Um, good evening. We're going to go ahead and open Lilton Conservation Commission. It's November 4th, 2025 via Zoom. So, um, with that said, we're going to go ahead and start with the approval of minutes from October 21st,
2025. Does anyone have any omissions or corrections? um to the pages that Tim had sent along. >> I just have a couple of minor uh things under the uh dock discussion or the uh
land use future land use of uh um the Lakeshore Drive parcel. Uh Tim Mahern um he is the let's see one two the third paragraph down. It's just missing the N on his name in that paragraph.
And then there was one other thing under let's see here uh 19 Ipssw switch drive it says Scott Hayes foresight engineering was present since the last meeting Mr. Hayes indicated the two maple trees adjacent to the raised shed will remain designated a it kind of jumps into that
next part. I don't know if we can divide that up and just kind of reformat that sentence. Um but other than that uh that's all I had. Okay, great. Anybody? >> I had one. Yeah, I had oneition on the uh the 97 mil road conversation. I just
asked to add um that we had some concerns on the cross-section, the construction sequence that they uh had shown us that we needed some clarification on how it would function, how it would work. I had sent some edits over to Timman this morning. >> Okay, thank you.
Anyone else? If not, do we have a motion to approve the minutes as amended? >> Move. >> Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Okay. Andrew, please. >> Roll call vote. All right. Carl
>> Kyle Melberg. I >> uh Kyle >> Kyle Max. >> Ed. >> Edi. >> Sarah. >> Sarah Seawward. I >> and myself. I. It is unanimous. >> Okay, great. Thank you. Um, let's go ahead and move on to administrative
discussions. Does anyone have anything that they need to add to this list? Tim, do you have anything? >> Um, just the mention, not that we can discuss it, but the mention that we're um going to be issuing an enforcement order. >> Okay. Well, and we'll discuss that at
the next meeting. >> Correct. >> Okay. Does anyone else have anything they'd like to add? Okay. Let's go ahead and start with the Long Lake Park hazard trees near Harwood Avenue parking. >> All right. Um so a little while ago,
Lauren and I were approached by the um the church that sits on the corner of New Town Road and Harwood. So right next to the Rwood parking area for Long Lake.
Um they they mentioned that they want to remove some trees because one came down close to the structure. There's so on the lot there's the church and there's another house and I guess one tree came down that was close to the structure um and they wanted to see if they can get
other trees in the area removed as well. It's unclear right now whether or not they're within the buffer zone and so it's it's likely that they'll have to come in front of us um if that's the case. Right. Um, in the event that
they're not, they are on conservation land. They are on Long Lake Park property. Um, so the ask here is basically to for your guys's approval for these trees to be removed on conservation property if they're deemed
a hazard. Now, there they did provide a arborous note. Um, it was very general and honestly there's I think I'm going to pull up the arburous note and share that with you guys. Two of the trees I can identify. The other I believe it's
two or three. I'm not sure which ones they are and I still need to get clarifi clarification um from my contact over there on that. So, I'm going to show you the two trees. >> Right. And on the letter it says these trees consist of one spruce and three
pines. However, in the narrative then it refi refers to as one tree. >> Yeah. >> Um so so this is one of the trees. Um you can see there's a Can you guys see this? >> Yes. >> Yep. So there's a yellow um flagging
around this tree. This is one of them um that they're looking to remove. The other one is the one that they noted as a hazard to New Town Road, not the structure. It's
this one right here, and that it's leaning towards New Town Road. So, I'm I'm really not sure why they're looking to remove that one since it's not it hasn't been designated as a hazard to the the house. Um, but that's their request.
Why would we take a tree down unless it's going to fall down? >> Yeah. And in the reverse note, it it only states that it's a hazard, I believe, because of the I think it was size, species, and it might have said
characteristics. I can pull that up here real quick. >> Are the trees in question flagged? >> That's the thing. There were seven initially flagged when me and Lauren went out there to take a look at them. Now they're only looking to remove what
did it say? Um four, right? One one spruce and three pines. So we're unclear which of those seven trees um are the are the the five. So we still need to get clarification on that.
>> This is near that Chinese church. Uh, I believe so. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Would you be able to ask them to flag the current four trees that we're looking at? >> And that's what I was waiting to hear from them on um if they can do that for
us. That's the next step. So, this might have been a little preemptively brought up um to you guys since we don't know exactly which ones there are there. But um those >> I think if they could do that prior to the next meeting, everybody could go and do a driveby. Yeah, that yeah, >> unless you think it's an unless there's
an eminent hazard on something. >> I mean, I don't I don't feel terribly comfortable giving an opinion on that just because I'm not a certified arborist, but I mean, I will say >> they don't really give a very detailed explanation for why these trees are are
a hazard in the in the >> thoughts or guidance for Tim on these trees. I think until we take a good look at them on the ground and identify which trees they're actually looking at, we could probably be a little more cautious
in making any determinations. I would say >> I I I will say of the seven that we looked at that were flagged out there, um don't want to say they're they're hazards or not hazards, but they don't appear to I mean that that
one I showed appeared to be obviously dead, but the other ones appeared to be in good living condition. I will say that. >> Okay. inclined not to cut them down unless we are absolutely certain. >> Okay. So, let's go ahead and move this
forward to the next meeting. And in the meantime, if you can chat with Tree New England Tree Masters and ask to flag the four that they're looking for us to um look at, that would be great. >> Okay. Next is the four pond aquatic
vegetation management D file 204-823. And that's the year uh 2025 year-end report that was submitted to the commissioners um by water and wetland quite a few pages.
Um any questions on that or Tim any action? I don't think there's any item for that. >> That was just to to notify you guys of of the results. Um it looks like they had a successful treatment there this year. Commissioners, anyone have any questions
on that? >> I I am curious um other reports that might be coming in from other bodies of water. >> I don't know that any other bodies of water like Long Lake for P, Long Lake Forge Pond or Spectacle Pond have had received um treatments this past year. I
think there was some permitting um windows that weren't met um for those water bodies. So I I don't believe any of those had treatments done. >> Okay. Any commissioners have have any questions on
>> are these multiple year treatments? >> Tim, >> it this report that we received was only this past year. Um but they're reoccurring. Yep. >> Yeah. And it it does reference that in the
narrative and also projected um uh future forecast as well. Okay. All right. So, we'll file that report. Um I'm going to strike the next item which is a discussion on conservation budget. We're not ready to discuss that. We don't have enough
information on that. Um, one thing I'd like to add is just a reminder on the next meetings which we have November the 18th and
December the 2nd. So, I know as we're kind of getting into some of the the holidays, we just want to make sure. Um, Tim, I did actually had a question on that. Is it projected past the 2nd when we're meeting? So, we can look three out
>> past um January 2nd. >> No, December 2nd, >> I believe I I thought we had it scheduled um into January, but I'll I'll I'll check on that. >> Okay. All right. If you do have a chance
to go ahead and and do that as well, that would be great. >> Sure. >> Um so, we have so the next the public hearing opens at 7:45. It's now 7:40. I do want to make note that the 8:00, which is a notice of intent for 2:42
King, um will not be heard tonight. We will open that and close it and move and move not close it, but move it forward. So, we have the 7:45 and then the 8:00. Um and then we have to make sure we have quum because I'm not voting on the 8:00
um due to missing meeting on that. So, um Tim, you want to bring us up to date on anything else? I know you had mentioned in the last meeting about the braille trail. Um any commissioners have any thoughts on on that.
We were asked to kind of look if there were opportunities that someone might have something that they'd like to mention. >> Was there a proposal? >> Yeah. Well, I think in terms of location, Tim, do you want to talk to that briefly?
>> Sure. Yeah. And in since last meeting, um Lauren and I have actually met with um Jim O'Neal and uh we met over at Long Lake at the Colonial Drive entrance um
to see if that was a a good candidate for an area to have it. Um unfortunately, there's the I think it's an AT&T easement over there. Um, and so there would be challenges there. And I'm not sure if it would be possible or or
ideal to have um a Braille trail that has a break in it going across an AT AT&T easement. There is a way we can fit in about a quarter mile loop um before that easement. There's there's not a a
ton of um room before you get to the to that easement when walking in from that entrance. Um but that area is very flat and that's something that we're um really looking for is areas that are that don't have too much of a grade to them. Um other locations that were
floated um and we're thinking about are YAP um and um Balsam. >> The um the loop at Yap would actually be really nice. The slope going down into it is a little messy. Um, from uh, New
Town Road, the grade is just kind of pitched and it's a little treacherous. Um, but the loop itself is flat. Like if you came in from uh, Picker Lane, I mean, that might be a great contender actually. >> That's a great suggestion. Anybody else have any other suggestions?
>> Yeah, and it's great that you guys are looking at um, trails. Is has anybody had discussions with people that might be using these? And I don't know the group, but if there is a group or anything like that, I feel like that's somebody we need to bring in and maybe they already have a thought like that
where an ideal spot would be. Um, >> yeah, we we plan on we haven't reached out to the disability com uh committee or commission yet. Um, but that is on our on our plan to do that. Yeah, I I honestly didn't have a lot of time last
week to um to put into this um crunching budget stuff. >> Yeah, I know you had budget stuff. Yeah, that's that's fine. >> Yeah, I think I So, I would say sooner rather than later. >> Yeah, >> I we can throw out trails all we want, right? We know the properties and we can list ones we think are appropriate, but I don't think we are necessarily the
ones that should be making that decision. we can provide input, but >> and then Tim, if there's any commissioners that want to help you and Lauren on that to take the lead for that as well, it might be nice to I know you all have been busy with quite a few sites as well, especially with all the
rains that we had that got a little um little hairy for the last couple weeks with some of those big storms. >> Yeah. Um, not to to jump to something else yet, um, but one thing that I I can add while we have time before our next um,
hearing is Foster Street. Um, we have been going out there pretty much daily um, to ensure that they're, you know, the erosion controls are staying in good condition. They have, um, started work on that corner of Grimes and Foster. They've um graded the area, so they're
going to be expanding the um the roadway footprint in that area. >> Okay, great. Thank you for that. Okay, it's 7:45. Let's go ahead and open the public hearing notice of intent 15 Park Drive, construction of an addition and attached uh covered porch. Who's here to
speak to that? I don't know if you need to move someone over, Tim. >> Yep, I'm going to move over Mike. >> Mike? Yep, we see you. Mike, if you can if you can introduce yourself, that would be great. >> Yes. Good evening. Um, my name is Mike Leuk of 15 Park Drive. Uh, I'm joined
with >> Allison Fortune, 15 Park Drive, >> and we're looking to add an addition onto our existing structure at 15 Park Drive. uh an addition and a covered porch attached covered porch.
Um I have um I believe you've been shared the plots by the surveyor. If not, I can share my screen and bring that up if you'd like. >> Sure. Go ahead. >> We also have a number of photographs going.
>> That would be great. That would be very helpful. Thank you. Um this is the plot that we had um of our structure as it's currently existing. Uh in the green in the front of the dwelling is the addition that we're looking to propose the 12x 12 with
a 4x12 covered porch next to it. Um, we have a small stream that's running along the west side of the property line, uh, which we had a variegated wetland report done back in June,
flagging it, uh, and identifying where it is. So, our current structure where we're looking to do the addition is outside the 50oot no disturb zone. >> And the structure that we're looking to put is going to be on these helical peers. So, we're not doing any digging
into the subsurface. And I guess the other thing to point out on the figure here is the erosion control which we have marked um kind of going alongside uh we have an existing vegetable garden. So, it's kind of coming out from the uh bulkhead of our
crawl space and then following out to the street there. So, that's shown there. The other things that are noted on the figure are um the driveway. It's a little hard to see, but it says Batuminous Drive, Bit Drive. Um and that
is um that's an indication of the paved driveway that exists there in that dotted line. Um >> it might be good to jump to a couple pictures now to kind of put a visualization onto that. Um this is just
a sketch that um the conservation not the conservation commission sorry the um environmentalist did of >> the wetlands delineation um that was then incorporated with the actual surveying >> um this is the front of the property. So
the next slide actually kind of sketches out where we're looking to put this addition right in front of the house. Um, so only coming out about 12 feet, not going all the way to the west side of the house. Uh, from this direction,
you can kind of see towards this tree line in the distance. That tree line is on the edge of the um stream at the at the top of a bank. >> It's like a ridge going down to the stream. But yeah, there's the there's our vegetable garden.
So that's where the um it would sort of f almost follow this um gully you know with uh our boundary for putting up hay bales or whatnot as our um you know protecting
the 50ft zone. >> This is the actual stream and you can see some of the flags in this kind of picture over here. Um the stream runs pretty much south and then it has another embankment that comes up on top. You can kind of see the edge of the iron
fence that we have up at the top of the hill here. Uh just yet another >> Excuse me. Ed >> Oh, do do you know what the stream connects to? >> It goes down to the frog pond by Long Lake.
>> And is it is it running all the time? Is it perennial? >> No, it's intermittent. Um >> this summer it was quite dry. >> Yeah, it tends to dry out. It tends to be most active obviously in the spring um and so through about the time when
this delineation happened um which was June July it's maybe running a bit August it tends to be dried out fall you know the fall is not super wet either and then it will >> except after these past weeks
>> events right um you know in winter it's not very active and like I said it's mainly spring and You can you can kind of see a bit of the embankment here. And then there's another picture I have that will kind of show it a little bit better. Um this is kind of a far away picture. So the
addition we're looking in the front left of the house, this little tiny maple here, which is has that first blue flag that kind of shows you the distance from a visualization kind of point of view of um what we're talking about. And then you can kind of make out the mound here, which um I believe is going to be the
leeching field that we currently have that is on the um plot that we have. >> Yet another angle. >> So you can see the flag. >> You see that flag on that maple here. Um and then this is from the opposite side looking back towards the house. So
the stream is right here. It's kind of hard to make out some of the blue flags, but you can see the embankment that comes up before the leeching field. Then then we're talking about doing this addition on the opposite side. >> You you're saying addition,
it's an addition or a porch or >> It's a one room addition that's going to be um an office. Both of us work from home and you can see we're sort of crowded around this little desk right here. Um, so, uh, it'll be our office space and then there'll be like a front
porch just sort of tying it together into the into the where the existing door is. >> Interesting that it doesn't need some kind of foundation. >> Um, the suggestion, sorry.
>> Right. A helical pier is a foundation. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I just >> in place foundation >> of an addition being put just on peers. I guess maybe I'm just not knowledgeable in that. >> Yeah, it's a ground improvement. It's it's just as just as competent as a concrete wall. Your typical footage.
>> You know what the what's the distance from the uh edge of the stream? I didn't see it to the uh to where the construction is. >> 62.5 >> 60 wetland. >> Oh, that's that's to the boarding. The
stream is even further out, but it's >> the bordering wetland. I'm sorry. >> Yeah. So, 62.5. >> Thanks. >> Um, couple quick questions. Um, access, you had mentioned your, uh, driveway. Is that how construction vehicles and such
will get in? And then also, so you're doing a porch as well. Is the porch open or is that covered? >> It was a covered porch. >> Okay. >> And in terms of the access to the spot where it's working, it's going to be the driveway and the street itself. Um, so
all building like materials would be stored in our driveway, which is a a paved road, a paved surface. How far will you be away from your
septic system? Your your looks like a raised bed. >> I I don't know exactly how far away it would be. Um it's not on here. I mean, the septic system is listed on here, but the measurement itself isn't on here. >> I was just curious with the grade. My my
the reason I ask is um you're picking up additional roof drainage and so you'll just want to uh envision where you want that to go so it's not going over towards your system. >> Can you show that picture of the front
of the house again? I had the same concern, Sarah. And it looks like it's it's already graded to just run right towards the street, right? It looks like there's a little >> grading is is meant to drain it away from the house. You're correct. And then actually where these big cle um plants
are is actually a rain garden in the front. >> I don't think I have a good one of the rain garden. >> Yeah, you do. >> I do. Oh. Oh, >> no. Not really. >> So, kind of here. Right here. >> You can see that is like a little depressed rain garden. Yeah.
>> Um so, and that is kind of like a depressed channel as Allison just mentioned that that is guiding the water out towards the street from the gutter. Um, that being said, I don't think I've really seen this being overly saturated at this point from that gutter, even
during heavy rains. >> No, it doesn't. The water does not tend to collect there at all. >> Um, quick question on your rain garden. Was that part of the original when the septic system was upgraded? Was that permitted or was that just something
that you all added later on? >> That was just existing when we bought the house. Okay. >> I mean, I'm calling it a rain garden. Yeah. Because we we did put quite we did permit quite a few of those with some of the um changing of septic systems. So >> yeah. No, that was um that's always been
there since there was there used to be a dogwood tree there as well, but um >> yeah, now it's just a garden. >> Okay, Kyle, does that answer your question? Yeah, I think that makes me feel between being a raised a raised septic system
and then kind of already a channel for storm water. It looks like we're adding impervious area. Looks like the porch itself is going to be taking away driveway space and maybe half and half. >> It's going to cut it's going to cut a little bit into it for sure. >> Yep.
>> Well, that's your driveway, not a walkway. >> Oh, it's a driveway. >> The way it is now is kind of both. Okay. Doesn't feel like it's going to have a huge change in the with the roof line
with the with water necessarily from what you have now. So, >> yeah. What I guess what's the what's the roof line going to look like as far as either tying into the existing or >> It is planned to tie into the existing roof.
>> Yep. Um I I we haven't gotten and done the actual building design yet. We were waiting to have um these approvals before we then put together that and then went for a permit. But um I think some of the initial ideas was to have um the peak head towards the main house and
attached to the house. So the runoff like you mentioned would be towards the driveway and towards the the >> the gully >> the gully. So, just to clarify, the footprint that you're looking at now is going to be the same footprint. It won't it when you go
to your design, it's not going to get bigger. And the reason I ask is that would be an amendment. So, we want to make sure you can always go smaller >> once it's approved, but you can't go bigger. >> Yeah. No, this is this is it. Yeah. This is what we're approved for the >> um we Yeah, we did need a variance
getting closer to the street, so that was already approved. Um, so we're not looking to change this up from this point going forward. This is the the footprint we're looking for. >> Okay. Other commissioners have questions. Tim, have you been out to the site? >> I have not. No.
>> Okay. >> And we we don't have a DP file number yet, so we we can't. >> Right. So what that means um Mike and Allison is that it will be continued
to the next meeting which would be um November 18th um without you we're just basically waiting on your D number. >> Um and do any commissioners have any questions? Anyone want to go out and see
the site? What are your thoughts? >> I'm comfortable straight. Yeah. Yeah. Had some concern with the flags, but even even the flagging seems like it's probably pretty straightforward with it being the stream, right? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I I I don't have any issue. Maybe
maybe a uh if Tim and Lauren could go out, that would be helpful. >> Yeah. And a quick question on that erosion control. Does that come all the way out to the street >> on the figure? I believe it does on the
first. Yeah, it does. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> Okay. I don't have any other questions. So, with your permission, we'd like to go ahead and continue this to November 18th in hopes that D
um issues you a file number. >> Great. >> Awesome. Do you guys do you see any concerns or is there anything further that we could do uh or answer any questions to the commission prior to that or plan for during that meeting to make sure it goes smoothly?
>> Thank you for asking that. Commissioners, >> I'm good. I I I think um I would echo everybody else's uh comments earlier. It seems pretty straightforward. Um yeah, I think it's ready to go. >> Just get that D number.
>> Boom. No, we appreciate appreciate the photos and the measurements and everything. You've made it pretty straightforward, pretty easy for us. So, >> yeah, and the fact that you already have your variances is very helpful. Okay, best of luck and hopefully we will see you in uh approximately two weeks.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Good night. >> Thank you. >> All right, it is now 8:00. Um, we're going to go ahead. Public hearing, notice of intent, 242 King Street, removal of existing driveway, pool, and
walk construction of parking lot and walkway. It is my um knowledge that we're opening this and um asking to continue it to November 18th. Is that correct, Tim? >> That's correct. >> Okay. All right. And so, we're going to
wait one minute and then move on to the next one. Okay, it's 801. I'd like to open the continued public hearing notice of 10 97 and 99 mil road D file 204-1022,
construction of an electrical equipment area. Um, please note that if this comes to a vote, I'm not eligible to vote on this due to missed meetings. Um, who's here to present? >> Hi Sarah, I can start us off here. So, my name is Dave Ketchin, uh, assistant
general manager of the Littleton Electric Light and Water Departments. Here with me, I've got Steve Burn from, uh, the Citizens Battery Group and Dan Severs from Warren Cameron. Um, so I'll pass it over to them to um, continue our
discussion from the previous meeting. >> Thanks, Dave. So, um I think the request that you that the commission had for us was to come back with a uh construction process. So, we sent a revised drawing,
one that we hope is a little bit more clear, um along with the construction process. I don't know if you have had a chance to review this. Um, if you want us to walk through some of it, it's
similar to what was presented before. We have uh eliminated some of the confusion and tried to make it more clear in this presentation. >> Commissioners, what would you like? >> Yeah, I have a couple questions if
if that's all right, sir. Definitely. Go right ahead. Cool. >> Um, thanks Steve. I appreciate the updated plan and this is much more what I was envisioning, I guess, when we talked about a bathtub and and what it looks like. Um, so thank you. The question I have was I I looked at it
real briefly this afternoon the the containment calculation and I don't think it's going to be a major concern, but I'm it looks like I don't know if you changed changed the area somehow you looks like you doubled
>> more than doubled the amount of storage >> by gallons compared to the plan. So you have 28,000 gallons here. The plan two weeks ago it was only 12,500. >> Absolutely, Kyle. So let me speak to that. So previously we had um talked to
a um construction contractor about how he would have gone about or would go about installing this liner. And that's partially where this confusion came from. Initially we had shown the liners to be going up 90 at the the concrete pads previously. As you can see now, the
the whole enclosure is now that one tub like we were envisioning. We we hashed it out with the contractor how it would the basically the the entire thing would be um started basically with that liner being the first um kind of piece of the
puzzle. And when I initially had done the calculations, that was removing all of the areas below the pads, which ends up taking a lot of area um out of the equation. So now that we're including all of that area, you
get a lot more a lot more space for um liquids to go because basically it was almost half I believe of the area of the enclosure about um that had concrete pads um which gives us roughly half um
or double rather the amount of storage um that is estimated to be within this uh enclosure. So that's why it's a lot >> that's why it's a lot more. It was it was a lot is much um lot it was a lot smaller because we were doing worst case
scenario with that liner going up 90 at the concrete pads. >> So now that's out of the equation. >> Um as you can see in this cross section it makes a lot more sense from a construct stability standpoint. >> Um so I think that should clear up the the difference.
>> Yep. That makes perfect sense. Thank you for having the three different bathtubs versus this one bath. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that. >> Absolutely. >> Other commissioners questions. Chase, I know you're with us now. >> Sorry, I was on late.
>> This was my only outstanding question. Anyone else have any other questions? >> Like Chase says, this was the only concern I have. >> Okay, we do have from the audience, Jerry Kavalo has a question. Um, Jerry, you're permitted to talk. If you could introduce yourself and state where you
reside, that would be great. You should be set to talk. >> Good. Jerry Kavalo 8 Uplands Road. Um, may not be the appropriate time to do it, but I wanted to just talk about fishing access for this location. I did brief the light and water commissioners
on it and uh they were not in favor of it for a couple of reasons and they they said we should move it to the other side of the brook which is Kanscom property. Now, that that area is uh pretty much untouched and it's sloped down and the
side that Parley is on is kind of a mess with all Parley's junk still piled up there and they're going to have to do some work on that anyway. So um I'm bringing this up with this group because one the people the light and water is here and they're the ones that suggested
putting it on the other side of the brook and I think that is not the best choice because that is area that is you know version woodland and that's where the water comes down and if you've never been to this section of the brook it's it's very unique for beaverbrook it has
a good slope to it uh department of fisheries has done a survey there and they're year brown trout living in that brook. And it's the only section of Beaverbrook I think is like that. And the reason I'm pursuing this is I see these kids fishing off the bridge on Route 119, which used to be fun when my
kids were little. But that road has gotten so busy that we need to, I think, get the kids off the bridge into an area that's a little safer. And the fisheries folks said that they would stock wherever it was there was access for public and that had access for them to
put the fish in. and they also need a a parking area. So that's why I'm bringing this up now with KCOM because um Light and Water wants to move it over to KNCOM side, but that like I said, I don't know if you want to establish a new trail on that side when the other side is already
going to be re um redone anyway, cleaned up, I'm sure. That's all. >> Thank you, Jerry. Um, while it, and I appreciate you bringing this to our attention, we do have to stay focused on the permit at his hand, but I will take
the opportunity to ask commissioners if they would like to give Jerry any thoughts if it's appropriate. >> I think it would be great to set up some kind of access, as Jerry mentioned, uh, for this very unique portion of
Beaverbrook. Um but Dave, has the Light and Water Department fully weighed in on this in terms of access? >> Yes. Yeah. Jerry brought this in front of our board and as he said um the board was not in favor of using this this
property um for the the purpose that Jerry had pitched um in that location. Um they they did suggest I'm I'm sorry. Did you have a question, Ed? >> What was the reason why you didn't want
uh the board didn't want public accessing that property because it's going to be an operational property. So that that was their main reason. Um but they did give the alternative to look across the street and then um that
not going too far into um different different applica the applications here but 242 King Street uh they had requested that we make an area accessible off of that parcel um which that that'll be in front of this
commission at the next meeting hopefully. So I I I think there's a discussion to be had here. I just I'm not sure if right now is the most appropriate time for that. >> Right. Okay. And I and I I appreciate that. I followed that track. Um
>> one thing I'll I do want to add here, Sarah, is that I I mean I think right now Beaverbrook is accessible from Milh Hill. I I wouldn't say that we would want to blaze a new trail, but to the extent a single fisherman wants to fish
from there, that that would be consistent with our use. If it starts to degrade to the area because there are a lot of people, that becomes a different thing. Um, and I I'd be open to talking about it and understanding the ideas, but I yeah, I I
I very much understand why the water department or the electric department is not excited about the other side of the brook, but it it is accessible even now as fishing. >> Yeah, I Yeah, I definitely I have a little kid as well and we have walked
through there. It's again it has there's no blaze trail but it is easily accessible where we as stewards could probably do a little clearing or not clearing even there just cleaning up and there's an easy path and then you're right along the bank depending on the
water level of course it does fluctuate >> quite a bit but there's there's opportunity there and if 242 comes in all of a sudden and opens up another spot further downstream then I I yeah I agree keep it off of operational property for sure >> at the same time I think it would have
been a good public service for there's plenty of room on that on that property to establish a trail that would stay away from your electric uh that's being put in. I I I appreciate that's not >> what I'd like to do is we're going to
take an opportunities to to express that I think this would have been a good corporate citizen type thing. So, what I would encourage Jerry for you to do is to connect with Tim and let's put it on either as a discussion item or something going forward, but um I will have to
halt this conversation for this um notice of intent. So, >> okay. Thank you, Sarah. Can I just add one thing? I did give Tim the copy of the briefing that I gave to Light and Water. So, if any of your members want to read that ahead of time, they they can. Over. >> Okay. Great. We look forward to carry on the discussion in a different forum.
Thank you. Sarah, it seems like we're moving to a vote here. I have a couple comments on um conditions that I'd like Well, not even so much conditions is I I want to make sure the findings are clear on this. >> Do you want to discuss that before or
after a vote? >> I would like to do it before if the commission feels as though we're at an like go ahead and start to entertain a vote. I think we've think we've held them on
long enough here on this one, not that we've gone through the motions. >> So, it seems like we're in the affirmative. So, let's go ahead, Chase, and and others, if you have some some comments, especially I know Tim will be happy to hear these. I I think the the most important finding
that I want to make sure is very clear here is that we've required some pretty rigorous O andM requirements and that the condition that the water department or the light department, excuse me, I'm going to keep mixing them up. Let's just call it light and water that that light
and water needs to go through regular training with the fire department so that they can respond to emergencies. that has to be a condition. Um the other element though is that one very important part of the findings is that
these this is a public entity providing public power and I I wouldn't I would think differently about this or I would at least want to interrogate it in a different way if it was a private uh power supply interest. And I think
that's got to be reflected in the findings that by virtue of a public agency working with the public fire department there there's certain checks and balance uh there are certain checks and longevity commitments that are baked into that that might not be the case if
it was private. So those are the two things condition on training and make sure the findings are very clear public entity. Okay. >> One one thing I will add to that, Chase, is another condition that I had from a previous meeting um that was discussed
was notification to the commission in the event of a u an emergency. >> Yep. Absolutely. >> Are we feeling we're going to need a environmental monitor during this construction? I'm not sure if we need an environmental
monitor, but I would like to see the water department, who we know has the resources to do environmental inspections on their own to it give us regular written updates. >> What do you envision as regular while
while we're discussing this so we can >> I mean I I would expect like a once a week kind of status email. Here's what we're doing. here where the controls here are the issues we've encountered. >> Okay. During construction >> during construction, >> what do you see as regular for the
training? >> That's very loose, open to interpretation. >> I think we talked about once a year. >> We said last year >> annually. >> Yeah, that's where I was going with it. It needs to say that. >> Yeah, it will. Yeah. Okay. Other
questions or other comments? So, if that is not the case, if we have someone that would like to make a motion for this, move to close the public hearing and issue an order of conditions for 97 and
99 Mill Road, Mass E file number 204-1022. >> Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Thank you, Andrew. >> Roll call vote. All right. Chase >> Chase Carvey. >> Kyle >> Kyle Maxfield
>> Ed >> Ed Foldsai >> Carl >> Carl Milberg I >> Sarah >> I'm abstaining Sarah Seawward >> and myself I so that is one two three
four five in favor and one abstension. >> Okay great thank you. Best of luck. Thank you very much. Appreciate the work. Thank you. >> Okay, it's now 8:16. That concludes uh
our meeting for November 4th. Do we have a motion to adjourn? >> So moved. >> We have a second. >> Second. >> Andrew, one last roll call for the evening. >> Final roll call of the night. Uh Kyle
>> Kyle Max. >> Ed. and fully >> Carl guy. >> Chase >> Sarah >> Sarah Stewart I >> myself I we're