> I just figured this area would be a little closer. I mean, there's no wave there's no chance of waves ever getting up to where these dots are anyways. Under the water line is very rocky on that corner.
>> Um, and that slope, there's no real erosion concern on that slope. There's nowhere for water to get enough flowing to do any damage there. Although it is a rocky slope, we would have to bring in a machine and dig soil out and put lom in
there to plant there. It is incredibly rocky soil if we wanted anything to survive. So there's another reason why we kind of gave that as another option. Whereas option one and the other side of the property, well the other side near
the bleeding heart, we probably need a machine as well, but that's a little far away, >> right? >> The existing planting bed's pretty lomy. That would be fine to do by hand. you'll um that's going to be a challenge there because you won't be able to bring
equipment into that area. Um okay, so you'll >> very hard to believe anything would survive in that area without a significant amount of loan put in there as well. >> Okay, >> commissioners, here's what I would
propose. I I think John, you've heard from us that this is generally the areas that we're looking at. I think you've heard that option two makes sense as well as the other side by the bleeding parts. What I would suggest though is that you've you've heard a little bit of
push back on just high bush blueberry. What I would like to see is to have you come in with a slightly more comprehensive plan um that has maybe a wider variety of species that are involved. And I'd like you to come in
with what species you're you would plan that's a little bit broader than that. And I'd also like to understand how you propose to put them in. Um because I'm a little anxious about the idea of getting significant heavy equipment there. And I think >> a tracked excavator would be very
minimal. >> No, you you you can't because then you you'd be breaking down the infrastructure of the roots that are already there. So that's why historically on other sites it's hand augers like the motorized hand augers. >> Yeah, that that's what I was thinking,
John. Like I >> rip and tear everything and then I'd be throwing rocks everywhere and soil everywhere. I mean I work landscape construction. I plant trees. >> So that means that you have access to people that can help you with this restoration. As we stated, like we're
not here to tell you what to do. you need to come to us and make a proposal that's going to work within. >> I think this would be a lot easier if you just told me what you wanted or I just write you a check. I mean, >> what do we again? >> So, John, this is a this is a process
through D. Um, so we have obviously there is no check that's going to be written and it is a process. So, it's unfortunate that we're have to be reactionary, but commissioners, anyone else have any guidance for for Scots?
>> Yeah, John, I I hear what you're saying, right? You want to know what the right answer is. We're a little bit tied in that. But but I think what you're hearing is one of the things that we're concerned about with a um tracked excavator is not just what needs to be dug to plant the material, but also uh
plant the plants, but also what impact it will have as you track it over there. Which is why we're typically looking for in sensitive areas like this as minimum minimal of a disturbance as possible. And we appreciate that you are probably very familiar with heavier equipment.
What you're hearing is we would like you to come forward with a plan that is as minimally impactful as possible to plant these. And that includes probably doing it in a more labor intensive equipment,
a lower equipment sort of approach than you're used to. And that that's just what we're going to expect that close to a resource area. So, I I'm pretty confident you can with with that direction, you can come up with a as minimally impactful as possible as of an
approach. Um, >> yeah, I have ground protection mats that I go across lawns with dump trucks all the time and don't disturb them. >> I think if you want to come in >> Yeah, I think what you've heard, John, is >> you guys just tell me what you want. I
just tell me what you want and I'll do it. It's just that simple. We could be we could have been done with this months ago. Tell me what you want and I'll do it. >> I I mean, John, what we just told you what we wanted was >> another professional and another professional and another this guy and another that guy. >> All right, John,
>> I I hear your frustration, but u >> I mean >> what Sarah said is, you know, um hand augers to put it in. And if you don't think that that is feasible, then then you need to come back and tell us what is feasible and is minimally impactful.
But I I'm pretty confident if you come back with, "Yeah, we're going to put these in with hand augers and here's how we're going to minimize the impact when we do that," you'll probably get the green light as long as the plants make sense. >> All right, then we can talk about All right. We'll talk about the enforcement
order after that. >> Correct. Okay, John. John, with your permission, we meet again in two weeks if you'd like to. >> We can't do anything sooner than that with a approved plan to Tim. We meet every two weeks unless there's
holidays in there. >> Professional plan. >> Okay. Commissioners have any questions? >> Do I need What do you mean by professional plan? If I call I have a plant pro at site one, will he be able with his stamp name on something be good enough for you?
>> I'm not I'm not familiar with them. So um >> site one nurseries >> in terms of them working within wetlands and wetland species >> they sell >> that is John I don't know that particular vendor but that is the kind of expertise that we are looking for
someone who can say yep I've looked at the area and here's what I think is likely to survive in that area based on the soil type based on the hydraology and based on the goals. Um, I don't know if that person is qualified to do it, but that's the type of expertise that
we're looking for. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> So, John, with your permission, we'll see you in two weeks. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. It's um 9:14. We're going to open the 8:46 continue
discussion enforcement order 2 and6 Blood Road. We're just going to take a second. We've got to move you over. >> Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay.
Um, so we had an opportunity to to walk through and would like to know kind of your your thoughts on this as well with your plantings. Um, hopefully you were able to hear the earlier um conversation as well.
>> Yeah. So this is um for one thing about on John's situation putting lom on the um >> so hill there next to the lake >> right so we do >> I I think that leaving it alone would
probably be better because it's already settled with pine needles on it and there's zero erosion on that hill now but if you go add a bunch of um organic material there or lom that'll end up just washing out I I would I'm not trying to be argumentative. It's a
suggestion. >> Yeah, the roots might take longer. >> And with with our property, it's pretty flat down where the lake is. Um so there's zero erosion. We actually have u a couple of spots that are away
from the lake, some that are steep that we could add loom to and you know, it wouldn't erode into the lake. Um, I believe uh Lauren took some pictures and um we discussed a couple of side
hills and planting uh shrubs, but they they're not down by the lake where it's flat. >> Go ahead, you guys. >> Commissioners. Yeah, I I think this site is similar to what we just discussed. I'm not
envisioning us sort of like spreading lom all over. What I'm envisioning is digging a suitably sized hole to plant um ground cover shrubs, right? Like like high bush high bush blueberries. So to that extent, you know, we need to dig a
hole that is of a sufficient size. We need to put the right material in that hole to grow the plant. But it you said like spreading loom. Do you I I I'm not I I tend to agree with you. I'm not sure we want to just spread dirt all over the place. Um can you explain a little bit
what you meant when you said spread lom and how that in your mind is >> the same or different than what I'm talking about in terms of planting bushes? >> So what I like if you were putting in a lawn or something, you put four 4 in or
6 in or whatever or 8 in of loan down. Um, and then you could plant shrubs and stuff and small bushes and flowers around in that. I kind of thought that's what you meant.
No, the these would be direct burials. So, you're basically auguring a hole and putting loom and suitable soil in it to help nurture it. >> Yep. Um, I do have a question though. We are very unclear on our property where
we would even, not that we don't have plenty of property, but as far as planting by the lake where there's no erosion because our beach is completely flat, I I'm trying to envision what's beneficial. Um, but again, if you were
driving in our driveway going towards our boat ramp on the right hand side, that's very steep. Um it has trees right on it. And what we were kind of envisioning is we would sort of box that in um using I don't know PT or whatever
you can use. Then we would put >> landscape timbers >> landscape timbers whatever >> stuff you know any erosion >> and then we could put in some amount of lom and it wouldn't be able to go anywhere because it's going to be boxed in. And then we would have to have some kind of um ground planting that can root
quickly and can be in rocky very shady. But you know, we would absolutely do that. I mean, I I want that anyway, but >> yeah, we're not opposed to, you know, planting >> we just don't want to have to plant something on the beach for the sake of
saying, well, we planted it on the beach because if there's no erosion on our side, >> it would be more useful in a different area on our our situation on the hillside is what I'm saying. I guess that's what we're saying. >> Okay, Carl, you were going to say
something. Yeah, I don't think the box idea works. It doesn't really benefit anything from what we're trying to accomplish. >> Okay. >> So, I think we also we've had discussions about pollinators helping some um diversity in their fur for
plantings as well as you know species kind of come and go at times to what can help some of the others um through this. Um >> we're actually getting bees tomorrow morning. beehive and beehives. >> Yeah, we have four more hives coming in
the morning. So, that brings us up to seven. >> Yep. Seven hives. >> Yep. Um and we're more than happy to put um another two down here. We already have one here. >> Commissioners, >> I think what Sarah's getting at is that we as a commission are open to we hear
what you're saying that planting something right on the shoreline may not make sense with your property. Um, we are open to the idea of doing something meaningful to improve the erosion potential, you know, to provide more stability. Um, I'm okay with the idea of
you you described a steeper area that is more prone to erosion. And I tend to agree with Carl that sort of boxing it in and building it up with lom is probably not something we would be comfortable with. But to the extent that there are plants that you could dig a
hole and plant in that slope to provide stability, that's something even if it's not right on the shoreline, I would be open to as I would also be open to, you know, expanding um a planted area for wild flowers for pollinators.
>> Absolutely. And I have some pictures that I need to send to Tim and I'll put my comments in where we can could control the erosion, what flowers um because we already have 15 steeped beds in the front of our house. So we would
be able to add more on a hill that's has a lot of erosion. So I I will send all of that to Tim with some notes so we'll be ready for the next meeting. And one of the things that we're going to look for there is again the right plants that make sense for the type of
soil and something that will help stabilize the the steeper slopes here. >> Sure. Yeah. Absolutely. That's what we want. >> Okay. Other other commissioners have any questions or or thoughts for the math sense?
I I think you're heading in the right direction now with uh Paul and Chase's idea. Um if you like I think I had said earlier if it can serve multiple purposes all the better. Um you know if it supports pollinators and helps with
erosion it's all it's it's just makes it makes the situation that much better. >> Okay. Any any other commissioners? Thank you for joining us. We'll hopefully see you in two weeks. And if you can submit information to Tim, the
sooner the better. So if that way it needs any kind of modifications, he can help review that with you as well. >> Sure. >> I will send it by before the end of the week. >> Okay, great. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay, it is 9:23. We're going to open up
the 9:00 continued public hearing. Notice of intent, transmission line improvements, right-of-way New England Power Company, general maintenance and improvement along transmission lines. Allison, I see that you're here.
We were out on site um >> rain. >> In the rain. >> Yeah. >> Good evening. Um Allison Milman with BSC Group here on behalf of the applicant New England Power Company um for the Sandy Ponitto reliability project. Um
as uh chair spoke, we did have a site review on Thursday um with some members of the commission. Um we went through the right of way and looked at the plans. Um the comments I received back were to include um proposed concrete
wash out areas on the NOI plans which will then be provided to the contractor before construction as well as uh notes that secondary containment must be used um for equipment that are that will that has to be staged on Mattingham and
wetlands overnight. Um so I was able to make those changes to the maps. I provided them the TIM and I'm happy to share if there's interest um in the commission to review. >> I I think Allison, thank you for that. I I think it would be good um for those that are listening as well and then
other commissioners if you can just do a um cursory overview and go back to your original plan um such that you did at the previous meeting. >> Absolutely. May I share my screen? >> Yes. Thank you for asking. Okay. So, this is the um original plan
that we had provided to the conservation commission. This is for a uh rebuild of transmission lines within an existing right of way. Um the 337 line which is the the 345 KV transmission voltage line
is uh proposed to have a full rebuild. Um so every structure along this line will be replaced uh with a structure on queson foundations with a steel pole and then there's ancillary work associated with the 115 KV lines to upgrade them to
meet current standards. um that includes overhead work um and as well as um OBGW which is optical ground wire which allows for faster communications um between substations. Um there are a handful of replacements
associated with the 150 KV lines as you'll see here. Um they were based on engineering standards. Um we reviewed these both in the field with the commission um as far as you know the need to uh cross over this state highway
here. Temporary construction matting is proposed for any work uh located within wetland resource areas. Um and that's what this hatched areas is showing you here. Um anything that is proposed to be a graded work pad um which is necessary
for the larger crane and in um drilling equipment is shown in the yellow uh polygons here. Uh we also I think this is a good example. We also have some um civil designing plans that were reviewed
and approved by Littleton planning board um for stormwater ordinance. Um and those were prepared by VHB and they were also included in your packet for review. Uh we have a um due to the fill associated with a larger uh foundations
for the structures, we do have proposed wetland replication area which we visited on Thursday with the commission. Um it's relatively small. Um but it's the plan is to tie it into this existing wetland resource. We've writed a planting plan and aing plan. And we also
conducted um groundwater test pits to um ensure hydrarology is sufficient um to meet the requirements of this replication area. Uh the commission and I also visited this area here. This is um Mat Farm. um
due to plowing activities that have excuse me that have occurred in this area, there are mounds that need to be removed and so the structural placements are shown here to accommodate the removal of those mounds >> and then the proposed >> I'm sorry, can I interrupt you? Can you
go back to um can you go back to that plan and the the mound removal >> and just give me a little more detail about what you're anticipating to do there? >> Yes. So the the proposed plan right now due to the plowing activities that are
happening in this active agricultural field. The existing structures are pretty much now on their own islands if you will um elevated islands. And that's just because of, you know, years after years of plowing activities that have um
reduced the elevation surrounding them. Um so the company is proposing to replace these structures outside of the existing mounds. Um and then they'll be grading down the mounds. Um and then they'll be providing that that soil in
in cooperation with the landowner in this location here. Um and that'll because it's farmland soil they they'll be stockpiling it here for him to reuse as needed um on his property. >> Okay. And
how is that soil going to get from essentially the resource area, the mounds that exist to that field? And I I just want to make sure one of my general questions here was making sure that we're not going to create impacts during
the implementation of the work. And I saw some places where it looked like there were like all roads or other protection going in. Is there what protection is here while we're moving that soil? >> So we do have our proposed um sediment controls which are shown. Let me zoom in
here because it's okay. So, our proposal settlement controls are shown in the um kind of I don't know burnt orange or brown or whatever you want to call this line here. >> Um so, we did review this location with the commission um at the sidewalk. So we
are proposing sediment controls in this area as well as temporary construction matting to facilitate the structure work. Um where we typically show the construction matting you know sedimement controls are not um usually installed beyond the sediment
um beyond the temporary construction matting due to it being its own kind of protective measure if you will. Mhm. >> Um so that's what this is. And then we show the sediment control between the grading area and the wetland resource area. And this is an existing uh road.
This is blood road if you're familiar. It's a dirt it's a dirt road. Um there there currently are um sediment controls in place now for uh other work. Um but the company is committing to install reinstalling those controls prior to
excavation. And and I guess Alison, let me ask a try to ask a better question. So around the number 18, we're going to dig up some dirt, right? >> Yes. >> And that dirt is going to be relocated to an agricultural field.
Assume north is up. Plan northwest, right? >> Uh yeah, plan northeast, I would say. >> Oh, okay. Northeast. Okay. >> Maybe that's my misunderstanding here. Okay. Um, yep. So, it's northeast of the
rightway in an in an area that was uh approved by the landowner. >> Okay. >> And Allison, I think it might be helpful. You had mentioned out on site that that would more than likely not be happening during the peak time for agricultural performance
of those fields that you had mentioned potentially in wintertime. Yeah, I think the details need to be worked out with the landowner as far as his requirements for when that excavation work can happen. Um, obviously the applicant will work with
the landowner as far as any compensation that that might be required, but that you know I I don't think I can speak to exactly when this work will happen. >> Just I think just to that was just something that was discussed on the sitewalk. So, Chase, the the material is
vast and they're bringing in larger poles um to accommodate the difference in elevation as well. >> Okay. No, I think I'm starting to get it. It's what I'm trying to understand Allison is how what route is the
material going to travel from where it is excavated to where it is placed and do we have sufficient controls in place to minimize the impact to jurisdictional areas not just where it's excavated but
also the route through which it will be transported. >> Sure. Understood Jason. Okay. So there there are two access routes. One is along existing blood road, the dirt road um that does circle around and allows access to this area and the other one
would be the um on rightway access uh which will provide a direct connection um to this area that was approved by the landowner. So this is the the soil stockpiling area that has been worked out with the landowner and you'll see
it's outside of the 100 foot buffer. >> Okay. And so this is to the east of that number 18 that I called out, right? >> The um the >> Yes, this map view is east. Yes. >> Okay. Now, we're also going to take soil from around 21, right?
>> 21 sort of center of this plan. Uh to the right. Yeah. Are we taking soil from around these? >> No, sir. >> Okay. Okay, I think that clears it up. Um I just wanted to make sure that we have
considered how things are going to move around not just the limits of the uh planned work but the transportation and Allison I don't know if there are other places where that is relevant but I I do very much want to make sure that we've thought through those because one
of the problems we've seen in the past is the limits of work define the limits of the finished work not necessarily the limits of the work as it will be implemented. Does that distinction make sense? >> Yeah, I understand. Absolutely. Um
um as you know, as we show proposed, there are existing farm roads that are planned to be used um to haul um the soil where work is proposed you know within the agricultural field. We we're the applicants proposing temporary construction matting or flat mats to the
farm. Um but you know with cooperation with the the land owner um there there there will be a availability to use his existing farm roads to haul soil. >> Okay. >> Thank you for clarifying all that.
>> You're welcome. >> Shall I move on? >> Yes, please. Thank you. >> Okay. You're welcome. Okay. um as presented at the last uh public hearing, uh BSC did on, you know, behalf of the applicant go out and
proactively identify uh vernal pools um which were not necessarily certified but um potential and we assessed those last spring for vernal pool activity and we did identify I think two locations here which I'll
show the commission here. There's one here. vernal pools are shown in the purple here. So there's one uh small isolated vernal pool that's adjacent to um a VHB designed access road. So we're proposing the sediment controls. You
will see that there is no proposed impact um within that envelope. Um and the second one is shown here um which pretty much crosses the entirety of the right of way. Um as such we've proposed to mat
the the narrowest part of that um field identified vernal pool along the northernmost part of the um the right of way. Um so that's shown here. Um and there's also sediment controls proposed
the approach um to this area here. Allison, are you proposing given the proximity to vernal pools, are you proposing any time of year restrictions on this work? >> So, that did come up at the um the initial hearing. Um I I think if there
would be a request from the commission to uh condition, time of year, I would need to run that by the applicant. uh mostly due to the fact that considering this is a transmission line project, they do have outage and non-reclosure
um requirements for certain activities due to energized high voltage lines. Um so if that's a request that you um the commission would like to be considered, I would bring that back to the project team to look at outage and um NRA
schedules and see if that's feasible. Then we walked um this is Beaverbrook Road. Um there's some proposed new switch structures which we discussed in the field. The purpose of those is to sectionalize lines, allow for deenergization
of segments of lines during emergency and uh maintenance uh response procedures. So that's um the these um new structures that are being proposed here right outside of Littleton Municipal Substation.
So those are the new kind of I will say facilities that are being proposed by the applicant. So this is it for the um the plans that I had submitted to the commission. And then as far as um addressing comments, did the new plan come through?
Are you all seeing this now where it shows propo proposed concrete wash out? >> Yep. Yep. >> Okay. Thank you. Um so, uh during the sitewalk, it was uh requested that uh we update our site plans to provide better
direction to the contractors who will be performing the work. Um the first one is that secondary containment will be used for any equipment for overnight um matting place in wetlands. We discussed the fact that the larger cranes, drill rig equipment as such um isn't feasible
to to remove from from the matting, you know, on a daily basis. So, we we will be, you know, uh requiring secondary containment as well as um I've identified some proposed concrete wash out areas as we had talked about um to
be reviewed and approved by the contractor. For the most part, I try to put them as far away and in a an area that the concrete trucks concrete trucks can eress and ingress um without kind of bottlenecks, if you will. Um so these
are shown, you know, there's one here now. Um I have one shown here obviously outside of resource areas. Um, one here again outside of resource
areas uh closest to the public road. One here near you know for this specific structure which will require concrete. One here right near the road outside of resource areas. Um one here right along Blood Road. Um
just this is very constrained site as the commission is aware. Um, but it is on the opposite side of the public road um, from the wetland resource area. So, I thought it would be a decent place to actually stage that
concrete wash out. Uh, let's see. There's one here um pretty much in an upland area to accommodate um these structures. And then finally, one in this area closest to Beaver Brook Road, which seemed like a reasonable setup for the
contractor. >> And Allison, you haven't changed how you're going to handle the wash out in terms of BMPPS. Correct. >> Correct. Yeah, the applicant has um specified BMPPS um for a poly um with a uh containment
area or one of those what do you call them? Out packs or whatever the popup um that that are um more of like a cardboard material, but they also include the uh poly um for removal and disposal.
I have a couple conditions that I' I'd like to suggest we include here. Um, one is I do think we should add time of year restrictions to this both from a vernal pool perspective as well as from knowing the area. it. A lot of this gets pretty
wet and I think we could significantly minimize the extent of impacts by doing it in drier seasons rather than wetter seasons. Um the second condition that I'd like to discuss is um conditioning a
a frequency of inspections. Um I don't know Allison that what I saw in the package but I also probably didn't read all every word of the 200 pages was that inspections will be done as needed. One of the things we've seen in this area is
there's a lot of traffic. Sometimes the sediment and erosion controls can get disturbed um even after the site is sort of coming around to stabilization. I'd like to see the sediment and erosion controls inspected, I don't know, on a monthly
basis at at a minimum or something like that post construction until they're fully removed to make sure that they're intact and functional. Those are the two additional conditions beyond our standard that I'd like. >> Understood. I can speak on the frequency
of inspection. So this project as a whole because it does span multiple towns uh will trigger um a nipcpa construction general permit and storm water pollution prevention plan as such um BSC on behalf of the applicant will be out weekly and within a quarter in of
a rain event within 24 hours or more. Um and then we we will be preparing reports to the contractors to identify action items for them to address um based on the EPA swip requirements. So if it's a maintenance, you know, they have set amount of time. If it's, you know, it's
a a non-compliance, you know, you know, it'll definitely be put on a higher priority. I think we talked at the sitewalk about providing um some kind of uh reporting to the commission which we're you know the applicant is
amendable to document that we are you know completing these inspections and reporting and and following up on action items >> and Allison this is a lot to inspect on a weekly basis. We understand here that we're talking about comprehensive
inspections, right? Not just spot checks. >> Absolutely. I would say this would be a at least a full day inspection, you know, once a week as well as, you know, after a rain event. >> Okay. >> Project of this size. We're spanning multiple towns. Um, yeah, definitely a
full day. >> Yeah. Okay. Somebody's going to need their walking shoes >> for potentially six years, >> right? Yeah. Um Allison, we had talked um quite a bit at the last hearing and
then on the site of the various sections of road that are going to be enhanced and different stages of those roads. Did we talk about Blood Road at all because it is so fragile at times? >> I understand. Yeah, there's no because
it's a public road. Um there's no proposed improvements to that. Um, but we are >> I guess I'm I guess I'm concerned because we're using that as an access point. And as Chase uh alluded to as well, some of the field material is
going to come out Blood Road and go back over to the farm. But I'm just really thinking about some of the heavy equipment that potentially will be on that road. And I mean, we only just drove like five cars through there and it's it's wet. And as we saw, it has a
direct feed right off that road into the wetlands. >> Yeah, I >> I understand. >> I think there's some maintenance that you are going to need to do to maintain the road to minimize
the impact to the resource areas. And my expectation is that that's got to be part of your plan and package here. And I I actually I don't know that it is a public road.
>> So I'm I'm curious though, we all know the road well that if we have a rain event and all those trucks still go on that road, we're going to have a lot of impact into the wetlands
because we're literally right on it. So I don't know from storm water of of that so much, you know, just velocity going back and forth with trucks and tires and the wash. I just that blood road really
concerns me. >> No, I understand that makes sense to me as well. Um I think based on uh conversations with Matis Farm, you know, Blood Road was identified as their primary access for construction. Um obviously he, you know, the land owner
also didn't want heavy equipment, you know, tra traversing on his farm roads regularly. Um as far as you know, whether this is a public road, it was my understanding that it was. Um, I would have to reach back out to the project team and the applicant to see what kind
of coordination would be required with the town um to do any sort of upgrades or improvements to that road and if that would even be something they would consider. Um, I I'm just not sure. It's if it is a public road, I I just don't
know what the liability would be there. So, I mean, we can definitely uh, you know, agree to additional sediment controls and things of that nature, but I don't think I can speak on improvements that the applicant would make to something that may or may not be a public road right now.
I I look at that and I and I appreciate that we had an opportunity to walk, you know, the majority of of the site the other day that it it for me is the is I would say the holding point for me going forward.
Um I think you you've addressed many of our concerns. I think obviously Beaverbrook that access up there is is easier for sure. Um, but I I as I just want to be clear, I have a lot of concerns on Blood Road and I'd like to hear what some of the other
commissioners have to say about that as well. I I recognize that Michael and um Kyle aren't here who who were on that sitewalk, but um Tim, you certainly know that road well.
>> I thought that road was private. Um, >> but yeah, I think we should >> I'm almost certain it's private, >> but >> okay. >> It is. >> I'll have to c I'll have to like circle back with the the company's real estate team. It that's not my expertise.
>> And Andrew just said it. It's private >> assistant town clerk. >> Okay. >> I agree with I agree. I I I agree with Sarah Chase. >> I just don't know what we could do. >> Very fragile. >> Very very fragile.
Very fragile road. I mean, I think >> to to Carl's point about its fragility, Allison, and to the extent that you find out that it is a private road, um I think what you're hearing from us is
we're concerned about the the amount of traffic and the heavy equipment traffic on that. And at least for me, I would expect that there's the applicant has a plan to maintain or even in some areas upgrade that road where we're crossing
streams or were immediately adjacent to resource areas that are otherwise outside of your work so that the disturbance to the road doesn't result in a disturbance to the resource area. So maybe that's stone in places. Um, maybe that's supplemental sediment and
erosion controls, although they get beat to hell pretty bad on on Blood Road. Um, maybe you've got a better tool in the toolbox, but something to stabilize that is going to be important >> or or even at if you had the opportunity at various times to go through obviously
not the heavy all the heavy equipment to go through some of the the farm access lanes because they're not in resource areas. You could I mean those roads could be rudded up and then graded back out versus Blood Road at times. I think we're going to be washing into the
wetlands. >> Okay. Yep. I'll hear you. >> Um we meet in >> So this is a negotiation or I need to reach out to again real estate um as well as their community engagement group as far as like commitments and negotiations that were made with the
landowner. But I hear you and I have my notes here. >> Okay. So, would you like for us to continue this to the next meeting or two meetings from now? >> Uh, next meeting should be fine. Yep. >> Okay. >> Um, sorry, can we circle back to one
thing that I proposed? I had suggested to Allison time of year restrictions. Is there any opposition from other members of the commission to asking the applicant to come forward with what they would propose as reasonable time of year restrictions? No, I would agree.
>> Also, no, I just want to make sure you had clear direction from the commission, not just one commissioner shooting his mouth off. We we talked about that on site um during that sitewalk and there was some some
hesitation to commit because of the interdep departmental and and various towns and all the different kind of layers of contractors that that's I I think we were pretty much told no but no
harm in asking. I >> I would tell you that this gets a lot harder to permit if you're proposing to do this work in March, >> right? >> A lot lot harder. And I'm not sure that what you've proposed would be adequate in my mind without time of year
restrictions. >> Okay. All right. So, Allison, we're going to go ahead with your permission to continue this to the next meeting in in two weeks. Okay. So, that would put us at the 2nd of June,
>> Tim. Is that correct? >> Yep, that's correct. >> Okay. >> Okay, great. >> Great. Thank you for your help. >> Thank you. Have a great night. >> Have a good evening. Okay, we're going to jump back into administrative
discussions. Is there anything um I neglected to add? if anybody had anything that they wanted to add to that list that we had. Um I just had one for sitewalks. Tim, do we have anything coming up? I think Wednesday >> Wednesday
the one that I was going to uh add actually was No, we do have a sitewalk tomorrow at at 12:30 if if anybody can um meet with uh me and Lauren and Scott SM from Oxbow out there to look at the the wellins on that site.
>> Okay. I thought that was postponed. Okay. Um, anyone able to do that tomorrow? I can't do that one. >> Oh, can I? >> No. No, I can't. >> Okay. We've Many of us have been out there before. So, >> I I think it's probably worth than
rescheduling um just to get commissioners out there as well. Me and Lauren have seen the site, but the the site seems to be very different in terms of wetlands than it was when it was permitted back in 2016.
Um, and I don't know if that's because, uh, Scott had mentioned when we were out there, there used to be a big runoff issue on Heartwell, and I don't know if that was going onto that site, and um, now since they fixed it, there's there's
a lesser extent of wetlands there. Um the isolated what looks to be an isolated wetland out there right now is um appears to be very much smaller than it was uh when it was permitted. Um and the bordering vegetated wetland towards
the back there might not be a connection there anymore. So, I I think it's worth commissioners coming out with us as well to take a look because I think the next time those folks come in front of the commission, it could be very different than when it was last put in front of the
commission when the original order um was issued. So, I I'll go ahead and and uh reach out to Scott tomorrow or tonight and and see if we can find a a better date >> that would be next. Maybe potentially maybe next week, the latter part or
something. Okay. Okay. >> Okay. I think that clears the agenda for today. >> Sorry, I had one small thing if it's okay. Um, in a couple weeks, um, the commission will have in front of him, I'm writing the application now for
scout troop one to do a another sort of camping um night. uh this time probably sort of in the woodline at the top of like Long Lake Park. The idea that we would be doing would be a like a fivemile hike connecting a whole bunch
of Littleton conservation lands. A whole bunch of scouts are doing um conservation related eagle projects and sort of the next generation of scouts don't know all of our conservation lands. So, the idea would be to do a sort of a fivemile hike, stringing together a bunch of conservation lands,
and then if the commission was willing to allow it, um probably camp sort of in the treeine um adjacent to the meadow at the top of Long Lake Park. Um, is that something, understanding you don't have the application in front of
you, is that something you all would generally be willing to entertain as long as it was approved by the appropriate entities, or would that be problematic in your mind? >> Oh, that sounds good. Chase, do you think you'd have a fire though, or would it just strictly be camping? >> If the fire department was comfortable
with it, we would. Um, but if not, then we wouldn't. >> Okay, that that was my only question. Chase, are you Jay Chase, are you planning on having a scout or will the scouts be planning on uh trying to
connect conservation lands? Yeah, the the the route that I've got for them >> actually starts them in Actton and then essentially comes up from Actton through Sarah Dublet, then across to Cobbs, then
into YAP, and then across Yap into Long Lake Park. So, um there's very little, uh road hiking there. So, >> yeah. So, so what I guess the point I'm getting to is it sounds like if you
could come up with a route where like a connectivity between uh conservation lands and we put that on a website that people the public can do that too. I see that as being beneficial. Uh >> yeah, one of the things we're trying to
get them to do is like a fivemile loaded pack hike. So um and get to know conservation land. So, um, yeah, Carl, I'll put it in the package, the route that we plan to take, too. >> So, >> maybe they can bring some liming saws as well.
>> Listen, I I I will certainly uh I will offer up their uh their services along the way, particularly if there are projects, Tim, that you think would be good to do along the way. It's only five miles. They'll be able to cover that in a few hours. So, there's lots of time
for meaningful projects along the way. So you'll have that application in a couple weeks, but they were looking to do it June 6th. So it'll be kind of a tight, you know, we'll we'll look at it on the 2nd and then they'll do it on the 6th. >> About camping on that field, though, is
that they do discourage getting off the trail because of nesting birds and what have you. So I'm not sure it'll be tough to find a spot to set up a camp and not impact the wildlife that's in those fields. >> Yeah. What I was thinking, Ed, is I
would go out and scout it ahead of time and then we would camp in the tree line, not in the meadow itself. >> Okay. Because they don't even like people to let their dogs loose up there. >> Yep. Understood. >> Yeah. Chase, I was thinking maybe on the um like if you were to come in from Harwood A and start walking up the Pine
Cart path and kind of you're off to the right that side of the the field right up against that stone wall, there should be a nice section that you guys could could do that without disturbing the uh the wildlife. >> Yep. Just watch out for ticks. >> Yeah, gonna be a lot of lot of
peromethine sprayed around there, too. >> Poison ivy. Poison ivy. >> Y. >> Okay. >> Okay. Well, thank you all. I apologize for ambushing you all with that. >> No, that's good. Okay. Do we have um
someone that would like to >> I move that we close the meeting. >> Yep. Do we have a second? All right, roll call vote. Last one of the night. Uh, Chase >> Chase car big eye. >> Ed Sarah.
>> Sarah Seawward. I >> Carl I >> myself I it's unanimous and we are adjourned.