Okay, great. Good evening. I'd like to welcome everyone to August 21st, 2026 Littleton Conservation Commission meeting and we are on Zoom. Um, what I'd like to do is to approve minutes first
from April 7th and then we'll go into administrative discussions. Um, there were four pages that were submitted for the draft for April 7th. Um, does anyone have any omissions, corrections? I just
have one minor question. >> They looked great. Nothing for me. >> Okay. on the last page when it was um continued hearing for noticement 7 Worcester A at the top of the page it made notion and and added a
note that no material can be stockpiled in the 50oot no disturb zone and then it goes on to say the applicant agreed that there is no room to stockpile material on on the site. I'm assuming that's an
error that it's supposed to be 100 foot, not 50 ft. >> Yeah, I think you're correct. >> Okay, fantastic. So, I would like to make that change to 100T no stockpiling. Um, with that, do we have a motion to
accept as amended? >> I'll move that we accept the April 7th uh minutes as amended. >> Super. Do I have a second? Second. >> Alrighty. Andrew, can you do roll call for us, please?
>> Absolutely. Roll call vote. Uh Kyle >> Kyle Maxfield. I >> Michael >> Michael Livingston. I >> Sarah >> Sarah Seawward. I >> myself I. It's unanimous. >> Okay. Fantastic. Let's jump into administrative discussions. Does anyone
have anything that they would like to add for discussions? I just have one and I would like to um discuss the upcoming uh warrant article number 30 um for the town meeting. If we
have a chance, I'd like to talk about that. Okay. So, let's go ahead and start with discussions. The first on topic is six spectacle spectacle pond road D204-977. And we're going to talk about the site conditions. Tim, I'm gonna pass it over
to you. And I know you and Kyle had been out on site. >> Yes. Um, see if we have somebody here. Not seeing the >> thought I saw here.
>> Thought I saw Oh, they were there. Oh, Mickey. Yep. >> All right, I'll jump right into it. I'm going to share my screen here. I put up the sitewalk report um that I sent around. So, we drove past this area. We don't get out to this area a
lot. It's on the edge of town. Um drove by it recently. We weren't aware that construction had started. Um we didn't get notification that um they were ready to start construction and so there was no pre-construction meeting. Um
uh no, uh erosion controls in installed, no inspection of erosion controls. um one of the preconstruction conditions on the site was that there was an earth and burm to be um constructed along this green line. Um so that that isn't there
right now. It wasn't wasn't checked. Um so drove by and what stuck out to me was um there's a there was a about 40 foot tall uh stockpile of sand. So you can see on the approved plan here the the proposed stockpile area is outside the
100 foot and uh the existing stockpile uh is is roughly in in this footprint. It goes uh back to and and maybe even within the 50 foot uh no disturb area. Um and so
got some aerial here. You can see this is the site uh pre-construction of the um foundation for the building. I should say at this point um this is representative roughly without the the sand stock pile and um and all these containers have been uh most of these
containers have been removed. Um the building isn't uh past this stage the the concrete is in but it's roughly looking the same in this picture as it is right now. Um, so obviously right now you have the the big sand stockpile as
well as this stockpile of LOM over here. Um, you could see um before or I guess right when this project was approved, there was already a stockpile of of LOM here. It has um been added to a bit and so the footprint
is um has expanded a bit. It's got it's gotten a little closer. It's right about at the the 50 foot. um notice disturb line and there's a little section of uh construction debris here as well. also noticed this uh reached out to property
owner and and Mickey Jensen who uh is here tonight um met me and Kyle on the site um on Friday morning to to go through and look at the conditions and we did not issue an enforcement order then and there um we thought you know
the meeting is is so close let's just talk about it on on Tuesday night and um we did authorize Mickey to so this this area right along long. Um, it's it's really where the the 50 foot no disturb is more or less. It's very rocky. It's
it's uneven. So, we authorized Mickey to even that area out so that erosion controls can be installed as soon as possible. Um, because this is the line where the straw waddles were approved to be installed. It's this um black dashed
line right here. And then we also authorized him to start removing um that sand from the the buffer zone and relocating it outside of the 100 foot buffer zone. Um so I got a couple pictures here. So this is gravel
uh not too far from the the construction uh debris. So you can kind of see it right here. There's the construction debris which which is not pictured. I don't have pictures of that or this stock pile in this site um walk report,
but here you can see this is the edge of the of the the sand stock pile um when I was out there on Thursday and a little bit of it is is going down the uh slope towards the wetland.
Just another picture of that. And this material, I mean, it's unclear whether or not it's fresh or it's been there for quite some time, but I thought might as well include it in in the report. Um, this is material that's migrated down, you can see, into the
wetland around the wetland vegetation. So, at this point, we don't have an enforcement order issued. Um, we do have have Mickey Jensen here um to speak to this. >> So, Tim, quick question. Did you are you
able to add the additional photos that were taken on site? >> Um, what do you mean? >> The ones that I sent you today. >> Oh, shoot. I don't um Yes. Let me let me go pull those up. My apologies. So, um,
Kyle, I'm gonna, while he does that, I'm going to pass it on to you to just talk about what you saw on site and then Mickey, I'm just going to do a couple recap of what I saw and then we'll ask you to kind of, um, chime in here and we'll allow you to talk at that point. Kyle, thoughts? >> Yeah, I don't have too much to add. Um,
to gave a great recap of our of our walk um that that large stockpile. I think when we saw this under our uh when we approved the NOI, we saw a stockpile and and at least I did. I assume others did thought that was a stockpile of of
excavated material from the building footprint or you know of the construction. This is um this is a a screened sand material. It's a building material. It has nothing to do with the construction of that foundation or the building. Um so not saying we were
misled, but misinterpreted. they have approval for to be able to do that on the site. They just need to get it out of that 100 foot area, which they're actively doing. They're actively removing that sand from the site anyway. You know, selling it, doing using it, whatever. Um, so it shouldn't be too big
of a lift for that to move on. But yeah, I Tim and I were pretty eager to to give them some verbal approval to to start erosion control installation and start the process of moving this so that we don't see any other material migrating downstream. I I will say you could see the picture that Tim showed of that
material. I'm not convinced that it is this sand material. It looked very different. It was a darker gray and dark brown material, but um that burm that's there is not in good shape. Um so his priority is going to be to establish that burm
um you know get that constructed loom and seated as was supposed to happen with the the notice of intent. that was supposed to be one of the pre-construction conditions um was that this burm right here gets constructed better than what it is now so that it actually can keep material
from from moving downstream. But yeah, other than that um I think Tim covered it well. >> I I I have I I have not been on the site Sarah. I was on the site earlier when we first >> right >> was looking at this this area this area across from the stone yard. I mean it's
always been an issue down there. It's I mean that what I'm seeing from these pics to me is completely 100% unacceptable. I mean I just can't believe I can't believe they've got that >> that mound going heading down to the
wetland. It just it doesn't make sense to me. It's like ridiculous. Like there's nothing holding that stuff back. >> Tim, thank you for sharing those. I I did um have an opportunity to um visit
the site today and and there are um definitely leeching areas of of um fill going down the hill. Um Tim, if you back up a couple, you'll be able to see at the bottom of that slope, the toe of soap slope is wetlands, so active water
as well. And you'll be able to see some of the construction debris as well. I think that um I'd like to hear um from the owner to understand
how how we got to this and then I'm really concerned on how we bring it back to the stage of what was in good faith of where we were supposed to start >> um had the enforcement order. >> I completely agree Sarah. Thank you.
>> Okay. So, um, >> so I'm going to allow Mickey and, um, and Jamie Jensen Jensen. Um, they're both here. I'm allow them to talk now. >> Yep. I just did that. So, Mickey, you're on mute, just so you know.
>> Do you guys hear me or see me? >> U, we can hear you. So, >> we can hear you, Mickey. >> Yep. If you want to go ahead and introduce yourself and let the commissioners know where you reside as well, that would be great. >> I'm just on a different computer now. It's actually only me. is not my wife, too. I can't get I can't get the um
>> That's okay. >> to work. >> Yep. No, that that's okay. It comes up as um Jamie. So, go ahead. >> All right. Yeah. So, yeah, it's we did the foundation not this past winter, the the winter before. So, there's no actual
construction besides the dirt piles we had recently brought in that we're removing back out. Um, I take responsibility for not doing the erosion control. It was a kind of a spur
moment thing last two winters ago. We put the foundation right before it get cold and then we did nothing. We haven't done anything with it since. But since I met Tim and Kyle out there, um, I agreed with with everything they said. I'm going to move the stockpile back. I'm
going to pull. So, currently, right now, you guys have been out there. There's a like there's like a two to three foot burm all around the edge that goes down to the bottom to the wetlands. In order to put and that was there since we bought it in order to put the erosion
control down. I got to pull that back at least like a foot to two feet in order to put the the waddles behind it. Um, so that's our plan next to do that and remove the the dirt further back so it's
within the the 50ft um buffer zone. That's >> I guess to to recap prior to any construction and earth and berm was supposed to be built. So
>> yeah. So that's what I'm going to do. That's what I'm going to do now. >> Okay. So you're going to have to move more than material. You'll have to move some other things that are out there as well in order to do that. Correct. >> Yeah. The burn. Did you see the you went
out there? >> Mhm. >> Sarah. All right. Um so the BM that's around there, we got to pull that back. So, I'm gonna have to move those um the two storage boxes that are there. >> Tim, Tim, can you just go back to that the original photo?
>> I was going to ask the same thing. >> Yeah. >> Do you want the photos or do you want the aerial? >> The aerial. >> I was going to say the aerial would be great. >> Yep. Give me a second. Yeah, I think go back go back one first just as a refresher.
This is what the site looked like when the order of conditions was issued and that's March of 23. So that's great. If you can kind of come in, you can see So, where those containers are,
um Tim, if you want to move your cursor up there, that's where the um stockpile is. That's the large sand pile that's kind of sliding down the embankment. And then if you want to go ahead and highlight where the earthn berm is
supposed to be constructed. So you can see I'll show on the plane. You probably see a little better here. It's >> actually supposed to be pulled in pretty pretty far right off the Yeah. So, >> sorry. Let me um somewhere in here it does say the the edge of the so you got
the the proposed erosion controls is the the dash line and that's actually behind the uh the earth and berm that's to be constructed. So that's on the top of the slope that was existing and the burm was supposed to then come in and get built. Correct.
>> Correct. Yeah. >> Okay. So if you move your cursor to the left, there's an incredible amount of I guess I would call them concrete footings and everything that's there right on the
line. So I'm assuming all that needs to be moved as well in order to do the asbuilt for the burm. >> Yep. So >> all that all those forms would have to go there.
>> So everything on that line would have to be pulled back in addition obviously to the to the sand pile. I'm really concerned with that sand pile and safety moving that that that might >> Yeah. How how you gonna move that sand
pile back? That sand pile's like huge. Doesn't make >> Yeah. >> I'm going to start I'm going to start on the back side where the burm is and keep scoop scoop it out from the backside. So, um >> but there isn't a burm there now because
you're on top of it. >> Well, there is a burm underneath it. Yeah. But >> yeah, >> I mean, unless you got a better idea of it, I was going to pull it back with the excavator and and scoop it around the front with a with a a loader to bring it
back to to the other side towards like Spenc. >> Okay. Uh, so none of us are, you know, structural engineers, but from a safety standpoint, I I feel strongly that there has to be some erosion control cuz
Jamie, what happens is if all of a sudden that slides, you're going to be pulling that out by hand. You're not going to be able to have excavators go down into the wetlands to pull it out. So, there needs to be some type of construction
um protection on the back side of that sand pile to keep it from going down the hill. >> The the elevation >> the elevation that sand pile Sarah, it's almost going to be impossible to do that
without that sliding down. >> I can put on top of the burn the existing burn that's there. It's right on the sample is right on the edge of it. I can put um built fence on top of the existing burn that's there. >> Y
>> from end of the from a little bit past the pile on both ends. Put that in first and then if anything falls, it's going to be stopped by the sill fence. >> That's put just waddles there cuz it could just push the waddles. >> Yep. That was exactly what I was going
to recommend, Mickey, is that we use silt fence at least through that area and that gets installed before you do any sort of movement of that sand. >> We haven't tried moving it at all yet. Just I want to go to the medium first. >> Well, yeah, I think so. Let's not get ahead of ourselves a little bit, but I
think from a protection standpoint, downgradient of that, you may want to put some waddles in if you think there's going to be an area that may slide cuz the erosion control to be properly installed has to be dug in. I don't know
that with that type of velocity if it would be able to I mean, obviously, it's going to stop something. I just don't know if it's going to stop enough of it. So, um, >> let's stop more than waddles will. >> Oh, yeah. No, I'm talking in addition >> 100%. >> So, yeah, I'm saying so silk fencing on
the top of the >> do silk fence and then put a waddles waddles in front of that >> just further down like even at the bottom of the slope in hopes that nothing ever makes it down there >> in that same Mickey in the same area we talked about. So, that would continue all the way around the site.
>> So, in this area when you guys were there, it's pretty rocky there. You're not going to the the water is going to do much if you put it on a down slope. >> I'm talking the bottom >> bottom >> the bottom of that slope.
>> You want to put it down in the resource area. >> Talking about like down here, Sarah. >> I think you're I think you're going to have to >> Yeah, >> because if it slides, it's going to go down. >> If stuff's moving down to there, it's going to it's going to get in there. I don't know what's >> go probably go over the bottles.
>> Okay. Well, I'm still saying we're still going to put in the silt fencing, so that's at minimum. I'm just talking the waddles as a backup. But that's a >> Yeah, I do agree with that. I just think that they're they're still going to be up here near the top where he's going to
like you described, pull pull a foot of this rocky material away and then install them still near the top of the slope. But I agree that sil fence should be installed upstream of that closer to the pile >> to be that initial stopping point. I think before any digging starts, you
have to put a silk fencing there at the top of that slope. >> Yeah, I agree with that. >> Yeah. Do you think I think it would help if you put waddles in front of the sil fence, too? I could >> Sure. >> Cuz that's all sand there. I mean, I could dig it down. Put the cell fence in
there and put the waddles in front of it. So, it helps helps with the pressure of the sand. >> Yep. Okay, >> that works. Whatever the the double layer, whatever, however you think it is going to work. Most effectively, >> once I get it cleared out enough, then we can pull it back. I can pull it that
burn back and then put the wattles behind, >> right? >> Okay. >> I mean, h how did we reach this point that we have a pile of sand next to the resource? I don't get it. >> When I first started with the pile, it was it was 12t away from the burm. It
just to be honestly it got we pushed it back and didn't wasn't really pay we didn't pay the person pushing it back didn't pay attention. >> So >> the original pile was 10 was 10 to 12 ft away from the the burm.
>> Okay. And you were aware that you had work to do with the conservation per your order of conditions prior to putting a shovel in the ground for the foundation. did. Yeah. And like I said before, it's it's my fault. I we rushed to put a
foundation in. Didn't Right before it was going to snow and then we just >> But so within a year or so, you didn't think to call conservation. >> Yeah. I mean, honestly, I didn't until they forgot about it.
>> Okay. So, commissioners, at at first glance, some of the the issues are is that, you know, the burm wasn't built. they didn't follow the order of conditions. Um, lack of erosion control. We know that we have, and just off the top of my
head here, I took some notes that we've got unpermitted material, earthn material, and possibly building material, which we saw saw in one of the photos, um, used in a resource area,
and then obviously debris as well. So, um, what would the commissioners like to do at this at this time? >> What is the primary use with the foundation? What are you building? >> Contractor bays. >> A what?
>> Contractor bays. Garage bays. >> Yep. Which they they had a order of conditions. They had approval to do that based on the original plan that was submitted that didn't show
this intense use currently. >> You know, Sarah, we have to be we went hard on the stone yard across the street. >> Y >> so we really have to do our due diligence on this one. The same thing.
And we we know that that whole area is a very fragile resource area. >> Okay. Kyle, thoughts as you've been out on out on the site. >> I mean, I think we have a path forward and how we get there is how you want to document it or create that paper trail.
Um I mean I Yeah, I agree we shouldn't be here, but I we just have to find the path forward now. And I think it's in place. Um >> right. >> See if it if it happens. I don't and what do we need to do to >> so what we would need to do tonight is
to issue an enforcement order um with that and we would need to come up with what the expectations are. So what that means is that no work can happen within the resource area until you start
to come up with some of the the tick marks. And that's basically starting with erosion control. And you can work with um you know Tim and Lauren and some of the commissioners on this in order to get it forward. And we
recognize the sand has to be removed, but we need to do it in a manner that's going to be, you know, safe and also to make sure that we're not going to slide anything into the into the wetlands.
So, I've mentioned some of the the things that were at issue with the site. It's just up to the commissioners of if they want to go the route of the enforcement order. >> I think we have to. I don't think we have any choice. >> Yeah. I mean, I think I agree with that.
It's just just so that we have something, you know, whatever, teeth in the game or something, right? So, we can stay on top of things and and make sure we're keeping things moving forward. And >> um >> so, um some of the things that we would state in this is already what we've
talked about, what's gone on that we didn't follow the notice of intent. Um, so to go forward, you would need to come up with an erosion control plan. So like sequence of what that's going to look like.
Ultimately, you're going to have to come up with a restoration plan as well. And so that means that some of the debris that's gone over the banking or that the debris that's there that's in a resource pile, you'll basically tell us how you
plan to get it back to the state of which it was in when you got your first order of conditions commission. >> Does that make sense? >> Yes. But the first thing is to to set up the cell fence at the pile with the
waddles. Correct. >> Yes. So that's what I was going to ask Sarah. Are we >> So what you can do >> are we looking for all this in writing? I I'd like to see this happen tomorrow and I think it can happen, you know, in the next couple days. >> We just have to be very specific of how
we want that. So, we in theory would issue the order, the enforcement order tonight and then you can go ahead and tell the applicant, here are the things that you can do, but also understand there's a lot of things you can't do. >> Yeah, that makes sense.
>> So, that way we keep it moving, but we have to be very clear that it means that things are only going to leave the property. they're not going to come in and it has to be done in a safe manner and that you would come back to us on
the next meeting which is May 12th >> and already have like your full game plan from a restoration standpoint and what you're doing. So, I I think it's important to understand that we want
this site back to where it was with the original plan. So, if you have things that are stored in a resource area, that's going to be part of your restoration plan to say, "Okay, I'm going to move those things out." You can
possibly still keep them on site. They just can't be in a resource area. Does that make sense? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, Commissioner, >> that's within the the 50 foot buffer. >> 100 foot buffer. >> Buffer 100. All right. Because I think that that BM is on the the 50ft line.
>> It is, but that's because it was permitted and we asked you to do that to contain that. >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> So, but you have things that are already past that where the burm So, you're going to have to move some things
potentially to get that burm in as well. >> Yeah. >> All right. So, commissioners, can we have a motion? >> I think we need to we need to have Tim make sure Tim goes and inspects it. >> Sure. Yep. >> Anything else? >> Exactly. >> Sure.
>> So, basically the Yep. So, we'll follow through that. So, do we have a motion? >> Go ahead. Uh, so I'll go ahead and make a motion that the commission issue an enforcement order for six spectacle pond DP fall number 204-0977.
>> Do we have a second? >> Second. >> All right, roll call vote. Uh, Kyle >> Kyle. >> Michael. >> Michael Livingston. I >> Carl >> Carl Melber. >> Sarah >> T word I.
>> Myself I. It's unanimous. >> So let's just recap. The only thing that you'll be allowed to do is put the erosion control in and start to get the big pile out and simultaneously start to find an engineer, possibly the
one that you worked with before, to come up with a restoration plan so you can get those wheels moving. Does that make sense? >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Do you want Tim, do you want to come out and see the before I remove any dirt >> to see the sill fence and the water
behind it? >> Yeah, that's what I was just going to as soon as you have those erosion controls up, um, uh, give me a call or Lauren and we'll get out there, um, to to do the inspection. Yep. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Sorry I couldn't get the video going. So, but
>> thanks. Thanks, Pete. >> Okay. So, we're going to come back to discussion items. I would like to make a comment that our 8:15 and 8:16 um hearings for number eight, number two, and six blood road have been
postponed until May 12th. Um we're waiting more information um from D guidance and um the enforcement orders remain in effect as well. Okay. Um All right. So, let's go ahead and start. It's 8:00. Let's go ahead and start at
the 7:45 public hearing. Notice of intent transmission line improvements right away. New England Power Company general maintenance and improvement along the transmission lines. Who's here to speak to that? >> Allison is getting promoted over right
now and we do not have a DP file number for this yet. >> Okay. >> So, good evening. >> Hi, good evening. if you could introduce yourself and then also commissioners, you'll know in your packet there was some data that was sent for this hearing
as well. Okay, great. All yours. >> Thank you. Um, my name is Allison Miller. I'm with BSC Group. I'm here on behalf of the applicant New England Power Company. Um, I understand we're waiting our DP file number. I have reached out to the circuit writer and
zero to request a time a date when she'll be able to uh provide that to us. Um, if I may, I prepared a PowerPoint presentation to share with the commission. Um, can I share my screen? >> Yes. Thank you for asking. >> Please let me know when this is visible.
>> You're all set. >> Thank you. Um, so this notice of intent was prepared for New England Power Company and it's for the Sandy Pondites barrier liability project, which is a transmission line upgrade project. Um I was before this commission a couple years ago um for the geotechnical
investigations um portion of this work where they went out and assessed subsurface conditions um to do to complete the engineering for the structure replacements. So the entirety of the work proposed within the notice of intent is within an existing transmission line right away.
Um there are three lines that are being um replaced or or modified. Um and it's considered an asset condition refurbishment. So for the most part um there are no new transmission line facilities being proposed but it's mostly a replacement of existing
facilities or um overhead work to improve conditions of those existing facilities. Um so again it's replacements of existing structures and overhead work. Um and to facilitate this they are proposing as well improvements to structural work areas uh we call them
work envelopes or work pads and the existing access routes to be improved to accommodate the equipment. Um in total in Littleton activities are proposed at 61 structures 27 of which are within jurisdictional wetland
resource areas or buffer zones. Um, as far as wetland resource areas, uh, you know, work is proposed within bordering vegetative wetlands, 100 foot buffer zone, 200 foot riverfront area, and the female 100-year flood plane, BLSF, um,
jurisdictional areas. U, this is the overview of the project within the town of Littleton. Um, this transmission line refurbishment project does run through six towns. Um, so it's an entirety of 17.9 miles of structure
replacements. Um, of which approximately 1.65 miles is within the town of Littleton. Um, within your jurisdiction, uh, the project starts at the Air Littleton border just west of Great Road and then
extends to the Littleton Westford border just west of Beaverbrook Road. within the notice of intent filing, we've provided um our proposed impacts. Um so that includes bordering vegetated
wetland is 342 ft of permanent impact and that's for structural placements that are increasing in size that are currently existing within bordering vegetated wetland that could not be engineered outside um of those resource areas.
to mitigate for that um New England Power is proposing a 31 replication so that uh BVW replication is 1,026 square feet. impacts to bordering land subject to flooding are temporary only accounting
for um temporary matted matting work pads and access and that's 1,492 ft and within riverfront area there's 336 ft of permanent impact and this is all broken down in the notice of intent
package um by the activity as well as um the resource area. Um you'll notice in that this is table 11 that's in the notice of intent um where we've highlighted um activities based on their jurisdictionality. So a a large majority
of this work is considered exempt utility maintenance um such as overhead work on existing structures, removing existing structures, um installing structures that are smaller or the same footprint of the existing structures. Um and then we have
the orange rows here which highlight those which are subject to jurisdiction. So that's these direct embed structures which are increasing in size within these resource areas. Um this is the number of each. Um quesan which is a concrete foundation structure which is
required for certain um the certain of the structures along the transmission line to u provide a more robust um structural integrity of that structure. Usually it's um at an angle where they're receiving more um the load or what's called a dead end which um needs
to have more strength in the structure. Um graded work pads are proposed within buffer zone and riverfront area. Mo only work pads, matted access work pads and maintenance of existing access roads are included here as exempt
activities. And then type S road road is where um they do have a current access way, gravel access way, but it's become overgrown over time and they need to um it's you they need to make basically make it a little bit wider. That's a type S road. And then type 1 through
five is pretty much the road the historical access is non-existent at this point and they do need to lay fresh gravel um for the entire length and linear the width and linear length of those access roads to get the equipment in.
Uh BSC group on behalf of New England Power did conduct um vernal pool surveys. Uh we did identify two um acting vernal pools. We'll call them field delineated because they are not certified vernal pools. The first one is
shown on the plans as vernal pool L1 LIVP1. Um and we'll run through the maps after this but it's this purple area here and you'll see that there's no proposed impacts to that vernal pool. We will able we were able to work around that.
However, vernal pool LIVP2 um you'll see here we feel delineated the extent of of the um resource area in purple and it crosses the entire right ofway. Um therefore the impacts are unavoidable. Um, we did, you know, push
the matted access up on the northern edge of the right of way to avoid that the, you know, the make the smallest crossing necessary in order for the um structure placements to happen. Within your package, uh, we have our
proposed wetland replication area, which I referenced uh, previously. Um, it's shown right here. Uh it's basically west of Gillson Road um and it'll extend this existing bordering vegetated wetland area um by the 3:1 replication ratio.
And then within your package we have attachment G which has you know details engineered plans describing the wetland replication area as well as the planting plan and the seed mix um that is proposed. I'd like to run through the um performance standards from the wetlands
protection act for the commission's review. Um again the bordering vegetative wetland we are proposing 3 to one replication bordering lead subject to flooding impacts are temporary only. Um there will be no change in volutric flood storage proposed for this project.
As far as 200t riverfront area um again all activities are maintained within the existing maintained rightway. there's no new new um access or disturbance proposed within riverfront area. Um where road refreshment in is necessary
or work pad um stone needs to be placed. New power is committing to allowing those areas to naturally vegetate um and if not they will be lumped and seated to promote reveation within riverfront area. This is sorry I just noticed there's a
typo. Um Littleton performance standards. Um the 100 foot buffer zone all work is again within the maintained uh existing right of way. As far as wildlife habitat and rare species the project is undergone miser review. Um
New England Power is currently working with BSC to prepare a conservation management plan to receive a conser conservation management permit. Um, I believe the commission did receive letters from the from the reviewer from Fishing Game.
Again, as far as wetland setbacks, all activities are within historically maintained right of way because of the the structures existing where they are currently. Um, and they must be replaced, but they cannot be in the exact same footprint um because they
have to transfer the lines over to the new structures um before they can be energized. So they they can't really do it in kind. So they're they're proposing the structure replacements as close to the existing structures as possible. Um as shown as your on the NOI plans,
the project will employ erosion and sediment controls. Temporary sto soil stock piles will employ BMPPS. Um because of work existing within bordering vegetative wetlands and within close proximity proximity to those wetlands. Um they
have specialized techniques that the contractors use. Um specifically um watertight mud boxes that are used during drilling activities that contain um sediment or spoil. They call them spoils. Basically the material that's removed from the excavation areas when
they're working within wetlands and on swamp mats or temporary construction mass. Um, and if they are located in an upland or buffer zone or riverfront area, they will be stockpiled and encircled with ENS controls. And then all construction debris will be
removed post construction. In conclusion, although portions of the project um are proposed within wetland resource areas, the proposed project will minimize disturbance. Um the entire project is within an existing disturbed right of way. New England Power proposes to maximize
use of upland access routes to the greatest extent. Um employing BMPPS to protect wetland resource areas from sedimentation and soil disturbance. Um they are committed to providing appropriate mit mitigation for unavoidable in impacts.
I'd like to re rec um also clarify that this project does qualify as a limited under the wetland protection act provisions for public utilities. Um and New England Powers is also requesting a waiver for work within resource areas
including the 50ft no disturb area. At this time I'd like to do a quick overview of the NOI plans if if that's acceptable to the commission. Can Alison, can we just um pause here and see if any commissioners have questions
on um all the information that you just >> um presented? I I have some questions, but commissioners, go ahead. >> I have a question. Uh the you brought up the vernal pool that's going to be disturbed.
Um what what is the disturbance? I didn't hear you describe that or maybe you didn't. I missed it. The disturbance is temporary construction matting. >> Is it just matting matting to access a
utility line in the vernal pool? >> Yes, sir. >> And that that will be done obviously uh not during uh the the spring season. Um I don't have
I don't have detailed construction sequence at that level at this point in time. Sir, >> so you can condition that, Carl, if >> I was just going to say that was almost a kind of a rhetorical question, right? I think that's that's going to be a non-starter that yeah, construction
won't be allowed to happen during that time. Go piggybacking on Carl's question about the vernal pool. Um, I recall going through this a few years ago for the drilling. Did we have these issues with the vernal pools during the drilling? It's the same
locations, right? I don't I don't remember dealing with vernal pools for >> geographically. Well, yeah, the I will say that the geotechnical work was not at every single structure along this rightway. They needed to >> um visit those that were requiring
engineered design. Um, so those that required the case on foundations, those were the ones that were um needing the subsurface investigation. >> That makes sense. >> Alison, oh, sorry.
>> Um, with the vernal pools being you said they're not certified, right? They're not verified. >> Correct. >> Um, will those be covered in natural heritages CMP? >> Yes. So all work. So the um let me just
go back to that. Let me just share this with so this this fernal pool is not within natural heritage habitat. This one is just outside. So it will be reviewed by the reviewer as part of this
this area. But this vernal pool is not associated with any estimated or priority habitat. >> Okay. >> Could you tell me where exactly is that second pool? I I know where the first one is. >> Sure.
>> So the first vernal pool is not certified either. Correct. >> Neither of them are. That's correct. >> Thank you. >> There was more of a due diligence on our end to >> Yeah. >> document field conditions. >> Yeah. So this is let me bring you to
this is blood road. Okay. This is um this is an agricultural area. It did the maps show up sometimes. It's funny. >> Are you seeing maps right now? >> Yeah, we see. >> Okay. So this is again this is um Blood Road agricultural area and we're heading
um east. Um this is the field verified vernal pool that we found. right here. Um, and then it's continued. And this is Beaverbrook Road in the Littleton Municipal
Substation. >> Okay. Now, >> so it's kind of Okay. Okay. >> So, the the Blood Road site, um, I I know where the transmission lines are in there. So, it's within that egg field or >> No, it's it's outside the egg field.
>> Outside the egg field. Okay. >> Yep. >> Yep. So I have I'd >> say the current agricultural areas probably ends around here. >> Alison, I have a couple questions out of just clarifying. Um, in terms of the
riverfront, there was 338 square ft that were going to experience permanent altercation. But then when you were talking on a ladder um screen, you talked about 200 ft. So, can you show us
where there's going to be permanent alterations of the riverfront? Yep. >> So, this was the 336 ft. >> Okay. But then you as you kind of went down
carried on with your presentation, you referenced 200 ft there. >> Oh, that's the >> that's the actual jurisdiction area. >> Got it. Okay. Thank you. Um I'm not
familiar with a type S road versus a type 1 through five. Can you walk us through? We're originally I was thinking because we I feel like we just went through this project that
everything was going to be kind of in the same footprints, but now we're hearing that we've got more disturbed area because it's going to be to the left or the right of the transmission line. So, I'm curious. You mentioned that there are some roads that have to
be upgraded and can you walk us through type S road and type one through five? I'm not >> sure. >> Of course. >> Okay. So on the notice of intent plans um the symbology here breaks down the
different types of roads where type S is there's an existing access road but it's just not wide at this point. It's an overgrown almost like a car path if you will. Um, and the equipment that they're going to be bringing in such as large cranes, drilling equipment, um, bucket trucks,
things of that nature, triacles, dump trucks, concrete trucks, um, they require a minimum 12T um, stable access. Um, so these type S roads are basically where there's an existing road, it's just not wide enough to
accommodate the equipment they need to bring in to install these large poles. Um, so type S is an existing road that needs to be widened. Um, type R is an existing road that's wide enough, but it it just needs to maybe get a fresh layer
of gravel on it. So that's a repair like they're type R you can think like they're repairing an existing access, maintaining it. Type one through three or four to five are pretty much type one is national grid standard New England power standard access road design um and
then where we have um 2 three four to five that basically um indicates that there was some level of um engineering required so I can show you we had VHB civil engineers here's an example
so there are some access roads that are proposed that are being designed by civil engineer. Um, and that's to make sure that um they can make the grades necessary for the the large equipment coming in. So, here's an example. >> Are any of those in the resource area?
Sorry to interrupt you. >> No, no problem. Yep. Here's an example. So, this there's an proposed access road within the 100 foot buffer zone and 50ft no disturb zone. So within the 50? >> Yes, because they need to access an
existing structure to replace it that is currently located in the 50. >> Can you show us where the type S roads are going to have to be? >> Sure. >> Cuz I heard you we're going to have to bring in lots of trucks.
>> Yes. Here's an example of a type S road. Um so this is an existing road um that they are proposing to maintain. Um but then at this point it becomes narrow or gullied out where it's just not suitable for equipment. And here they'll have to
um widen the existing access in order to get the equipment in. So type S is the orange and red hatching around the access where type R is the solid orange. And how many times does it
present itself that you have to have a a type S? >> I don't think I've tallied that, but um >> is it a lot? >> Here's another example. This is not within a resource area.
>> Are they crossing over a resource area? >> This one is. This is an existing road that they need to widen in order to accommodate the equipment um getting to this existing structure here. >> And so is this one
Is that it for the SROs? >> Oh, we can keep going. There's a little spur here. They need to improve the access to get to sleeves in the conductor, but that's outside of jurisdiction. Uh there's a type S here
in order to access a pulling location. Pulling locations are basically where they set up the the reels for the after the construction is complete with the new towers to pull the overhead lines um back onto the new towers, the existing they take it from the old structures and
put it on the new structures. That's it. Okay. >> It's actually in the next town. That's actually a town line. Sorry. >> Did the old structures come out or old structures left? >> No, they do remove them. Yeah. But they can't remove them until they get the new
structures in and they pull lines over, >> right? >> Yeah. >> For any of these road enhancements, are we looking at any culverts? >> No, they are not proposing any new culverts or culvert replacements. I saw that your group or New England
Power was or is in front of the select board this evening for a a earth removal permit. Can you tell us about that? >> Certainly. Um I can tell you that uh they were before the select board and they have been they have been approved.
I did receive that text today. Um the the large scope of the work that um was subject to the select board's review was associated with these mounds. Um so this is an active agricultural area um where
the landowner farmer has basically plowed around the existing structures for very long periods of time to the point where the structures are actually on elevated mounts because everything around them has been plowed and worked.
Um so as part of this um New England Power needs to remove these mounts um and they in order to do so they've worked with the land owner um and come up with a plan uh which includes keeping
the soil for him because it's agricultural soil. Um they will be stockpiling that soil in this general location um for him to reuse uh for agricultural purposes. So that was that that's the large majority of the soil moving that's
happening on this project in Littleton. Commissioners questions know it's a lot to take in. >> Just out of curiosity, is the uh six-year time span just the work in Littleton or for the entire project?
for the entire project. Yeah. So, it's 18 miles and typically how this construction process works is you'll you'll probably see activities within your town in phases. The first phase being they'll come in and do some activities. They'll improve the existing access. they'll build new access they
need to um following that and it might be a lapse in time just because there's a progression in in seing and there's different disciplines or different contractors that specialize in different things. Um after that you'll see um equipment mobilizing that will do the drilling activities. So, they're
excavating out they're auguring out the holes um for the new pole locations. Um and then then they're then they leave the site and then there's linemen that come in and they set the poles and then they do the line transfers and they do the wire pulling. Then after all that's
done, typically we have civil contractors come back on site um and they do a lot of the restoration, debris cleanup, old pole removals, things of that nature. So it's um it's a multi-phaseed construction that has to happen um just based on the
specialties of of each contractor and qualifications. >> Thank you. >> So in your in your experience, how many times do resource areas and like the the vernal area get disturbed? It's probably not just a one and done if they're
passing through there over a six-year period. Correct. So, it will be on the contractor to, you know, sometimes the temporary matting because it's an extremely expensive thing to in install. Believe it or not, the rentals on those
are very expensive. They'll have to make a determination based on that. If they if the access is not needed for a period of time, they want to remove those mats, use them elsewhere, then come back when access is needed again and and replace them. And that's based solely on just
the long the the length of the duration of construction sequences and you know a decision that's made typically when we deal with natural heritage um as far as like vernal pool impacts or things of that nature you know once the matting
are down you know if you condition excuse me if you condition the matting to go down outside of active vernal pool season the matting may remain um because at that point you know the the amphibian breeding will happen around it and not you know it will not have an impact on
the capability of this large pool. So while we did push it to the smallest crossing possible we are as far as the entire vernal pool capabilities. You'll see here that BSC
identified this whole area you know is active and usable as a nesting site. So, you know, we minimized our impacts as best we could in this in this location. Kyle, I know you and I spent quite a bit of time out on this site with the prior
hearing. At times, this sounds quite different cuz I it's like we were at some sites really in cautious not to have equipment there overnight. The matting didn't stay for a long time. Am I remembering that
correctly? >> You are. But this is taking that project and amplifying it by a thousand. It's the scale is just the actual construction is incredibly different than >> right >> a drill rig or, you know, a geotech drill rig. They're going to use drill
rigs, but they're very, very large and different capabilities and whatnot. Um, yeah, I agree. I feel like we're talking a lot more disturbances here than we we did for that prior project, for sure. It's a little worrisome. Oh, >> Allison, this is a lot for us to take in
on first go round. I know that we would um uh insist on really walking through a lot of the majority of this this site and really honing in on disturbed areas. What's your time frame to getting access
or commissioners out there having things staked? What's kind of like time frame for that? Okay, couple questions. Um, when you say things stake, do you mean like structure proposed structure locations or what what what sort of staking are is
the commission for? >> So, I'm concerned with some of these type S roads. So, we'd want to know what your start and stop point is in terms of areas of impact
so that you would have stations. You would have to provide for us stationations of where the greatest impacts will be in the resource areas. >> When you say stations, do you mean like an engineering drawing >> or just an elevation where you can we can look at a plan and understand the
biggest area of impact is in that specific area? >> Okay. Yeah. Well, to be candid, I I don't think the type S roads are the the biggest impact area. I think it would be >> that as an example. >> Okay. Okay.
I mean, I I I think if there are cons I think if the sitewalk is warranted by the commission, then I think we should walk the entirety of the 1.65 miles. >> Mhm. >> To make sure everyone's comfortable. >> Commissioners, what are your thoughts on that? >> Yeah. No, I agree. I I think that's
that's what we did with the the prior drilling, right? We we >> I think that sounds reasonable. >> Yeah, me too. >> I I don't want to go down this road yet because I know you're still working on it, but the CMP is that in regards to
I'm a little confused by the the Fish and Wildlife. We got two letters and I feel like they contradicted each other. and said that there is no action necessary. Oh, you okay? I appreciate that. That makes me feel a little better about what I read earlier. But okay. And then the second letter
says, "Yes, there's blending turtles that you need to account for." And that's what's triggering the CMP is my understanding. >> Exactly. And so we're putting together, you know, basically agreement, if you will, um with certain commitments New England Power is going to have to make
um in order to um get a no take determination. Um some of these provisions that we are formulating include um nesting surveys. Uh we've you know we're committing to it's pretty extensive me requirements. So we have like this really big spreadsheet with
like what activities are happening when and you know everything has to adhere to that um when we're working within habitat. Um and also there's some invasive species management um that being considered um some of the the
invasive species are kind of uh encroaching on the sandy h the sandy nesting areas um on the right of way and you know we're that New England power is looking at basically removing those invasive species and doing a light planting of um like little blue stem or
something that's more advantageous to supporting um nesting. >> Great. Thank you. >> And is that something I know that we've worked very successfully over many decades with Oxbow. Do you have
specialists um with BSC that work with habitat and and such? >> Yes. So, we have a woman um named Sarah Barnham. She's a certified wildlife biologist um and she is our point person
at BSC um who is work you know who is working on this conservation management plan and permit um handinhand with the um reviewer fishing game commissioners other questions so of note this evening Sarah we're minus two commissioners
Um, obviously they will watch this and want to participate as well. >> Understood. If the commission would like to send me some times and days that might be appropriate to meet with me on site to review the site plans and the proposed
work, I would appreciate that. Um, I'd be willing to meet and if there's interest in having the certified wildlife biologist attend as well, I I can ask her to see if she's available. >> Okay. So, you feel that you're prepared to do a sitewalk now and you can call out
areas of interest. >> Absolutely. Yes. >> Okay. So, I think that would be best for us because we're minus two commissioners that we would probably work with Tim to throw out some um opportunities. We do
have some people that are available. I I think this might be more of a weekend or after work time so that a lot more commissioners can go at the same time. Correct. Thoughts on that? >> Sounds like a long walk.
>> Yep. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um so Allison, leave leave the ball in our court for a little bit and we'll have Tim kind of circle around with all of us and you all as well. >> Okay, that works. Okay, super.
>> I'll stop sharing now if that's okay. >> Yep. Thank you for your time and your presentation. >> All right. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Good evening. Bye. Bye. >> Thank you. >> Okay. It is 8:36. I'd like to go ahead and
open up the 8:00 p.m. public meeting. Request for determination of applicability. 245 Foster Street. Proposed driveway construction. Who's here to speak to that? >> Right. Hello. Can you hear me? >> Yep.
>> Hi. So, my name is Casey Ferrer. I work with Howard Stein Hudson here representing uh the owners of the property, SNS Foster. Um Tim, I'm not sure if you have the plans, if you would prefer for me to share plans or how you would like to
handle it. I think if you want to go ahead and do it, that would be g great because then you can navigate the points. >> Excellent. Um, let me know when you can see it here. >> Yep, it's up, Casey.
>> Okay, perfect. Um, so this project uh is located at 245 Foster Street. Um, it's a property that spans approximately, uh, just under 34 acres. Um, as you can see, the middle of the site does contain a
rather large uh wetland. Um, but we are not actually doing any work within the site that's going to uh affect or be within the buffer zone of that of that wetland. Um, specifically what we're looking at doing is constructing a small driveway access. Um, and the reason for
doing that is because we understand that Foster Street is going to be going through a reconstruction uh here in the near future. um we would like to just connect to Foster Street while we have the opportunity to do so. Um because if we do not get connected to Foster Street,
it'll be much more difficult over the next 5 years uh to create a connection to Foster Street. Um in doing so, um we had previously created um a preliminary subdivision plan that we had brought to the planning
board. We did not move forward with that plan. Um, but we do know approximately where um we may potentially uh put a roadway in the future if we were going to. Um, there are currently no plans to
actually build out any roadway. Uh, there's no design for a full roadway, but what we do want to do is just get connected and utilize um the location of the roadway that the planning board preferred. Um so in doing so when we were just designing this uh this
driveway entrance towards Foster Street um we were working with Mass DOT and utilizing their design plans for the new Foster Street reconstruction. Um so you'll notice the the roadway line work uh is labeled as part of the Littleton
reconstruction of Foster Street. Um, so we're basically utilizing that reconstructed condition as what we are considering an existing condition to tie into. One of the things we noticed on that plan was a wetland that was across
the street that we had not previously accounted for. Um, so that is why we are here before you uh tonight. Um you'll see we have a our our driveway entrance
here. Um so there's approximately 25 ft of roadway that we are uh intending to construct and then we are going to tie in uh the shared use path uh that the town of Littleton intended to construct along Foster Street. Um this line that
you can see coming across the screen uh the screen is a 100 foot uh buffer zone to the wetland as the wetland is shown on the mass DOT plans. And our closest disturbance that is not otherwise accounted for on the reconstruction of
Foster Street anyway is at approximately 90 ft from that wetland. And that is just where our driveway entrance uh where we break that curb to create the driveway entrance. So the majority of the driveway here and the majority of
the work on site is not within the the buffer zone or uh the buffer zone to the resource area. It is solely um the small portion of driveway entrance here and then the ramp which we'll have to construct uh to the shared use path. Uh
so that's the only modifications from the already approved foster street reconstruction uh that would be different within the resource uh the buffer zone to the resource area. >> Okay. >> And that is really that's all I have for
uh I guess laying out the project. I'm happy to answer any questions regarding uh anything you got. Tim, have you been out on site? >> Uh, I I have not. No. >> Okay. >> Has has this been a site that we have
delineated in the past? I'm trying to There's been several properties along Frost Street. >> I was thinking the same thing. I was trying to visualize where that actual entrance would be. >> Yeah. >> I was going to ask, is it at Balsam Lane
or is it Grimes Lane? So the MBTA station is right here on the left hand side of the screen and it's just adjacent to the driveway of the MBTA. >> Yeah. So it's across from Balsam >> is my understanding. But I think the short answer is yes. We've dealt with
this that wetland that he discussed >> right >> for all of that that whole pro that project that he's mentioning. I I I appreciate that he's that he's brought this in front of us, but I I'm not sure. I get that there's a change, but I don't
see a change, an end change. This was always going to be pavement curbed. There was going to be a sidewalk that mixeduse path there. I now it's going to be a driveway. I I don't see Yeah. So, just as a little bit of
background, when we were um once I first uh determined this wetland in this location, um the first thing I did was I reached out to the conservation office. Um, I spoke with Lauren and I believe she spoke with Tim regarding this and their suggestion was although it's very
much the same just to bring it in front of this commission just to get the opinions through an RDA process here. >> Yeah, I definitely appreciate that. >> Real quick, um, can you zoom in a little bit on the plan? There's an area within the 100 foot buffer zone. If you're
looking at the plan, it's it's to the left of the proposed uh, driveway. There's a bit of a gap between the the shared use path and then the proposed erosion controls. Um but it's it's tough without me uh I've got my cursor over
it, but um Yep. So if you move Yep. Right around in that area. There's a little bit of grading proposed in that area. Is that correct? >> Yeah, that's correct. So essentially what we're showing so the I guess the easiest way to describe
this is we have an existing conditions plan that is from 2021 or circa 2021 and then the plan that we have for the roadway only extends the grading to the limit of the right of way. So the grade
So what you'll see here in this location is basically just a difference of grades on what mass dot had proposed for the edge of the shared use path to what we have as an existing condition. So we've just provided a little bit of an area to
make up that difference. I don't know how much that difference is actually going to be. Um but we've just provided an area to tie in the contours where we know on both sides where they are. I don't think that could be a big grade difference though, correct? With all the
changes that have occurred out there. >> No, it's it's within a half a foot or so in each direction. We're just using it to tie in. >> Okay. So, initially we were we're discussing whether or not this is something that could um be administratively approved as a as a
minor um or not as a minor project, but um >> minor mod. no exemption under uh WPA, but because it's all within existing roadway, right? Where the driveway modification and the the
um yeah, where the driveway modification is. But with the grading, I thought, you know, we have the grading and the 100, we might as well just throw it out there as an RDA. So, is this is this um heading heading down Foster Street
towards the MVTA station? Is this on the hillside to the right before you get to the before you get to the parking lot? >> Yes, that's Yep, that's exactly where it is. So remember we had a um on that if I
remember right um there's a seepage slope >> right >> on that >> up behind that >> but I guess now with the drainage coming out of that driveway where's that is that calculated
of where that's going to go down that road into the catch basins that no longer exist. So they exist. It's not the deep. So careful what you say. >> Well, that Well, I thought we I thought they were taking some out that were proposed.
>> They altered them. They had to change the the catch basins that were proposed. So, there's still catch basins to catch runoff, just not the recharge ones that we were pushing for. >> Thank you for that clarification.
>> I just didn't want you get caught or something. But no, that I mean that's a good question, especially going forward if the I mean this driveway is going to turn into something I imagine or propose to turn into something, right? Um this isn't a massive square foot area
that would add a lot of runoff into into those structures, but going forward could be a concern. >> So we minimized the driveway here uh basically to allow for flexibility in the future. We currently don't have, like I said, any plans for, you know,
what this may be in the future or whether something may even happen in the next five or so years. This is just to give us the ability in case, you know, an opportunity does arise in the next 5 years, we won't have to fight to tie in. Um, so the way we've graded this is just so that there is a high point um right
after where the shared use path crosses. um that will come back towards the faucer street rightway and that's just per the mass DOT profiles and the the town of Littleton profiles for how they want that um I guess the the side of the right of way
to go. They want it to go up uh off of the um roadway to create a gutter line and then they have the shared use path which comes across which requires a certain cross slope. Um so we have that coming up. All of that drainage will go back towards Faucia Street, but then the
remainder and what we can we are capturing back on our site. We've um included a small little we'll call it staging area just so that it can collect. We don't anticipate a lot of storm water actually coming off. Um but just a staging area for it to collect
and dissipate uh before it runs off. But again, that area is outside of the the resource uh buffer zone. Anybody have any questions or thoughts on this? I'm curious on the permitting aspect of
this. >> Am I in what regards? If we're just looking at this access driveway, we're not looking at anything more than that. >> Tim, walk us through the your stream of
thoughts on this again. Um, so the little section of of driveway, um, it's it's going from being a a paved service to a to a paved service, right? And and one of the exemptions under the
wetlands protection act is conversion of um work with an existing roadway, right? So it exactly this um the thing that upgraded it to an RDA for me was the the minor grading that is
proposed um still within the the 100 foot um but on the other side of the the shared use path. So there's there was nothing that that could exempt that activity in in WPA. Okay. >> Thank you.
I I think we've all spent a lot of time out in that area. Are we thinking we need to go out on that area or what are our thoughts? If if I could just add uh real quick a little bit of background for this small area that although within the 100 foot
resource area uh is the grading here. This is also area that was previously approved to be disturbed by Mass DOT. >> I was just going to say that >> you'll see that there is two grade outlines here per their plans. One is a um a permanent easement and then a
temporary easement. So this was the limits of their construction work. So even though our limit um is just about here where we want to put in this um erosion control per MOT mast's plans
they intend to disturb up to this gray TE line. Um so well beyond uh even what we're showing. >> Yeah. And I I was wondering if they haven't already honestly with either their the trailers that are there or the stock piles of material. It it's I mean
have you gone by there late? It doesn't look great. Um Sarah, so I go ahead. >> Sorry, I was just I've been in contact with them this past week. Um because I noticed the condition, too, and and they're getting people out there this week and next to
>> clean up the whole stretch. >> Okay. >> So, what do you >> Okay, >> I think the applicant's looking for a negative determination. >> Okay. Commissioner's thoughts on that. Sounds good. Hey,
>> do we have someone that want to make a motion? >> I'll make a motion that the commission issue a negative three determination for 245 Foster Street proposed driveway construction. >> Second. >> Second.
>> All right. Roll call vote. Uh Kyle >> Kyle Maxfield I. >> Michael >> Michael Livingston. I >> Sarah >> Sarah Seawward. I >> Carl >> Carl Melberg. I >> myself I it's unanimous. >> Okay. Thank you for coming in, Casey.
>> I appreciate that. Thank you. Enjoy your night. >> Thank you. Have a good night. >> You too. >> Okay. We're going to jump right back up into discussion items. Conservation land field burns. Tim. >> All right. Um, so this past week, Lauren and I, Lauren and I were um were able to
walk um the fields of Long Lake Park as well as um the field in the back of New Town Hill um with steel and talk about doing burns. Um he
mentioned the ideal window. We we kind of just missed it for for this spring. So there's there's two windows. you got a spring window and a fall window. Um, preferably you want to go for the the spring window. Um, but he did say that both of those fields are are good
candidates to have burns. Um, so we weren't sure with with Long Lake Park with the amount of of poison ivy um that there can be out there, but when we were out there, we we didn't see too much um
to to raise those red flags. Um, so I think ideally we would probably wait until next spring to have those burns done. Um, they can be done as as trainings um just to kind of see how
like basically do a test, right? And and see how it it goes. um in subsequent years would need to get um pres prescribed burns done and approved by the state. Um and he said it's it's best to have these done not as like a one and
done but to have multiple years in a row have there be uh burns at these at these fields in order for them to be most effective. Hey Tim, are are you talking for these burn windows? Um are you talking about the moisture content and the grasses or
>> in the green that's that's growing up and you also want to make sure that it's it's not happening um in line with the the ground nesting birds or you want to make sure that it's happening. So >> So we coming back >> do we have a um do we have a burn plan
that was done by No. So, so I think what what you're referencing is like a a formal um burn plan that would that would go to the state to get a a prescription. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, so so we're all set up and if we don't, we should
probably get that. So, it's set up to go. So my understanding is that we can we can move ahead with maybe not doing the entire field but a section of it um and and seeing how it does compared to the the section that was untouched like the
control um and then if it yields good results or promising results then we go down the avenue of getting a full-on prescription um approved by the state. Are you talking about doing like a small you talking about doing a small area? That's
>> so yeah when >> like a New Town Hill back in that area for example um in that field we were thinking pretty much splitting it down the middle um and the way that trying to
remember when I was out there basically doing half of that field. >> And is it off the table to do it in the fall or we're just looking at springtime? I don't know if it's I don't know that's off the table. Um Steel was saying it is
more beneficial to do it during the the spring though. Um because if you do it in the spring, that's that's right at the time where you're getting the vegetation is is ready to go right after um right after
the burn in the spring. And so it's more beneficial for the the native grasses. >> Okay. >> So let me ask you this. uh as opposed to burning could just mow it. >> Well, in the fall
>> we have been mowing it. Um it you still have like the um the woody debris or the woody plants um take hold, right? And it's it's tough with with just mowing it to get those. Um whereas the burn
>> gets to those and it and it benefits >> the Yeah, the burn and the burn has to be like a hot I mean to get to the roots >> it's got to be a slow hot burn otherwise it doesn't do anything, >> right? >> So that's that's that's where the burn
plan comes into play. >> Yeah. So, it sounds like we're not in opposition. Um, >> I guess we just want to have more information. >> Yeah. Um,
do you guys want to entertain the idea of a fall burn or or are you >> I hear that spring is is is >> I think I think if it comes up that it looks like it's going to be viable or beneficial to come back to the commission.
>> I agree. >> Yeah, I would. Yeah, >> it it would probably need to be super quick like we get out there next spring right as the snow melts. Um and then, you know, next meeting look for for approval.
>> Do do we know if we have nesting birds there? I guess that's >> there's nesting there's ground nesting birds at Long Lake Park. That was something that I was gonna I was gonna actually reach out to Dustin Nell and talk with him about to make sure that we're doing that in an ideal time
>> where it's not gonna affect the ground nesting birds. >> That would that would have to be the fall, I think, because we can't even mow in there till what? Beginning of August, end of July. >> Yeah. But they're not nesting with snow on the ground, right? Like if we're
>> Right. Right. Right. >> The only reason you mow so late is because there's no reason to mow early in the spring or summer, right? So, if we get out there after the snow melts, like Tim said, then you're there before the birds are. But, >> y >> I and I probably making that up. I'm totally I would my response would be
that I trust the professionals. Whoever you're working with, whatever their recommendations are, that's who I would trust to follow. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> We we also talked with Steel a little bit about invasive disposal while we were out there. um trying to navigate,
you know, what we're doing to to provide that. Um and so we just talked about a couple things what what he'd be looking for um with that. And in if we were to coordinate doing burns with those invasive disposal piles, um and so areas
that that aren't near houses, um ideally some sort of uh like unnatural surface, right? you're not going to get regrowth of the invasives for for any that that don't fully die.
Um if the area can be um have a tarp over it to allow for solarization um before the burn also ideal. So some things that we were talking about with him. We're still trying we're still looking at locations. Um I spoke with
Steve Yanley about this and a little bit and he mentioned that when he was in Chelmsford they had an area that was um kind of contained by jersey barriers. >> Um so I asked about this and he said that the heat will actually break down
the concrete over time. Um so I guess it's it's not a perfect situation but um just an option. So, we're still having talks about invasive disposal and we'll come back to you soon when we have
some options. >> I mean, the best place to do that kind of thing is like in a gravel pit area or some place, you know what I mean? That's that's if we if Littleton has a place like that, they can just dispose of it and have the burn in there. That
>> that seems to work the best. >> Okay. Well, Tim, I think that's clear as mud. So, I don't think we offered too much much guidance, but a good start for discussion. Um, let's carry on. So, we've got other things. Uh, meeting
schedule. So, um, that was sent along in your packet. So, you know that we are pushed off to uh May the 12th because of town meeting, but then you can see that uh how it follows afterwards. Um,
anybody have any questions on proposed dates. >> Yeah, it was really just that change. It it just we put that schedule together before we knew when town meeting was. >> Yep. >> Um and you know had to make the change. >> So we're going to have backtoback weeks.
Is that what I've seen? >> We are. Yeah. >> Yep. >> There's no concern with that or I mean for your sake are we looking like it's busy or what? Uh, I mean I guess >> we can we can play a bunch here.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. I mean my concern is right if we have somebody come in and we ask for edits or whatnot, they don't have time to do anything to get it to the next meeting, right? And then they're looking at a month away to get on. >> Yep. It's a good point, Ka. It's just really if more of like a new filing
comes in, >> then have to have it. So I think that'll be um just a wait and wait and see on that. >> Okay. Is there Sarah Sarah, is there anything on the town meeting that involves the conservation commission? >> Yep, we're getting to that. Yep. Um,
let's do 151 Taylor Street, North Bridge, groundwater monitoring sitewalk. I on the off chance that all the commissioners are here, I was going to schedule this uh at the meeting. Sounds like we're already going to be scheduling um the sitewalk for the the the
transmission line project. So, I'll just send it out. I'll just send around an email um scheduling both of those at the same time. >> I forgot about that one. Are they pressing you for that? >> Um they actually just submitted their um latest report and and we were kind of
waiting on the the snow. Um >> that that's something that I don't know that all the commissioners >> are going to need to as well. So >> that one might be a little easier for you to facilitate. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. Great. Um, what I'd like to do now
is Tim, if you can share article 30. Do you have that that you can share at some point? >> What I wanted to do, um, is just go over briefly, um, the town meeting report for voter
information on page I don't know what that is, page 56, article 30. And so I just want to make sure that everybody understands a little bit more where um this is
going. Um and I was hoping that Tim might be able to just briefly walk us through that. >> Yeah. So Sarah actually brought this to my attention today. I I was not aware of this um going in front of town meeting.
Um so last year there was an article passed in Springtown meeting to create a revolving fund for clean lakes committee um that's funded by the parks in a wreck um long
leak town beach program and and the fees that they they have with that. Not all the fees but just a portion of them. Um right now there's about $2,300 in that account. There's no clear answer on how much it is um acrewing each year. It's
kind of based on uh what parks and wreck is is taking in. Um the funds within this revolving fund can only be allocated for um work or or maintenance or improvements um to Long Lake itself.
No other water bodies. Um and this work has to be whatever whatever work is uh proposed has to be approved by the um parks and recck committee. So that's that's as it exists today. Um
right now this is this is these are funds that are being um controlled by the clean lakes committee and this article is seeking to transfer that responsibility from clean lakes committee to conservation commission. So we we knew this was happening at some
point, but it sounds like we're getting caught off guard by it and there was no discussions about it. >> I mean, I was aware that we were going to control the the funds that we're getting for CPC for um invasive management um
and and the lake management plans. Um, it was just it it was never clearly relayed that all like when all this stuff is going to be >> right. That's my point. So, I guess the
bottom line is Clean Lake Committee is no longer going to be recognized by the town and we're going to take over those duties. Is that my understanding with this? Well, it's still unclear, but like I want to say
>> great. That's not good, right? And I'm not I'm not blaming you at all, but the fact that you don't know what this article means or what it relates to you going forward, that's not that doesn't seem okay in my eyes what the town's doing here. >> Yeah, it's >> Michael, I know that you and and Ed went
to um the FinCom meeting. Was any of this brought up in terms of funding or the catalyst for funding for like the lake management plan and such? The what I remember of the discussion
was the idea of the Clean Lakes Commission still being there and offering, you know, their considered advice, but it was really going to be uh conservation commission that had the ability to act.
But I I don't remember I don't remember anything about these funds or uh that being part of the discussion. I don't believe this was referenced during that meeting. I don't recall it. It was. >> Yeah. >> Andrew, do you have any insight with um
you know, we just talked about CPC and different funding or or such and how this might pertain to who's going to hold the purse strings and who's going to do out the money for >> Yeah. So, if I'm remembering that um joint meeting that we had with Fincom
and Select Board on that Super Saturday night um a couple months ago, I think we mainly just um addressed CPA funding for lakes and lake management. We never actually delved into, okay, Concom, you're going to be given responsibility
of this revolving fund or that one. So, this is pretty new. there had been inclinations that, you know, we'd be taking on more responsibilities for the lakes um on behalf of the town instead of CLC. Um but yeah, no directs pointing
to this actual revolving fund. So it is uh kind of a new uh thing. >> And how how is this money acred that goes into this particular fund you had mentioned? Is that park and wreck? >> Yeah, it's parks and wrecks. um their
fees that they get associated with the town beach. Um it's not all of them. It's it's just uh some of them. I'm not sure how the number like how the amount the is is determined each year. >> Okay. >> Whether it's like a percentage I I don't
know. >> Okay. It's not something I'm I'm versed in at all. Okay. Um, >> is is there going to be push back from clean lakes here? Like what are we expecting to happen at town? Like I can see that the finance committee and
select board apparently recommended it and select board move and seconded to approve it. Has anybody else been discussing this? >> I don't even know. >> Yeah, >> I have no idea. >> That's why I just wanted us to be at
least aware of this and so um there is enough time. So if there are other questions, Tim can facilitate that and you know kind of disseminate the answers to us if you do have a specific question. >> Um but yeah, I just wanted everyone to not be caught off guard.
>> Yeah. So, I appreciate this Sarah and I guess my question that we need to I think need to talk about right now is are we supporting this that we're going to get asked if we right I would think >> I want to be careful that this was put on as a discussion item that this >> that's very Yeah.
>> I don't feel comfortable doing a vote or or having a discussion because there's so many other questions. So, I did this just as kind of like an an FYI. So, >> okay. So, we're going into town meeting blind and not being able to talk about this. >> Well, I think if Well, not true. I think
if you had a specific question, now is a great opportunity to ask Tim to get you an answer. So, that's I I think the a clearer path forward for that. So, um if there is a question, um
Tim could certainly try and get answers for that prior to the meeting. And we can certainly post uh for town meeting as well. So if this comes up on the floor, you know, we can quickly get a consensus of, you know, if somebody brings up a good issue, we can, you
know, gather around and say, hey, maybe we want to go down this path or maybe this is okay. Um so at least we'll be able to take some action at the meeting if you know something comes up and we're not really comfortable. >> Think about that if you had quorum on the floor.
>> Yeah. Yeah. So just because we do have some new commissioners that you can't just speak on behalf of conservation. >> Exactly. We'd have to have a quorum present and and make a decision through a posted meeting, but we can post anyway
just in case. >> All right. Well, I think if you know if somebody has a question, feel free to email Tim. I would say sooner versus later. Um, okay. Let's come back to our agenda. Did I miss anything? Tim, you're going to work on You got
quite a bit of work to do after tonight with the enforcement orders. Um, okay. All right. With that said, it's Would someone like to
911? Would someone like to make a um motion to adjurnn? >> Motion to adjurnn. A second. >> All right. Last roll call of the night. Kyle. >> No. Matt. >> Carl. >> Carl. I.
>> Sarah. >> Sarah Seawward. I >> Michael. >> Michael Livingston. I >> myself. I. It's unanimous. And we are ajourned.