So, in accordance with the requirements of the open meeting law, please be advised that this meeting is being audio video recorded. The agenda lists all of the topics which may be discussed at the meeting and those that are reasonably anticipated by the chair. Those may be taken from these discussions. Not all
items may be discussed and other items may be raised to the extent permitted by open meeting law. Please be advised that the town of Lunenberg utilizes Zoom platform as host for its hybrid and remote meetings. That the Zoom platform utilizes AI technology known as AI
companion to create audio transcriptions of meetings to aid in the subsequent preparation of meeting minutes and that AI companion is activated immediately upon launching the Zoom application. You are hereby notified that this AI technology may capture audio prior to the start of the meeting and or the
following the conclusion of the meeting. join Zoom meeting. Um, say you're if you're here, you've joined. There's the meeting ID and Okay. So, then we would have the the call to order. Pete hasn't joined yet, right?
Okay. So, do a roll call. Uh, Richard Burch present. Mike Larouche, present. Mary Wilson here. Peter Stella.
Yes, I'm here. Perfect timing. Mowing the lawn. And then Chris St. Germaine. Do I call him if I know he's not here? Yeah. Okay. Chris St.
Germaine running late. Jeff Viviano will not be here tonight. All right. So, um, announcements. We have public comment. Comments are to be limited to three minutes and on a subject matter under the direct jurisdiction of the commission. Comments
about current agenda items are be made during the comment period of specific agenda item. Please address all comments to the chair and state your name and address. Do we have any public comments? Seeing any hands raised. All right. So, um, do we have
any comments from members of the commission? We do that too, right? If FMA, uh, Madam Chair. Yeah, absolutely. So, uh, I just wanted to give a shout out to the, um, high school national honor society. Uh
uh two weekends ago, uh we had about uh 27 uh young people show up at uh Table Rock uh to work on um a project there. Uh we were building uh we've been working on building some boardwalks uh through and across some uh
sensitive areas to protect the areas and kind of ch channel foot traffic, you know, away from those areas. And uh those young people uh carried uh a massive amount of wood uh for the uh boardwalks into into the areas where
they needed to go. Uh sometimes they were having to carry them a half a mile. Um some of some of the uh placement areas were a little bit smaller than a shorter distance than that. And uh they also carried I think 10 10 cinder blocks
and 12 solid blocks uh for the uh footings for those uh boardwalks down the trail. And we actually even got three of those sections. There were five sections of boardwalk that we had material for. We even got three of those sections uh built. So, uh, we really
appreciate the, uh, those volunteers showing up, uh, and, uh, doing that good work and particularly I acknowledge that a lot of them were on their, uh, spring break. Uh, so it was really fantastic to see such a great turnout.
That's amazing. Thank you. Yeah, we also had a good turn of the pollinator habitat for the Earth Day event, too. Okay. Um, moving on. We don't have any minutes to approve, so I'm going to skip over
that. Um, our first up is an appointment, and this is so it's for 60 Cross Road. Um, they are looking to do a amended order of conditions. um they're also under new public hearings, but the
I think that we're looking to maybe hear a little bit about what they're trying to do and see if we want to advise them to file for an NOI or actually I don't and we couldn't we
actually can't hear it I don't believe on the agenda tonight because I don't think that they got the I don't think Logan was able to get the um the placement in the ledger on time. He just got it in on Friday, so that
wouldn't be enough time. We're a day short. So, is the applicant for 60 Cross Road here? Looks like they're not here. Okay. So, I guess I I'll move on to new public hearings. Um, we have 1178
Northfield Road. So, pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40 as amended in the town of Lunenberg wetlands protection and municipal bylaws, a public hearing on a notice of intent by Mary Pakquette and Joan O'Brien for the replacement of an existing failed septic system,
including work within the 100 foot and 30 foot buffer zone of a wetland resource area. Um, this is on open gov record ID NOI-24-4 and it does have a DAP number. Um, Mary
Um yeah, sorry for interrupting uh madam chair. I thought we had had a request uh from uh applicant uh on Shirley Limster Road who had asked to go first. Yes. And I made Okay. And I uh you know I'm the
outgoing chair and and I um told them last time that they weren't on the agenda and and they were. It's just with our backup support we didn't um you know it wasn't properly detailed so I missed that and I uh I just wanted
to make certain we were able to take care of them this time if at all possible. Yes, I actually emailed him and told him that I would hear them first and then I forgot and just start it off. So, it's so I can just unread that and go on to the next one because
we didn't fully open that or I think I think we could uh hold it open um and circle back to it. Uh okay. All right. So, 2011 Lemonster Shirley Road pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40 as amended in the town of Lunenburgg
wetlands protection and municipal bylaws. A public hearing on a request for determination of applicability by Kolis Commuter Services for vegetation management control and maintenance activities along the railroad right of way within Lunenburgg as part of the renewal of the 5-year vegetation
management plan. And do we have the representative for this application? Yeah. Hello everyone. My name is Matt Donovan from Benes. I'm here to represent the Kis RDA. Can everyone hear me?
Yep. Um I I just sent the request. I can pull up the maps. Um Oh, yeah. Let me uh Okay, you should be able to share now. All right. All right. So, you should see the
maps now. Um we this RDA is to confirm the accuracy of these maps used for herbicide application um along the commuter rail right ofway and we submit this RDA to your commission every 5 years required by CMR11. It's required to get these
determin determinations before submitting the 5-year vegetation management plan to Mass Department of Agricultural Resources. Um the V the vegetation management plan is designed to manage and control vegetation necessary to keep railroad and operations safe. Regulations are in place to keep the
sensitive areas protected throughout the duration of the plan. And these sensitive area restrictions are listed and described in CMR 11.04 as well as our vegetation management plan. The maps we provided you with were ma mainly made for the chemical portion of the plan but
often dictate where mechanical methods will be used due to chemical restrictions. Each year there are two chemical applications. one in the May to June time frame that targets the roaded and one in the August September time frame that targets the brush and areas adjacent to the roaded. The sensitive
areas marked with blue and yellow on the maps are restricted from the brush program and will only receive the road bed application. So that's what I'll focus on um because that's the only chemical program taking place in these sensitive areas of your jurisdiction. However, if there are any questions
about the brush program um I'd be happy to answer those as well. The roadway application is performed by a spray truck that drives directly on the track um equipped with nozzles on the back side that are located about 18 inches above the ground spraying the solution directly down onto the track. It has um
arms with nozzles on the arms that target the shoulders of the roaded as well up to 12 ft from the center line of track on each side. The certified applicator is accompanied by an environmental monitor familiar with the site conditions and equipped with these maps um instructing the operator as
necessary. The applicator has the ability to turn off all the nozzles or in many cases just the side nozzles where um the mixture maybe targets the shoulder where it may be getting close to the buffer zone of the sensitive areas and that's done just at the flip
of a switch. Um the yellow zones um will never receive any treatment to the shoulders um and may sometimes still receive treatment directly down onto the ties and that's done in the at the discretion of the environmental monitor
and applicator um to stay in conformance with the regulations. Um the blue zones typically represent being within 90 and 100 feet of sensitive areas. Uh sorry 10 and 100 feet of sensitive areas. And these zones typically receive the full
roaded treatment. The dark blue zones are are more for D zones and um water supply areas. And um these the dark blue zones are only sprayed once every two years. Um in these blue and yellow zones due to
the limited spray more effort is put into controlling the vegetation with physical and mechanical me measures. Um the chemicals each year um are chosen by the certified applicator and they will always come from the right ofway sensitive area material list provided by
Mass Department of Agricultural Resources and we do include that mixture every year in our yearly operational plan that we send to your commission every year um via certified mail. Um, so we are seeking a positive 2A determination to confirm the maps as well as a negative determination for the
work included in the vegetation management plan. Um, nothing has changed with these maps or the vegetation management plan since the last time um, we came to your commission. Um, if there's any questions you may have, I can open the floor up to
you. Hey, um, are there any questions from any of the commissioners? Mary. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I thought we had uh and I was just trying to look it up at our uh local
uh regulation a keep out of 30 ft uh for spraying herbicide uh by uh utilities is and it it wasn't clear to me from looking at the map if that had been taken into account.
That wouldn't be taken into account. Um did you It would be 10 10 feet would be the the setback um for wetland areas which is which is under the CMR
11.04 sensitive area restrictions. Are you saying that's a a local bylaw? That's a local bylaw. Yeah. Uh so uh section 6.1 uh it says under utilities applications
of herbicide shall not occur within 30 ft of a wetland or water body during the maintenance of a line. Yeah, that may actually have come up earlier. And um the MBTA because it's on the MTA property, they are exempt from um any
local bylaws and it would go to to the it's that would be under the regulations of the the state CMR 33311. Okay. And I did I sent a uh I believe I
sent the exemption letter to um the commission back back in January when this RDA was submitted. Okay. Nothing else for me. Uh Madam Chair, I I don't see the exemption letter in our in our files. Uh uh I
would be happy to uh send that. I'm not positive I sent it. It it would have been a while ago. Um, Madam Chair, I can definitely send that. Might I suggest that um the applicant uh just I think you you he can upload it directly to open gov. Yeah, I'm actually checking in
open gov to see if I see one. I'm not seeing anything that shows an exemption, but yeah, if you could d upload that directly into open gov, that would be I would be happy to. Perfect. If that that can if that could just be like a condition of the termination so we can still issue a termination that would be
much appreciated. Thank you madam chair. Nothing more for me. Okay. Do we have any other questions from members of the commission? Do we have any questions from members of the public? So, as far as the applicants
request to approve this with the condition that we get that letter, how does the commission feel about that? I would be uh willing to make a motion, Madam Chair. Yeah, I would be willing to make a motion uh that we uh approve with
a negative determination on the condition that that letter is received. Okay, we have a second on that. We would still be seeking a positive 2A as well as the negative determination. Correct. I think those have to be
managed as separate motions though. I don't know. Rich is more our process person, procedural person. Yeah, you can make it all as one motion. Okay. Then I would also move that we accept the uh wetland uh determinations
as uh presented uh in the application. So move second. A second or that is a second. Okay. Uh so we'll go to a vote. Richard Bers.
Yes. I Mary Wilson I. Peter Stella. I. Mike Larouche. I and an I for myself. And that would be for approve with a negative determination and except with a
2A positive determination with the stipulation that we get the letter for that showing the exemption. That would be a negative determination as well as a positive 2A. Correct? Yes.
Perfect. Um that works for me. I'll I will upload that. Um, and I'll I'll send you an email to follow up right after to uh confirm with you that that it was uploaded. Okay, perfect. Thank you very much, everyone. Have a good night. You too. Thank you.
Okay, moving on. We have um 1178 Northfield Road. Back to them. M Madam Chair, if I may just acknowledge that um uh Commissioner St. Germaine joined our company. Oh,
okay. We pin him. There he is. Okay, there we are. Okay, so 1178 Northfield Road. Um, pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40 as amended and the town of Lunenberg wetlands
protection and municipal bylaws, a public hearing on a notice of intent by Mary Pakquette and Joan O'Brien for replacement of an existing failed septic system including work within the 100 foot and 30foot buffer zone of a wetland resource area um
open-25-4 and D number 208-1347. Do we have the applicant or their representative here tonight? Yes, Madam Chair. Ryan Proctor with Dillis and Roy representing the applicant. Okay, perfect. Um, do you want to take us
through the application? I'd be happy to. Would it be okay if I shared my screen? Yep. Let me make you a co-host. You are all set. Great. Great. Uh, thank you for your time tonight. Um again, Ryan Proctor, Dillis, and Roy. Uh this application was
filed, I believe, two months ago, maybe in the beginning of March or late February. Um it had sat in open gov uh for at least a few weeks after submission. Uh there was a technology fee, I believe, of $1.20 that uh was not brought to our attention and remained
unpaid. Um so once that was um addressed, um the application proceeded from there. So, as was read into the record, the the project involves the replacement of a failed septic system. Uh, currently the existing system is located in the rear
yard of the house uh in an existing lawn area and the existing system is entirely within the 50ft no build offset and partially with inside the 30ft no disturb zone. Um, so I've got the wetland shown in green at the top of the plan and I've got the three wetland
offsets uh shown in orange, the 30ft no disturb, the 50ft no build, and then the 100t buffer zone uh all in the dashed orange. The new replacement system is shown in this red box here. Uh we are proposing to do a pressure dose geomat
system uh so a treatment system and we are actually increasing the setback uh from the wetland area. Uh when you compare that to the existing system that's located in the backyard, the entirety of the proposed system is outside of the 30-foot no disturb zone with the exception of some
minor grading in this area here um that would spill into that area. We are proposing to install erosion protection around the uh limit of work that would be installed prior to construction. Um, as was mentioned, we did receive one comment from DP along with the file
number and their only comment was to ensure that we had received the proper approvals from uh Nobel board of health and Lunberg Board of Health, which we have. Um, we've already been issued the septic permit for the project. The reason the system has to go in this area, the lot has several
wetland areas on the property and slopes quite steeply down uh towards, I believe, New West Townsen Road or West Townsen Road. Um, so this area that we've had uh between the house and the property line is is really where it needs to go on the site and it is located within an existing lawn. So we
are not proposing any tree removal uh for the construction of that system. I think I will leave it there. If there are any questions, I would be happy to take them. Okay. Um I really like the the colored lines on this. It makes it really easy
to let's see. Um, do we have any questions from members of the commission for St. Germaine? Yes. Can you go into what type of um protection you're going to put in? Is it straw waddles or
Yes. So, we have uh straw waddles proposed. We have that detail on the plan and then that would just wrap around. It would connect underneath the deck uh to the deck in the back and then around and up the property line on that low side of the system. Great. Thank you.
Do we have any other from members of the commission? Oh, Richard Burch. Oh, I think you're muted. Ryan, you have a seasonal high water listed, but you don't have an elevation that I can find. See uh so this is uh the soil test that
we had. So I guess the high point uh elevation is 197.7. Okay. For an elevation and how far what's the set back between uh high water and the bottom basin of the system?
That is a good question. Uh let's see. Okay. So, 197 and the bottom of the sand is I think it's about 5 feet. The bottom of the geomat 2027. Okay.
It's about 5 ft. Yeah. Okay. That's all for now, Madam Chair. Thank you. Mary, you have a question? Yes, thank you, Madame Chair. Uh, so u I did have the ability of going out on a sidewalk uh with some others this weekend and I I think for the most part,
you know, I it's pretty straightforward. uh bite. Um when we were out there, one of the things I did notice along the, you know, at the top of the bank, um near the near the intermittent stream in the back, there was a sty uh stack of
construction debris. Um and I would like to have that uh be a condition that that uh construction debris is moved out of the 30-foot uh no touch uh zone. Yep. I would agree with that. I was out there also and um it looked like there
was a little bit of clearing, maybe a a shack was moved and there was some debris from that that I would also like to see moved out of the buffer zone, the 30foot. Okay. Buffer zone. Do we have any other comments from
the commission? Do we have any comments from members of the public? Doesn't sound like it. So I think here I would be looking for a motion to approve with the
condition that the debris is removed. So moved. Second. Okay. So, we'll call vote. Richard Burch I. Mike Larouche. I. Mary Wilson. I.
Peter Stella. I. Chris St. Germaine. Hi. And I for myself. So that would be approved with just the condition that the debris is removed. Thank you very much. Thanks. Have a good
night. You too. Updating my notes. Okay. So, our next hearing is 57 Round Road pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40
as amended and the town of Lunenberg wetlands protection and municipal bylaws. A public hearing on a request for determination of applicability by Renee Rainville for installation of a well and water line including work within the 100 foot and 50 foot buffer zone of a wetland resource area. Is the
applicant or their representative here tonight? Looks like I see Renee on. Renee, do you have is it will you be representing or do you have I am I am Rainy Ringo 57 Round Road Lunberg, Mass.
Uh do you want talk us through the project a little bit or do you have the ability or would you like me through the project a little bit? Um no it's pretty much straightforward. Uh Dan Wolf from Ross Associates has
done pretty much all the paperwork and uh files all the applications. Um he was going to represent me tonight but he had uh something on his calendar. So, um just here to answer any questions if you
have any questions. Uh like I say, it's pretty straightforward. Uh my neighbor Mark uh Sprag is, uh I guess having a well put in. So, uh my thought was to have one truck come and drill both wells
at the same time just to eliminate um any hazards uh bringing the truck in twice. So, uh, if you have any questions, I'm willing to answer them. Okay. Um, I know. Let
me check the And we have we have plans for this. Do we want to show them on the I'm getting a lot of feedback. Just does anybody want me to share my
screen or would somebody else want to share their screen and look at it? I think conservation came over the weekend to take a look at the site. Uh there were three pe three individuals and uh they said pretty much straightforward
and that they would take it up at this meeting. Yeah, I typically like to just take a look at the site plan. Um I don't know if somebody else wants to share that. I can if you uh open up to sharing.
Okay. You should be all set. Am I sharing now? Okay. See it now. So, it looks like this is the well that you're looking you're proposing right here, Reineie. That's
correct. And uh Mr. Sprags is located about 30 40 ft uh uh to uh his property. So one truck would be able to come in and drill both wells. Uh Mr. Sullivan said he could
probably do that one to two days. Then the truck would be uh taken out. The are there any questions for members of the commission? Madame Chair, I guess my only question would be does any vegetation need to be
removed to get the truck into this wellhead or proposed wellhead? No, it's all lawn. Okay. Yeah. Do we have any other questions? Nope. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Richard.
Does anybody else have a question? Members of the commission, do we have any questions from members of the public? Um, so for this I think I would be looking for a motion for a negative
determination. So moved. A negative determination. A second. Thank you, Mary. Uh, roll call vote. Richard Bur, I. Mike Larouche, I.
Mary Wilson I Peter Stella I Christine Germaine I and I for myself motion I negative termination thank you board thank you good night
have a great night So, up next we up next we have 60 Cross Road, but we actually can't hear this one. They I don't believe they're here, but also we did not get the um ledger in on time.
I am here. Oh, you are. So, we had Is that was that Bill Hanigan registered? Okay. So, we had had this on for an appointment earlier um just to discuss it and see if it was
within scope for an amended order of conditions. Uh so, we could open it and just discuss it, I guess. Yeah. And um but we wouldn't be able to approve anything or vote tonight. Um can you
explain why? So I don't believe so for the this was supposed to be in the ledger within with five business days. I'm recalling this correctly. Let me take a look. And I Logan had mentioned earlier
that he got it in for Friday, but today is Wednesday, so that wouldn't be enough time for it. So, it was only advertised on Friday, right? Got it. And today is Wednesday, so that wouldn't be five business days for So, for it to
actually be a revised um amended order of conditions, I believe it has to be advertised. So, it would Richard, can you is that correct? No, I agree with that. Yep. I believe that's correct. It has to be It's a hearing, so it has to be advertised uh in accordance to the
open meeting law. Okay. So, we have no issue with hearing it right now, but just not Well, no, we you can't hear it. That's that's it would be inappropriate. Okay. So, um if this So, the the question is that it was advertised to be
heard tonight on the advertisement. No, it I believe it was advertised to be heard for the next meeting. Okay. All right, that that's good. Yeah. Okay. So, um I would I would normally say that I would request to continue to the next meeting, but I can't even request to
continue because you can't technically open it. Okay. Right. So, I guess I'll see you at the next meeting. Okay. Sounds good. Thank you so much. That makes it easy. All right. Madam Chair, yes. I I thought we needed to discuss briefly uh
if we were in uh agreement that this would be just a modified order of conditions as opposed to needing a whole new notice of intent. Is it is it okay to do that while we're we can do that under the appointment and but we can't
do the hearing itself. Okay. But under the appointment, we can discuss briefly if this um if this will fall under the modified um order of conditions. Well, I would I would actually ask whether it would even need an amendment because really it's
just a change of the house style, not changing really anything in in the um in the plan itself. Would it be okay for us to discuss that now as an appointment? Okay. Yeah, because that that's just really an appointment with the
commission. Correct. So, yeah. So, I can bring I can bring the uh the sketch up. Yeah, that would be great. So, if you let me share There you go. Okay. Let me um
I won't this is the plan. I won't bring up the plan, but I'll bring up the sketch. This is the red is what was originally approved and the the black the new the new building plan is what is now going to be built. Okay. So, it's essentially we're
keeping outside of the the no build zone, the no touch zone. All the grading essentially remains the same. Nothing's changing with the with the utility connections. It's just basically just different house style than what was originally proposed. Smaller, more
compact house. This is this is a deck, too. This is not part of the building. So, the building is actually only up to here. So, it's it's a little bit further back, but it's in a smaller footprint. Smaller footprint. Correct. So, I mean, the commission could make the decision that
it doesn't need an amendment to the order. that this is just basically us notifying the commission that we're changing the house style um and we would pick it up on the as plan for the final review. Do we have any comments for members of
the commission or questions on this? Richard. Uh thank you madam chair. Um, for myself, one question quick, Bill, is the the wellhead was outside of 50 foot in the original application. Is that correct?
I I don't know. Okay. Um, I would say probably not, but let me let me do this. Let me pull up the um I thought I was just looking at it. I am looking at it. It looks like it was
outside of it on the original. Yeah, for myself as the the wellhead now is inside the 50 foot where it was outside and the house is about 20 ft closer to the wetland, the foundation itself. Uh, I do think that this would qualify under a modified order of
conditions, but I don't think it needs a it it's still a single family home. The envelope itself is still roughly the same within the buffer. So, I don't think it needs a new notice of intent filing, but we should move forward with
the the modified Okay. notice of modified order of conditions. Okay. Amen. An amendment. Yeah. Amended. I'm sorry. All right. So, we'll I guess I understand what what what your your questions are regarding the well. I'll try to find out from Chris. Um I think
that might have been an Ashoba requirement that it got moved um during the the process, but I I could be wrong. Um he was he's not able to make the meeting tonight, so I I'm kind of jumping in. Um so, yeah, if we could if we could
just be moved to the to the next meeting, we'll we'll come in and go over these questions. And now I know what the questions are going to be. So I'll have answers for those before we get here. Okay. Does anyone Mary you had had your raised your hand raised? Do you want to add anything? Madam chair. No, I was
just going to u ask the same thing that Rich was going to ask. Okay. Do we have any other questions that we might want to address now before he comes back? So um I guess we will see you at the next meeting. Yes. Okay. Thank you so Thank you very much. Have a good
night. You too. Moving along. Um, we already heard 2011 Lemonster Shirley. So, next we're going to be moving on to our continued public hearings. Um, we have 390 Howard Street
and ANRAD pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40 as amended and the town of Lunenberg wetlands protection and municipal bylaws. A public hearing on an abbreviated notice of resource area delineation by Kevin O'Brien at 390 Howard Street D number
208-134. Do we have the applicant or their representative here tonight? Doesn't look like it. So, we'll move along on that one. Um, next is 221 Electric Avenue. Oh, yeah.
Madam Chair, we we should uh continue it. Oh, yeah. We want to So, we'll motion to continue. Make a motion to continue to 521. Have a second. Second. Okay. Um, roll call vote. Richard Burch.
I. Mike Larouche. I. Mary Wilson. I. Peter Stella. Hi. Chris St. Germaine. Hi. And I for myself. Okay.
221 electric a asked to be continued to 521. Make a motion to continue 521. Second. Second. So that's a motion from Richard and a second from Chris because I've been
forgetting to do that. All right. So roll call vote. Richard I. Mike I. Mary Wilson. Hi, Peter Solo. Hi, Christine. Germaine. Hi.
Okay. Um, moving on, we have 67 Island Road. Uh, pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40 as amended in the town of Lunenberg wetlands protection and municipal bylaws, a public hearing on a request for determination of
applicability by Melissa Canavino for the renovation of a patio, stairs, and walkway within the 50oot buffer zone of Hickory Hills. Um, open gov record RDA-24-9. Uh, do we have the applicant or representative here tonight?
Looks like I see Melissa on. Sorry. Is that better? Can you hear us? Yeah, we can hear you now. Okay. Okay. So, this was continued from 35. Um, we had asked you to come back with
uh some what's looking for what they to show us if you had any pictures of the walkways that were there or if there's any more um evidence that you
want to show of what was previously in the property before the the new construction was put Right. So, uh, we actually went to some relatives who also had Polaroids. Uh, fun fact, the family and all used to
work for Polaroid. Okay. Um, so if I can share my screen, I can show you um Oh, yep. Let me make you the picture we're going to show you is what I was trying to explain last time about the walkway that had existed, which was like
a cinder block walkway that was placed on top of soil and okay, you should be able to share now. Y make this a little bigger for you. So you can see the old You can see that
image I I presume. Yep. So, you can see the old staircase and how it came down into this walkway with the cinders and the grass growing up. And this is this photo is I don't know from the 80s um maybe earlier. So, this is the
walkway that we had in the ground. I still do not have a photo showing the walkway, but I'm trying to show you an example of what I was trying to explain that you saw in the overhead imaging that you guys had shown us a meeting or two ago where the ground was so
discolored because grass had grown through this essentially unused walkway um which was in front of the greenhouse that had fallen apart. Does that Does that better demonstrate what I was trying to talk about last
time? Yeah. How long has this been gone? It was gone. We pulled it up to do this project. So, this image you're looking at here was actually they took this up and poured concrete maybe 25 years ago, 30
years ago. So, this image itself was actually a concrete landing. And and if you look at through some of the photos that we've already submitted, you'll see that concrete. This walkway didn't get pulled up. it got left where it was and grass grew through. Um, but again, this is
what I was trying to explain when we saw the overhead pictures with the discoloration. That's what the discoloration was a result of because it wasn't wholesome top soil grass growing. It was this block abomination grass that
had essentially grown over through time. So, but this So, I'm looking at this stairway. The stairway looks appears to go to about the edge of the house and then this walkway I mean we can't really see how far it comes out but the
it's so it's still significantly if we're looking at it from this perspective shorter than the current deck even though this what you're looking at is the stairways leading up to the house. Um if we were to pull up a diagram you'd see that that was the what
is closest to the driveway. the deck would essentially be arguably you'd be standing on the deck right now looking towards our neighbor's house. Um, so this all this was was to me to show you the the example of what we were trying to explain. The walkway was that
it wasn't it wasn't a port pad. It wasn't a It was a 1970s DIY project that involved people halfaphazardly trying to level the ground and put these pavers down
that were just neglected over a couple decades and grown through. And the reason I talk about this is because this goes back to the original question about the RDA. And again, I'm not claiming I wish that we had talked to you guys beforehand, but we didn't think we had
to because we were just repairing something that was already there. So, we've had I feel like we've had three or four different perspectives on this hearing where we've talked about whether or not we had pre-existing
walkways. Um, so and you're saying that those stairs and that walkway when did were there when you what year could you say this this family's owned this house for 75 years they when was probably probably in the
mid70s they were constructed and possibly this this cinder block area that you're looking at right now I think a concrete pad was possibly poured somewhere in the mid 80s to late to early 90s.
Okay. Um do we have any questions from do or do you have anything else you'd like to share? I do. So that was just us trying to trying to explain what we had talked last time like I think Mr. Burch had kind of understood what we were saying and I just wanted to show the block. This this was what the walkway
was constructed of. That was parallel to the house, which is where the current walkway that we're talking about tonight is. So, sorry. The other thing that you wanted
us to do uh was to come back with suggestions for how we could possibly reveate some area to compensate for the patio. or the walkway that we've installed. So, we actually went to
council with Dylan Roy. Uh they came and walked the property with us and came up with some suggestions. If you look at this, I'm sorry for the photograph. I took it from the roof trying to get as much of the area as I could.
Um what we were proposed is that we cut out, if you're looking at the walkway on the deck, that 46 square feet of area there and resaw that um with sod. We would then take that area that
says 193 square ft and also grass that in and possibly add shrubs or some type of bush if you guys adjust it. And then, and I'm sorry because I'm kind of blocked by images, but if you look on
the left side, um, we were considering putting some American beach grass or something comparative there comparable um, along the shoreline to help with erosion and
either planting aelas, shad bush, button bush, arborvite, forthia. what you guys think uh you know would be appropriate. In essence, we'd be giving up almost 30% of that
walkway. We'd be seeding uh approximately 240 square feet of area with grass and then on in addition to that, possibly some bushes or tree. And we'd like to keep the area that's not
um indicated on the walkway so we would still have access. Um essentially we'd be putting in 104% area of grass for the area that we'd like to keep for the walkway to compensate for keeping the walkway. And
again, the intention of the walkway isn't for aesthetics. It's for the 81-year-old homeowner who, you know, the whole reason we put this in was because the gu yard pitch is so bad, she wouldn't have even terrain to walk on. So, it's really about safety. It's not even about
aesthetics. So, we're looking for some guidance on how, you know, what types of grass we can put in, what types of bushes or or plantings are appropriate, and how we can schedule that with you. Thank you for sharing. Do you have
anything else that you'd like to share? Um, no. I hope that I covered it. This again, we we had some pretty good counsel from Dillis and Roy. Um, they've been incredibly accommodating and and educational. And you can I guess the
only other thing I'd say is right now where that water line is. So, this water line has receded almost 8 inches since I measured this morning. um because the dam is open and it hasn't rained as hard. You can actually see, you might know my neighbor Ron Albert.
That's his dock in the water. And you can see how the water isn't even where it's supposed to be for his dock usage because the water is still going to receive more to what would be a typical water level, right, for this lake.
So, I mean, we typically would we we measure from the high water mark. Did Dillison right happen to say or measure what the high water mark there is. Sierra, they hadn't done that yet and I think it's kind of their
involvement and how much we move forward with them is dependent on tonight and the progress we make. Okay. Um, do we have any Oh, mayor, you have your ra your hand raised. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, one of the, uh, topics of dialogue at the last
meeting was the high water mark and whether it was the grass line or not. And this clearly shows that it is a grass line. Yeah. No, you're mistaken. It's the elevation that I'm looking down from the roof. And the question was whether or not it was the closest grass line, essentially the hash mark that's
below the 193 foot. That was where Sophie had originally measured the wall from there to that mark. And what my argument was was that the water clearly doesn't come up to that point. That's beach area. So that's actually what the discussion was. So I I would point out,
Madam Chair, that it's incumbent upon the applicant to give us drawings that are absolutely unambiguous. It's not incumbent upon the commission to try to figure out what the applicant is trying to do from ambiguous drawings and uh diagrams. Thank you, Madam Chair. With
that Oh, Barry, you raised your hand again. Oh, I meant to lower it. Apologies. Uh, do we have any other comments from members of the commission? So, I actually have some pictures that I
had found. Um, when you mentioned in the previous meeting that there was a tree there that you had had Matt Marorrow come out for, I was able to find his pictures from when he was out. Um, and I did send that out to the commission. I
don't know if anybody else saw that. Um, I can share. Is it Is it okay for me to share my screen? Yes, of course. Okay. So, I'm going to share my screen. Um, okay.
Can Can you all see my screen? Yes. Okay. So, um, this is Sure. This really appears that the high water the high water mark is at the grass. Well, that's that's a hill.
Okay. And it also shows um what it looks like when the greenhouse is gone. Mhm. And this walkway that we have here and where the tree was. And it my from what I see
that's there now. The current deck kind of goes out to where that tree was before it was taken down. The stairs essentially end at the front of those kayaks. Correct. Okay. So you've you've really gone significantly past, right? Because the
walkway you see where those kayaks are because of those trees and there was actually a birch tree at that one point long before me. Um but essentially on the corner closest to us, there was at least one if not two small birch trees. So that's why their walkway went to the end of that concrete and then across
underneath the kayaks to the other side of the other walkway. And so you're you're actually willing to get affidavit from other neighbors, friends, and family that have been here and been on this property if that's helpful. So,
and you're saying that this is not at the grass line, this water. Yeah. So, so that actually dips down roughly 12 to maybe 14 in, maybe closer to 12 in. So, what you're looking at is the top of a hill. And if you were to
stand over that, it goes down and I don't know what the angle would be, but call it a 30° angle into the water. So the water never actually it doesn't typically touch the grass. It comes to about a foot of it. And if you look along the shoreline, you can see how it
jogs in again, which was the area that we were talking about with Sophie where she had measured roughly 17 feet to that corner, but that was beach. there's not an even elevation from that dock all the way across to the next property. So, some pieces are higher and some
places are lower. And because of that, the shoreline doesn't follow the contour in like a a consistent manner. Okay. We're not we're not arguing that we're inside the 30. That's I couldn't be more apologetic that we
are. What we're trying to establish is that we didn't create a whole new environment down there. We just tried to fix what we had to make it walkable and safe. Do we have any questions for members of the commission? Mary? Um, so I don't think I
have further questions, but I, you know, based on what I've seen, I I would not be inclined to approve it as, uh, as proposed. Um I had hoped that the applicant would uh take on board the suggestion from uh Commissioner uh
Viviano about uh a side access um you know and uh creating some steps from the side uh so as to uh avoid further encroaching into the 30ft zone. I appreciate his suggestion and we
looked at it. Not only would we have to, we would actually have to dredge to build the deck at that point, which we haven't had to. And financially, we might as well rebuild the entire deck because that requires all new support structure, taking out that stone wall, pushing the
deck back, relocating the stairs. It it it's financially would just be completely prohibitive. Not to mention the elevation of the way the hill comes down. there isn't enough room because the elevation determines the the run of the
stairs and the elevation is determined by the foundation that we built the deck onto. So, in order to put stairs there, they would die into a hill or the existing stairs, the granite steps that are there. It's not that entertain, it's
that it's just not feasible. So, if they were recessed though into the side, um I that doesn't appear that it would be a problem with running into the other stairs or we would have to recess those steps a
quarter of the deck again. I would mind I might as well rip out the entire deck and rebuild it. I would I rebuild a a $28,000 deck because it's the space isn't there. the railings would change, the blocking would change, the beams would change, the footings would change,
the stairs would change. And I I know that your perspective might be that's my problem. But what I'm saying is, you know, I have a neighbor that just built a 50ft wall in the lake that apparently the commission thought was appropriate, but
I can't have a walkway that's 25 feet from the lake. I I I'm not I don't understand the consistency of the decision. Mary, you have a comment or a question? Uh yeah, I just had a comment. The um
the cost is not material to deliberations. Um that's why it's so important for applicants to come before they invest in doing the work. Uh so whether it's permitted or not, the cost is not is not material. Um and um yeah
and to your point uh madam chair about recessing the stairs that was that was what commissioner uh Viviano had suggested they consider um last time and it does sound like that's feasible um
just costly and and I I would caution the commission uh that uh you know I for one uh would not consider permitting this if it is in front of me today. And so we need to be very careful about uh
what we permit after the fact because uh that that just is a slippery slope. And so, uh, in my opinion, the question really is, uh, looking at this like it was a new application in front of me today with no work done and whether or
not I would, um, I would vote yes on this and I I would not as one vote. I appreciate that comment, Mary. Um, I would also I mean I would like to add that when you had mentioned that you went before when you had spoken to Matt
about having that tree removed. Uh, that tree is around the area where the deck is. So you you did request permission to have the tree removed. I'm curious why you wouldn't also uh file an application for
something of this magnitude because again I thought that I was just repairing a walkway that existed the tree I was removing a 50-y old tree and by the bylaws that go on the lake anything over 4 in or within 100 ft of
the water requires conservation and HOA so I followed those rules what I thought I was doing here was just fixing something that was dilapitated to the point that it It was unsafe for people to walk on. I didn't think I was creating anything new.
I guess I mean when I look at the pictures though, it it's clearly, you know, I mean, obviously you have the the greenhouse foundation there, but it's clearly something new because at that point there's in 2020 it's grass, there's a tree, and there's a little
sidewalk there. So, it's definitely a big change from what was there. Are you calling the walkways the sidewalk? So, it used to be a working living greenhouse and there were were walkways on both sides and a pathway. So, if you want to call it a walkway, it
was a pathway with those pavers that my dad had created there. And that's what we're talking I'm talking about the picture from 2020 that just has almost it's like a concrete Yeah. Correct. Walkway, right? Because nobody was walking. The greenhouse had already collapsed.
Nobody was walking in the front and we let grass grow over it. Yeah. And not everything. I'd love for you to walk through this house and see what wasn't done completely. It's it's a lakehouse that was turned into a house that has a lot of hodge podge projects and one of
that was what went around that that lake the greenhouse. Some of it got concrete and the front of it got pavers. I So, um, so I think at this point I'd be looking for kind of which way the
commission is leaning here. Don't do maybe a a straw pull of some sort. uh take start with uh Richard, where are you? Yeah, Madam Chair, I would agree with uh the sentiments of
Mary as far as uh the stairs should be recessed. Um unfortunately, the pictures I've seen make it less and less likely that there was a working walkway there at the time of the construction. I mean, I
don't see any evidence of a walkway in the the pictures that you presented tonight that Matt had taken back a couple years ago. Uh just because there was a walkway there at some point when there was a greenhouse there doesn't mean that um
we're fixing the walkway that was there 50 years ago. I mean, unfortunately, there's just no evidence of any walkway outside or any structure outside of the foundation of the old greenhouse. So, their construction should remain inside the footprint of the greenhouse. Uh, and
the stairs that go out the front should be um recessed in on the side so that there's no further um intrusion into the 30 foot no disturb zone. And unfortunately, it does make a huge
difference moving down the line when other people come before us uh to make sure that the 30-foot no disturb zone stays uh as pristine as possible uh to allow this to go
forward. The next person's going to say, "Hey, you let this person do it. Now this person's going to want it." And unfortunately, it just uh gets worse and worse. So, uh, my sentiments are the same as Mary's. This is not permittable if it was not constructed as of yet. Um,
so I would not be in favor of it. All right. Thank you very much. Um, Mike, what are you thinking? Yeah, I concur with uh Rich and Mary that um
this would not be permittable if it were to be done today. So, I concur with my fellow commissioners. Okay. Thank you, Mike. Um, Pete, what about you? I don't not sure I have a vote on this,
but I I do have a comment. I I don't see there's that although you've got shown us like one picture, I don't see that the picture demonstrates that anything was there. Uh in the the location, uh you
kind of got this walkway that you know the steps coming down kind of like you got closer to the lake to me. I think that it definitely got closer to the lake even if there was a walkway there. And I think that you're not able to demonstrate uh solid evidence that you
had something there recently that wasn't removed. So I would I'd be completely against it uh if I had a vote. And if it was any way you were going to do it, you'd have to probably have an engineer come in and say that it's not going to cause some sort of uh problem with the
wetland, even if it was even going to be allowed. So, I would be completely against it uh or completely against any kind of approval. And I don't know what the uh members that have a vote are g going to tell you to do, but I would be against it and I probably concur with
all of them in being against it. So, all right. Thank you, Pete. Um Chris, what about you? Yeah. Um everything has I don't have anything else to add. Um, it's all been said. So, I I'm I'm in line with my
fellow commissioners. Okay. And, um, I would I'm of the same thinking that I wouldn't have permitted this if it came before me before it was built. So, um I guess at this point,
so we'd be looking for a motion to remove the structure. Is that Mary? Madam Chair, um I I think um
I the applicant has has said that it's not economically feasible for them to uh recess the stairs and I don't know if they want to reconsider that uh given that the commission seems to be inclined
uh not to permit it as proposed. Uh but uh they if they are not willing to reconsider that then I would be willing to make a motion for a positive determination. You had something. Could we be given the opportunity to
continue to work with Dillis and Roy and maybe come back with another solution or offering to you? I mean I can look. So I know like Peter said he hasn't seen this is only one picture. We've submitted over 10 pictures to
um our folder. So, I didn't know we had to come back every time and give you the whole picture. So, if you want us to do that, we can do that next time. But Dillis and Roy said they're going to need 3 to 5 weeks um to work on this with us to continue, you know, coming up with some ideas. And maybe that's the
case. And I can find more evidence and more pictures. I mean, again, like we said, we were really trying to create something. We've had two walkways and a pathway. If you don't want to call it a solid walkway, I understand that. We'll give that to you. But I think we're trying to make feasible, reasonable
recommendations here to We We had a walkway. We had two walkways that were concrete. Those are there. You can see that. So, I don't want to rip that up. But if you're talking about losing the entire front, I don't know. I We just were We're trying to And I understand about
the precedent we're setting. But that's that's not what we were doing in all honesty. So we're I mean can we go back and work with Dillis and Roy or like what are the other next steps before we come to a final determination? So let me um Chris did you have
something you wanted to say? Yes. I I I strongly think that's a good idea. I I think a lot of your designs have been a little we just haven't gotten good good measurements and accuracy out of the pictures. I I think I think you should
uh engage with Dillis and Roy. Um they've come to us and come in front of us with a lot of different scenarios and um they're you know we it does work with with we work well with them. So I I would before turn before tearing uh you
know removing it I would give Dillis and Roy a shot see what see if they can come up with anything that's um solvable. Is there any any interest or benefit in us asking them to look at the impact that it like Mr. Stella had said having
an engineer to take a look at this and tell you whether or not it actually has an impact on the lake. Well, the the issue is that it's in the buffer zone. It's encroached into the buffer zone. Um I do appreciate that. I guess what I'm asking though is if they
come back as they're giving us suggestions, if we paid them to actually look at the installation, would there be any benefit to them telling you that there was a negative there wasn't a negative impact on the waterway? Would that would that change anything?
Speaking for myself, I would want to see um the structure in the same footprint that it was before. Um it's and again if it saying that there isn't an impact would other people could come and say do
the same thing and then come back and say well if Ellison right could tell me that there's not an impact then I just it's it wouldn't set a good precedent. Um, Mary, did you want to Madam Chair, I just wanted to point out that our uh our local regulation doesn't
give the commission uh the ability to accept an assessment of no impact uh in lie of the regulation. The regulation says it's a it's a uh no touch zone and and and even we're not allowed to even
allow grandfathered structures to further encroach uh in the no touch zone. That's really where I'm most confused though because less than a quarter mile from us on the same shoreline, we have neighbors that just built a whole wall, brought in yards and yards of sand and stone and built in the
water. So they're not even outside of the 30. They're they're inside the water. How did how did that project get approved? That is not the project that's before us today. And if you wish to report um that uh address as a
violation, um the chair could have the administrator look into it. I guess I'm just questioning the consistency of the decisions. That's all. So yeah, that's just not in front of us right now, but we're that's something that you would like to report. Absolutely do that and we could take a
look at it. Um, right now we're talking about, you know, your property. So, so there'd be no benefit to paying for an engineered decision on what's currently built. We need to talk to them about what we can change to meet the guidelines.
So, I think there would be a benefit to you talking to an engineer and seeing how you could what you could do to get out of the buffer zone and to make sure that you're not encroaching further than you previously were. Um, I don't know if any members of the commission
have any things that they would be looking to see. I guess that's what I'm asking because as I employ them, I want to make sure that we're moving in the right direction and and spending money efficiently. So, I'm just asking if you guys could just give us some direction on what we
should request from them because you're more familiar with this than us. Um, does anyone have any they've Mary? Uh, yeah. So, I I would be looking for um basically for the footprint to be
dialed back to the pre-existing footprint and by that the block wall of the of the uh previous greenhouse. I mean, we have seen photos of the greenhouse that was there. We have seen um photos
uh of the uh walkway on either side. Um in my mind, I haven't seen something that demonstrates a walkway on the uh lake side of the greenhouse. And so, uh, I would be looking for something that,
uh, dials the deck back to, um, the block wall pre-existing footprint and any walkways to be consistent with the walkways we saw evidence of on the, you know, either side. That's me as one
vote. That's what I'd be looking for. Um, that's definitely going to be my goal in talking to Dillis and Roy. Um, who I can't say enough good things about they've been so receptive so far. Is there absolutely no way that
this board would entertain if we took out the walkway and we took out the wall? Is there no way that you would entertain leaving the stairs that project 66 inches off the deck, leaving those there and whoever was to patronage
the deck walk on grass to get there? Would that be absolutely out of the realm of possibility to leave the stairs on the deck if we took out the walkway and the wall? Speaking for myself, um the only way that I would see that being a possibility is if there was some sort of
evidence that those stairs do not end past where the previous structures were because we can't encroach any further than the previous structure was. Um, I don't know if anyone else has
anything they want to add to that. So, I guess that's what I'm asking. So, the board doesn't have the authority to give me the 6 foot by 7 foot stair that lands essentially the picture you showed earlier where the
kayaks were. They land in front of that where the tree was. And um, Mary, oh, sorry. I I would not I would not be inclined to a vote. um to approve that me as one vote.
I would not either. Does anyone else have anything to say otherwise? Yes, I would concur. Madam Chair, were you saying something? Yeah, this is Mike. I concur with what has been said already.
about the cannot be in that area. So I think what we'd be know looking for would be the recess stairs on the side and the structure to be in the same footprint as the previous structure. You you will allow the canal lever though,
correct? I'm sorry. You will allow the canal lever. Um the deck overhangs the front by 24 in and previous meetings you guys have said that can lever is okay because it doesn't touch the ground. I think that Mary did you want to that
that was said. I mean I for one as long as it's a a permeable deck uh would be okay with a can lever but I don't want the stairs outside of the footprint of the pre-existing deck. Gotcha. I understand that. And and I'm only one vote. So, uh, Madam Chair, you may want
to sample further. Yeah. Does do we have any other responses to that question, Commissioner? Richard? Yeah. As the canolver doesn't touch the ground, I don't have any problem with it. As long as, like Mary
said that it um is not a solid flooring, but I believe looking at the construction they had, it wasn't. The water does go through the slats in the floor. So, as long as it's not touching the ground in front of the wall from the old greenhouse, I don't have a problem
with it myself. Okay. Thank you, Richard. Does anyone else want to add to that, Madam Chair? Yep. Mike. Yeah, I I'm okay with the canal lever uh because it's not touching the ground and uh water can uh
go through the slats, so I think we're good there. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. And I I would also be okay with the canal lever. I I think it's it seems like it's actually similar to how the greenhouse was too. Um
so so it sounds like, you know, we would be looking for the stairs to be recessed on the side. Um remove the existing stairs and any other structures that are not in the previous footprint.
Okay. Uh, if we could have the roughly three to five weeks it's going to take for Dillis and Roy to help us kind of put some other stuff together, I'd really appreciate it and we'll get working on it. Okay. So, we would be looking for a motion to be on the would
that be the June 4th meeting or the June 18th meeting? June 18th at the earliest, please. Okay. All right. So, I'm looking for a motion to continue to June 18th. So moved. Second, Richard.
All right. Motion from Chris and a second from Richard. Roll call vote. Richard Bur I. Mike Larouche. I. Mary Wilson. I. Peter Stella. I. Chris
Germaine. I move continue to June 18th. Write that down. Okay, moving along. We have um 31 Round Road. It's continued from 521
pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40 as amended. and the town of Lunen Rick wetlands protection and municipal bylaws. A public hearing on a notice of intent by Shawn Pharaoh for the construction of two landscape replacement walls, placement of two removable docks and replenishment of
beach sands within the 100 foot, 50 foot and 30 foot buffer zone of a wetland resource area on Lake Shirley. Do we have the applicant or their representative here tonight? I believe it says continue to 521.
Oh, okay. Where did you see that in the agenda? Am I losing it? Uh, it's the first line right under the address. Madam Chair, and it says continued to 521. Oh my gosh. I read it and in my mind it was 421. Continued from 421. Okay. All
right. So, um, I motion to continue to 521. So, second. All right. Motion from Mary to continue. Second from Chris. Roll call vote. Richard Bur. Mike Larouche.
Oh, Richard, did you Richard, did you say hi? I think you're muted. He He said I to mute. I Mary Wilson. I Peter Stella. I Chris Germaine. Hi. And I for myself.
Okay. Madam chair. Yes. Do you hear that background? Is there some way to stop that from happening? Yeah, but I everybody that's in is muted and then it's not my house because it's silent here for once. Okay.
Um I'm not sure where it's coming from. It looks like it has stopped. Okay. Thank you. Oh yeah, I did notice it, too. Um so I'm going to move on to administrative determinations.
And where is I know we we do have 42 Meadow here. 48 meadow lane. Um, okay. So, administer determinations. We have 10 Sandy Co. Um, you're kidding us.
So, and that is do we have the applicant or one of their representatives on? Okay. Hi. So, um, yeah. So, we were we were out at your property on Saturday. Do you want to go over show any plans of
what it is that you're looking to do? You know, I apologize. I don't have any plans uh on this computer. Um I was hoping we could just pull up like a quick uh image of what we're looking to do uh from from your records. So
essentially what we're looking for is due to the increased electrical bills that that we've been facing, but we're new to Lunenburgg. So, Unatell is is a new thing for us and the electric bills have just been uh crazy. So, we're hoping to take down some trees um within
the 30- foot buffer and um you know, we recognize what you know, this is doing uh and what the implications are for requesting this uh and in hopes of getting this approved, uh we'd relocate, replant um additional trees along the
shoreline. But again, our our main goal here, main objective is to get solar panels and figure out something with this electricity. Okay. Um so, and we when we were out there, we were we were out there because
um we were trying to help kind of move this along because we don't have an we didn't have an admin at the office at that time. Um, so you're looking to remove like a significant amount of trees and we had
asked you to come in just for just to kind of get uh some guidance although we can't really hear this as an application or um yeah, but we just wanted to let you kind of come in and see maybe where the
commission would be on looking at this as a significant amount of trees for a utility removal um utilities and and a private utility, not a public utility. So, um did you have any pictures of the area or did you did you say you wanted
to share a site plan or do you want one of us? So, um I thought we said we didn't have to get a site plan. Uh I think some you had a you did have a plan um with the the highlighted areas. Oh,
okay. So, We uploaded everything. Um, so I'm not sure if you have access to that right now. Yep, we do. Um, so we usually offer you if you would like to share it. Um, my apologies. We're Yeah, we're new to
this process. So, yeah, I wasn't aware that that was we we just thought you would be able you would be bringing it up and looking. So, um, as far as this one goes, this one's a little share. I could I could
share if it's helpful. Oh, thank you. And then the one that we would be looking at would be the uh CAD-25-1. I think that's the one that I I have. Uh, let's see. Let me make certain I'm sharing the
right window. Okay. All right. Uh, so this is one of the photos I pulled up. Uh, well, are you seeing a photo? Yes. Yeah. And I think this is the one that um the uh your solar um provider had uh
given you. Correct. And as I understand it, all the trees that are shaded in yellow are the ones you're proposing to remove. Yes. And um I mean there really isn't anything against the house. That's just the area
uh of shade that the trees project. So it's 13 trees uh right along the shoreline. It's not a huge area, maybe 20 feet. Um and you know, we do have probably 50 75 other trees on our on our
property. Uh, do we have any questions or comments from members of the commission about this type of work or what the um I do have a picture of like the tree line if anybody would want
to see that. Yeah, why don't madam chair if you uh can share that. Uh I don't have mine easily sharable. Yeah. So it's really just the trees that they're I couldn't get the whole tree, but I got the tops of the trees. Um, so let me share
that. Oh, okay. So, this is a this is a photo of because the you don't get too far back from the trees, so I was trying to get a a view of just how tall these trees are. Um, this is, you know, pretty high up as
you can see. So, they are and we think it's a little off to the right of our plant. I I think we're off to the left of this image as far as what we're looking to do. I do know the tallest
tree is 100 feet. Okay. But there are other trees that are not uh not even close. Okay. So, this is um I uploaded a number of photos. I'm so sorry that I didn't have it ready on
here. It's it Yeah, it's somewhere in there. Um Chris, did you have a question? Yeah, I as I I actually have a good photo that I'd like to share if possible. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, let's see.
Can you uh enable me? Oh, absolutely. Okay. I thought this this aerial picture was pretty telling. Um, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine. Here I can kind of
see it. It's Yep. Yeah, that's correct. There's certainly some significant uh trees here with with some girth, but uh there are again several very thin thin trees that that could be probably just pulled down by hand.
Okay. Do you have any questions or comments, Mary? Uh so uh what I observed when we were there uh you know it is apparent that those trees are going to shade their roof line. Um but all of those trees are within the 30-foot zone. Um and there
are a lot of very mature trees um that they're proposing to take down. Um so for me it doesn't seem like it's um appropriate for it to be an administrative determination. This seems like it's an RDA or an NOI type of application.
I don't know how the other commissioners feel about that. I would agree with that. Do we have any other comments in relation to Mayor's comments? Yes, Madam Chair. Uh this is Mike and I
too agree that uh it would be more appropriate for um another way of approaching this Okay, Mary and Madame Chair, my understanding of our regulation is that there is a
waiver for uh or you know for for limited waiver for uh public utility work, but I don't understand that that regulation provides for private um power
generation. It's my just me as one vote. Okay. Does anybody else want to add to that? We lose Richard. So if um oh so if we were going to be recommending would we be look leaning toward an RDA or an NOI?
Um I uh madame chair I you know it's your meeting and your call but I almost wonder if we should do some type of straw poll uh be before uh because I at least in the time that I've been on the commission I've never seen the
commission allow this uh much of extensive tree work within the 30foot no touch zone. It's called the no touch zone for a reason. We just had some people on uh a meeting who did something much less um offensive if if according
to the regulations, right? That that we said no, we're drawing a hard line in the sand on the 30foot no touch zone. So, I would hate to send these people away to do another application only to have them denied if that's, you know, where the commission's mindset was. But
that's just a recommendation. Yes. I think that's an excellent recommendation. Um, so if we do a straw poll, I would like to Mike, where would you be leaning? Yeah, I I I guess it's it's a hard ask
to remove this amount of trees even though it's I can understand u that you know if your electricity is too high here's an option uh for solar to help you but unfortunately the regulations
aren't there yet for us to be able to do that. So, uh, until that changes, um, I think it's going to be hard to remove all of those trees under our regulations that we have,
um, in order to accommodate this application. Okay. Thank you. Um, Pete, Stella, how are you leaning on this? Um, I think I have the same situation uh
just mentioned by Mike. The the regulation doesn't really allow for it and we have to abide by what it is regardless. I mean, I think it might be just a waste of money for them to try to do what they're trying to do. Um,
perhaps. So, okay. Thank you. And Chris St. Germaine. Yeah, this um I totally sympathize with what you're trying to do, but I I don't think, you know, we're follow we're simply following regulations and I don't I don't see this going through. There's no
way. It's too too extreme. These trees are too too important for the shoreline. So, okay. Okay. Um even if we left um you know 3 4 feet of of the
stumps still or or per perhaps you know another question is is what what can we do? Um can we bring these down significantly? Um can they be trimmed? Like what what
are our options? Yeah. Uh, I'm not an arborist. I'm not sure how that would work. I mean, I can't we can't we can't condone killing trees. So, if you cut them in half,
no. And as far as our jurisdiction really would be if the trees were uh dangerous or Mary uh I yeah so we wouldn't taking the
canopy out uh from my understanding of the regulations right again me as one vote taking the canopy out I don't believe I could vote in favor of that the regul population does provide for trimming up. Um, but you would have to leave the canopy there. And I think the
canopy is probably the problem, unfortunately. Again, you know, I I I really appreciate what you're what you're trying to do. And I'm a huge advocate of clean energy, too. So, I hate having to say no, but I just don't see any way um from my own read that the
regulation would permit me to uh vote yes on something like this. Okay, understood. Okay, that's fine. Um, madame chair, uh, I think, um, you had not made it quite around the room yet.
Um, the straw poll, I think. Well, I hadn't made it to you yet. Or did I not make it to Chris yet? Well, Richard's gone. Oh, Richard's gone. I was interested in uh Rich's opinion. So am I. I'm very bummed that he's gone. Um but yeah, I've been
waiting for him try to come back in has not so the the current straw hole would be and myself I would you know it's just not in our jurisdiction. Okay, that's okay. So, okay.
Okay. Oh, Mary. Um, Madam Chair, I uh when we were there this weekend, um the applicant said that they had a uh an RDA that was open for something different and and I don't want to distract us, but yeah, for the deck and I I saw the
application open in open gov. Um, is that uh and and I know it's not on our agenda tonight, so we can't talk about it, but um that's something that maybe we want to make certain doesn't get lost uh while we're, you know, waiting for
our uh uh conservation um administrator to come back. Yeah. So, I think is that is that set up for the next meeting? Is it good? Um, I was just going to go look. Um,
it's for our doc for our rolling dock. I just ended up to uh mail out all of the a butters notification still. Oh, okay. Okay, good. I I was worried that it had been languishing there for a while. Okay. No, no, I still have to mail it.
Okay, good enough. Okay. Yeah. Well, thank you all very much. Yeah. Appreciate it very much. Understand completely. Thank you. So, have a good night. Thank you. You too. Um, so the next thing, these agendas are different because Logan did them. Um, so
we have seven Park Street Terrace, but that's just waiting for Sophie. Then he has the next two things are. Do we have 791 Lemonster Road? Oh, is somebody saying something?
I just unmuted for 791 Lemonster Road. Oh, okay. Yes. I thought it was like at the town hall, so I was just sitting in my car from the Zoom. Okay. Apologize in the dark. Yeah. So, this
one. Has Sophie been out to look at this one? I mean, yeah. So, it looks like this one is stalled um at intake, but we do have I haven't announced this yet, but we do have a an
interim administrator, an agent um who's taking over. Her name is Herlin and it looks like she assigned this to herself. So, I'm assuming that she'll be reaching out soon to come to your property and take a look or whatever would be
appropriate moving forward. Um, it doesn't look like there are some photos here. You're just looking to have two unstable pines removed 15 to 29 ft past the limit of work, right?
Yeah, one of there's they're pretty much I mean one of them is like half rotted and the other one is pretty unstable and one of my main concerns is
I have somebody going in there um probably next week now with all the rain that we've got. Um once that land is cleared, I have a feeling that once those trees are exposed to more wind and
weather that they're just going to end up coming down anyway. And while I have somebody there, you know, on site working rather than having to reschedu something, I I was hoping to have them removed at the
same time. I think it I apologize. I don't have the pictures like actually I do have the pictures on my cell phone like I did upload like pictures of uh like the tape measure inside the trees where
it you know it's I forget what it was like eight or nine inches the tape measure went in without any problem. Um, Mary, you have your hand raised. Uh, Madam Chair, just as a point of order, I
think, um, and I apologize if I just spaced out and didn't hear it. I think we need to have the applicant say their name and address. Oh my gosh. Yes. Can you say your name and address? Sorry. My name is Stephen Bedartha. I currently reside at 81 View Street, Fitsburg,
Massachusetts. Okay. And you're here for 791 Lemonster Road. And then I'm here for 791. Yeah, we're looking to build our primary residence there. And so I know so this is on there's a single family home being constructed
there that was approved at the planning board it looks like. Um so you said you're having it cleared and then you're looking for those two trees to be removed before
Yeah, they just Sorry. Could you repeat that? Um, so can I So you're looking to have the trees removed before the area is cleared or while the area is cleared? While the area is being cleared. Okay. And these two particular trees
happen to be in the buffer zone, but the other area that's being cleared is not in the buffer zone. Yeah, the other area is fine. And I mean, it's I'm they're just going to be a hazard eventually and they're eventually going to end up falling and I'd rather not have them
fall on a brand new house. Um Mary, you had your hand raised. U Madam Chair, yeah, I just wanted to clarify. I think the I think the issue here is is that it's outside the limit of work. Um, and so that's that's the
that's the challenge is, you know, if it would be, I think, um, much less of a concern for the commission if it were not outside the limit of work. Um, just my own thought. Uh, I was looking through the photos. the photos. There seemed to be a lot of photos
uploaded to the uh request for determination and I didn't actually I thought I had seen a diagram of where they are relative to the limit of work not not popping up for me. So I have
diagram showing you want me to share my screen. Oh yeah that would be helpful. Okay. Can you see my screen? Ah, yes. That's what I was looking for. So, we have um pine number one, pine number
two. Is that slightly outside the limit of work? And while I'm in here, um, I could also show some pictures. Uh, Madam Chair,
uh, the assessment of, uh, how far they were outside the limit of work, wasn't clear to me how you came to that conclusion. Oh, so limited work and proposed erosion barrier. Oh, see detail.
of this. But the tree is this. I had assumed this was the tree. Uh Stephen, you're on mute. I uh madam chair I had assumed that until I looked at the second diagram and there were two trees that were actually
circled and so that's why I was kind of thinking maybe I don't know what this is because there's you're unmuted now. Yes, you are unmuted now. Sorry. All right. So take a step. I had
Dillis and Roy go out and actually map put up uh flags where the limited work is and then I went out and took tape measurements from the pine to like the ribbons they put out. So pine number one is actually like they have it
marked. I think it's like just to the right on the right hand side of the dotted line. Yeah. Is that this one right here? That's a boulder. It's like it It's like just to the right of that. It's like looks like a canopy. Tree
canopy. Oh, this right here. Yeah. So, that's the first one. That's like the one that's 15 feet. Okay. That's the one that's like really dead. And then I don't know why it's not marked here.
Maybe because it's not as close to the limit of work, but that's just kind of like my rough guesstimate of, you know, based on the land and the the the plan here where it is. But it's that one is
29 ft outside the limit of clearing ribbons roughly, give or take around 29 ft. Okay. So somewhere in like this area. Yeah, it's probably probably even like closer to that dotted
line to the right of the number two. So, um, we have any comments from the commission? I don't know if it's helpful to show the pictures of the actual pine trees so you
can see like how dilapitated some of these are. Yeah, I was looking at the pictures and um the tree the first tree tree number one is is very very poor condition. Um I I you know I don't really have an issue with that one coming down. Um I saw the picture with
the tape measure almost a foot in to the center which you know it's it's it's in it's in rough shape. I don't see a Yeah, that one. Yeah. You know, you can you can tell that the
tree is is severely compromised. And then so that's just the rough kind of idea of where 29 ft is. I don't know if I took a closeup of that one. No, that that's the other one. I think I
was just trying to get a better look at like where that is compared to uh where they had their ribbons marked. That's the first Yeah, that's tree one. Yeah, we don't have any close-ups of
tree two. I think just that um this one photo you might have had up. Uh yeah, that was probably it. Let me I can check my phone to see if I took a closeup of it. It's not dead like the
other one by any means. But this one, sorry, I'm switching back and forth here. Oh yeah, that one that's that's the 29footer. Yeah. What's the issue with that one? just
that it's going to be hanging over our house. Um, and we're worried that it's going to end up falling down once like that land is cleared and that tree is exposed more cuz in just on the other side, it's all fields on the other side
of that too. Maybe like 60 ft back behind that. It's all fields. And when we expose the other side of it, we're just worried that that one will also be a hazard to, you know, our our
residents. And you can't see it in the picture, but this tree actually splits up into two two separate uh trees. I don't know what the real term is, but Mary, did you have a question or
comment? U Thank you, Madam Chair. So, uh, it looks like pine number one is right on the 30foot no disturb zone line, but it looks like pine number two is well
within. Uh, so it's not far from the uh, wetland. judging from what I was seeing with the measurement and seeing where pine number two is uh relative to the so that
um so the fat dotted line uh is the uh or long dash line is the limit of work and then the fine one inside of that appears to be the 30 foot no touch zone no to the to the left of where you were
yeah That appears to be the 30 foot no touch zone. Um, and if you follow that on around towards the right, there's actually a a detailed comment that says 30 foot no touch or no disturb. Yeah. So, it seems to be kind of very close to
the wetland. Um, yeah, I have another picture. Sorry to Sorry. Go ahead. I I mean, am I understanding and interpreting what you're telling us uh correctly? Yeah, that's right. Yep. Yeah. Uh, so I just wanted to make
certain that I that I was understanding and interpreting where these were uh correctly. So I I I have a lot of big pines on my property. Um, so I I'm familiar with them and uh, you know, for me as one
commissioner, I would be okay with you taking those down, but I I would want to see uh, definitely pine number two uh, would require a two to one replication or, you know, two native trees planted.
Uh, and then I because I'm conservative on trees and I'm only one vote, I would ask for the same thing for pine number one as well. Um, but that's just me, Madam Chair. Back to you. Thank you. Um, I think that's a great suggestion.
Uh, Pet Sully, you had a comment or question. Yeah, I was going to go same thing Mary's saying as far as uh and she's got more experience on the replication, but having my experience
with, you know, I wasn't born yesterday. that big pine. I think you probably got into the project, didn't even notice it, and you probably should have looked at it and said when you did the application process because that's that's a I think it's a hazard to to not allow you to cut
it down. But we just have to do something because it is in that uh 30 foot no touch. I mean, the the tree you said is pretty high and I looked at your drawing. It looks like it's uh I have to look at the drawing, but it's pretty close to where your house is actually going to exist. Correct. Yeah. Yeah.
Yes. If they came down, they would come down across the entire house. I would I would defer to the other more experienced commissioners, but I think it's a liability not to let you take it down in my opinion, personal opinion.
Okay. So, um, Mary's suggestion, well, and really is the kind the the the bylaw is that if we, you know, do allow these to be taken down, it would be, um, do you know what the one of them has a very
significant trunk size? Um, but we would be looking at at least a 2:1 replacement on those based on their size. Can you elaborate on that? like uh say the first one I think the plane said it was like
36 inch. Oh, does it say Oh, yeah. 36. Yeah. On the first one, Dylan Roy had marked it as 36. I think the second one's roughly the same. Maybe a little bit smaller. That's probably like under 30. But when you say 2 to one, what what
type of a replacement is? So, we would require native replacement, but also does anyone know off the top of their head what the exact caliber would have to be for both for the
replacements? I think it's circumference of of 2 in, but I was just trying to look it up. Uh, Madam Chair, thank you. So that would be like planting like an 18 inch pine or not. I wouldn't plant a pine like a like
a a m a maple something like that like that would grow like 18 in or you know like a dogwood trees or dogwood. Um yeah aesthetically wood. Uh yeah, I found I found the Yeah,
for greater than 20 in at um at chest height uh three replacements. Um I think the background noise might be coming from you, Chris. Aha. Yeah, it went away.
My wife is a loud talker. Yeah, that's uh I I would have blamed the TV myself, but I mean, you know. Yeah. So, uh reading the regulation uh the local regulation, it says if it's greater than 20 in at um at chest height
that it's uh which is, you know, four feet that it's three replacements um that are required and place them at 2 to one or at 3:1 is what it says. Oh, three to one. Okay. All right. If they were less than if they were 8 in to 20 in,
then it would be two replacements for the removal of one tree. And then the caliber was 2 in on those. I'm looking I I remembered seeing something like that somewhere, but I'm looking in here and I'm not seeing it. Uh and it's supposed to be you're
supposed to be uh replacing with a similar variety as what you've taken out. But so as an example, a tree would, you know, be replaced with a tree. Uh understory would be replaced with understory. Shrub would be replaced with
shrub. Uh and in this case, it's trees. So we would expect it to be replaced with trees. Um I don't see a caliper um specified actually. Okay. It says the sizing shall be equal to
that of the affected trees or a height of 10 feet whichever is less. Okay. So of those of the affected trees or 10 ft whichever is less. Yeah. So the 10 ft would be less. Yeah. So it would be
three three replacements for each of the removed trees and the replacements would be at a height of 10 feet. Okay. So three trees more or less. or pine at least 10 feet tall. Yes. The diameter of the tree doesn't matter.
Just mostly the height. Okay. Correct. All right. Yeah. That I mean that's more than reasonable and probably in our landscape designs anyway. Uh well, this would be this would be additional in addition to what's in your
current landscape design. Yeah. Uh and then uh ma uh madam chair uh we would since he'd be working in the 30-foot no touch zone um I think we may care about the equipment
they're using to remove the pines. U most of the time we don't allow like a truck bucket truck to drive over there and do it. Um, that's uh I'm not a tree I'm not an arborist, so I don't know what would be a safe way
to bring those those trees down, but I am concerned about them being outside of the uh the limit of work. Okay. Yeah. Um, how do you know how Sorry, if you bring up the um the site
plan again. Um, does somebody else want to share that or should I share that? Sorry, I don't have it. I can share it. I found it. I can share it. So, we have the order condition set up for the septic that's going to run pretty darn close to
where that pine is. Oh, where pine number two is? Yeah. Pine number two is. So, would that be like Yeah. Yeah. So, they could probably do the work from here if the ground's stable enough to do
that. Yeah. This one though, uh, this is the one that's farther away, right? Isn't this the one that's 20 feet away? Yeah, that that's correct. Uh, oh, and is this the one that's all eaten out inside or the one that's um more? Number one's the one that's eaten out. Number
two, one that's a little more intact, but Okay. So, they could climb this one and take it down. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Uh, Madam Chair, that that's that's what I think the permission ought to be then is that they can use a a
bucket truck if they stay outside of the limit of work uh for B pine number one and for pine number two the same restriction, but it sounds like pine number two will have to be taken down manually uh by the uh arborist going up
in the tree. Okay. And then we would um require that the uh that the sumps stay in the ground. I believe the stumps have to stay in the ground even with the tree replacements
the problem uh madam chair if I may. Uh the problem with trying to remove the sumps is that uh it's very disruptive uh to the soil. Uh, and so we always inside of the 30-foot no touch zone, uh, require that the stumps remain in place.
Okay. And what about like pine one? Could I remove that stump? Pine two, I don't mind the leaving that stump. The pine one just where it's so close to the it's like on the limiter work, right? I would
look to kind of I would hope to have that removed and why what's it doing there? It's not going to grow into your septic line. And I mean I would just rather it moved,
but I mean if it's you can grind it down. Oh yeah. Yeah, that's that's fine then. Yeah, great. The grind works. And just out of curiosity, when I do the replacement trees, I assume it's got to
be around where those trees are being removed or is there like a specific spot where, you know, I need to plant those trees, Madam Chair. Do you want me to take that? Um, yes. They definitely have to
be within the 30- foot zone because we're taking out trees within the 30-foot zone. Um, generally we like to see them go back in a similar, you know, kind of placement. But if you know, you and your, you know, uh, arborist
determine that a better, you know, there's a better place within the 30-foot zone that would, uh, you know, give them a better chance of viability, then I I think that's I think that's okay. Okay. Yeah, that's what like my
main question, especially with like uh tree number one, right, where it's close to the septic line, I would look to pull those further away from where that's going to be and you know, not going into that existing root
system and, you know, hopefully they they take well there. Madam chair, from my perspective, just as one commissioner in one vote, I think that sounds reasonable. Okay, great. I do too. And then Mike, did you have a
question or a comment? Yes, Madam Chair, but I think Mary uh answered it for me regarding the grinding of the stump as an alternative to pulling the stump. So, she was way ahead of me.
Okay, great. Thank you, Mike. You're welcome. Uh, Chris or Pete, do you have any comments on this? No, I think I made my comments. Okay.
So, um, now as far as what the replacement plantings are, Mary, would we be looking for them to submit what they plan on putting in its place before they do it or Yes. Okay. Yes, definitely. Um, we'd want to
have uh some and I I mean from what I've seen in terms of the practices that we have allowed is that they can say it's going to be, you know, six, six, you know, maples of a specific variety that are
10t tall. Or they may say, "Oh, okay. Well, we might choose maple. We might choose birch. We might choose, I don't know, um, uh, black birch, right? Or cherry. And we'll get
of this of this pallet, we'll get six that are at least 10 foot tall. So I I think you know in terms of the practices I've seen either either would be acceptable either saying here's a pallet of things that uh are recommended and when it comes time we'll pick what looks
the best or um you know they can give us something that's nailed down as well as you know instead of giving us a pallet of things they would choose from. Okay. And is there so we're taking the trees out you know within the next few weeks.
Is there a timeline when those replacement trees have to be planted? Mary, uh, I would think that we would want to, um, well, you know, it's a good question. I mean, if if he was just coming if this was just a project that
was a uh administrative determination, um it would uh we would say that we want these um you know, planted within, you know, 3 months or 6 months
of having taken the trees down. And since he's doing work there already, uh I guess I I don't know. Uh because we wouldn't we wouldn't I mean they're outside of the limit of work, so we wouldn't want uh we wouldn't expect that there would
be any damage to them uh happening. So yeah, I think it'd probably be better uh since this is filed as a separate administrative determination to treat it as a completely separate something and managed uh separately. So maybe maybe it'd be better to have them uh plan it
uh and uh you know within within 3 months so that they later and I go through the same steps with like I do the online application and just submit it as uh I I don't know what the options are
but I assume I can figure it out. That's a a form to replace that vegetation, if you will. So, are are you asking how you would submit like your planting diagram and your plan? Yeah, I
just go back online and resubmit a application. So, you could you should be able to um you'd be able to upload it into your current the open gov application. Okay. Piggyback off of what I already have open. Yeah. Okay. because
it would be it would be part of the current application for the Yeah. Um Chris, did you have a question? Yeah, I I want to make sure that the you know the trees have um have a good chance and I are you saying he needs to
put them in during construction because I would like to give him a little bit more room, a little le leeway if possible. Um, you know, he's building a house and, you know, I I just don't want to see the tree. You know, you go to all the work of planting in these trees and
they get damaged during construction. Um, are they going to be okay in the 30 foot? Is there is there Which way is the which way is the work coming into this property? Well, it's um, Madam Chair, if I I may. Absolutely. The uh, these are
outside of the limit of work. So, okay. They should be protected. So, I mean, that's the one point, but the other thing that I was thinking as, you know, as I was talking out loud through this is just from a point of order kind of perspective,
uh, this this now that we've gotten here and, you know, talked about it as a administrative change, I wonder if it really wouldn't be more appropriate to treat it as a um, a field
change. And I and I don't know the answer to that question. I wish we had the benefit of uh Rich being here with us because I you know Oh, Rich is back. Yeah. Great. Have you heard all of this rambling? Uh
Rich, uh just a little bit of it. myself. I mean, if they're going to be in there cutting and grinding the trees, I would think the replacement should be planted as soon as possible, especially to try to get them uh in this growing season.
Okay. I think we are outside of the limit of work. It's a separate application. So, I mean, even if it wasn't, you know, we would still be looking for this sooner rather than later. Answers all of my questions. Thank you. Thank you. More than reasonable. And I I
mean, I can bring the I can bring those further away from the limit of work, right? Like it's just, you know, you're replacing what you're taking essentially and, you know, keep it around the general area.
Yes. In the buffer zone. In the wet within the wetland buffer zone. Yes. Yeah. replacing what we're taking out of there. Right. But okay. Okay. So, we have any more
comments from commissioners? So, this is what I have. Um, and I are we able to approve this tonight if we were if we voted to. I think we can. Uh, Madam Chair. Okay.
Um, so I have six trees at least 10 ft each and a 3 to one replacement. Um, pine number two will be taken down manually. Pine number one
could can use a bucket outside of the limit of work. Um, we'll need to see the planting diagram, um, just to make sure it's in line with what is currently there. And we want to see the plantings as soon as possible
um, to get them going for this growing season. Does that cover everything? And Madam Chair, they need to be native uh, native. And they need to be native. Yes, native trees. So, a planting diagram with native trees that would be
comparable to what is there now. So move second. Second. I have Was that Mike for the motion? Yes. Okay. And Chris for the second.
Sure. Okay. Um Okay. So, roll call. Mike Larouche. I. Mary Wilson. I germaine. I. Peter Stella. Hi.
Richard Burch I and I for myself. Okay. Motion to approve. Great. Thank you. I appreciate everybody's time. Thank have a good night. Thank you. You too. Okay. Um Oh, my laptop's about to die.
My husband is telling me. Uh no, it says I have 41 minutes left. Um Okay. So, moving on. We do not have any extension requests, permits, or certificates of compliance or notice of project change. Um, we still have we have Carolyn Po, is
that how you pronounce your last name? Yes, thank you. For 42 Meadow, which is not on the uh not on the agenda. Um, was that
supposed to be on the agenda? Um I I wasn't sure uh because when you came out um Saturday um I didn't know if um you know Mary had had suggested I come tonight just to you know kind of
rehash right our visit or your visit uh on Saturday. So I guess I just want and I can come back again if that's okay if if that's required. I know it's getting late. Um, but my questions are are
still, you know, am I in the 30foot no touch zone? Um, and I have some uh photographs to share if that's helpful for everyone. Um, but my concerns are, you know, if
I'm in the 30 foot no touch zone and I also want to just make sure everyone's on the same page because I'm in a butter of 48 meadow lane as well as 34 Meadow Lane and there's been some activity within the last few months. So, I want to make sure that um, you know, we're
going about this uh, the right way. Um my concern is just the as you saw like the invasives and there's a deep drop off um you know from where my my fence ends. Um and if
I'm able to we have a lot of vines and invasives those Norway maples are popping up like crazy and they end up growing and leaning toward the house. So, what I'd like to do in addition to my garden um is just kind of landscape that corner a little bit better so that
it's a little bit more healthy and um you know there is a dead ash there that um I don't think I'm going to take any trees down now. I think I just want to start planning on filling in the that area if I'm able to do that.
Right. So, um, do you want to show some Are we okay to talk about this? You want to be throw some pictures? Yep. I'll real real quick. Um, so here here is my my garden. Um, I don't
think you're sharing. Hold on. So, do you see at the bottom where you have share screen? Okay, here we are. There we are. I thought I hit it. Sorry. Click on that and then choose whichever screen you want to and there you go.
Okay. All right. Um so this is the Can you see? Okay. Yeah. Okay. So, um this tree, you know, they're starting to bloom at the top. This one is is dead.
Um you know, this one's leaning, which I think will eventually fall in I don't know when. But what we couldn't see was the back side. So I just want to show you what the back side looks like. Um and and this is what the back looks
like. So my my thought is is to really kind of clean this up and make it uh a little bit more um intentionally landscaped than just this kind of scraggy looking
uh kind of it's it's just messy. um where things are just popping up, you know, anywhere. Um this is the end of my fence. That's my survey stake. So, you can see like this space here is empty and it's like a
steep drop off. Um I can't see what you're I can't tell what you're pointing to. You're talking about the space right at the at the fence. Yes. So when it be starts to become thicker,
right? And so if that's part of the no touch zone and did we I'm drawing a blank. Did we have I a measurement I know Mary you had Mary you have your hand up. Madam chair I took the action to do a diagram
which I have hastily done while we were talking. Thank you. I love that. I got back to my work desk on Monday. I completely forgot. Um yeah, let me share my screen. Uh we have to unshare, I think. There we go. There. Yeah,
that's what we want to share. Share this. Okay. So, this is a this is a uh snapshot out of Mass Mapper. Uh this is 42 Meadow Lane. Uh this is the approximate location of the tree line. Uh and the trees that uh Carolyn was
talking about were in this vicinity and I did a measurement from uh perpendicular from here to the wetland is shown in mass mapper and it uh said 63 ft. um so that people have some sense
of the dimension and where the wetland is uh back here and the the drop off that Caroline was talking about uh is sort of kind of happening right in this general area. So we would be just within the 100 foot
but outside of the 50 foot. Correct. Okay. So, um, with that information, what would we be looking for as far as next steps? It seems like it would be fair. I mean, Madam Chair, just me as one opinion, it seems like it would be
fair to manage this as an administrative determination. Okay. Um, I don't know. Rich has a lot more experience than uh than I do in this area. Okay. Um, Rich, what do you uh how much area are we talking about and how much
vegetation are we looking to take out? I mean, if it's just a couple plants here and there, the termination is fine. If we are taking out more than that and doing a little grading, it probably should just be an
RDA so that we have something a little more formal um on the file for the work that's being done in the buffer zone. Um okay. I I don't have exact measurements. I think I just before any of that started
is if I can actually you know I think we're talking maybe I don't know 10 by 15 maybe where that drop off kind of goes down and then it's wild after that.
Um, but I don't want to take any trees down that are unnecessary because of, you know, I think of the that embankment's just going to erode anyway. If I would properly fill in that corner so that it's a little bit healthier
landscape. Um, you know, then those invasive Norways and those other trees and the bittersweet won't be such a battle every year. But we can I can do it if it's within the no touch. If it's not within the no
touch zone and it's okay for me to Yeah, it looks like it's clearly outside the no touch zone from what Mary's drawn out. Yeah, I mean you're clearly outside of that, but I myself I think an RDA would be u probably the right way to
go. Then we do have it documented. and then just have a little more descriptive um diagram of what the work you're looking to do in there, Carolyn. Yeah. No, that's fine. I just want to make sure
um you know that I'm not overstepping the boundary that the intention is clear to just kind of even that area off a little bit. um you know and and I think it would you know so it won't harm the
garden that's I'm putting in a perennial garden pollinator garden there so it's not going to harm that uh in any way with those stranglers and the bittersweet that I've been hacking away at now for for too long.
Um and uh that's just kind of what I would like to do. I think it would just be better for the space in general and a little bit healthier. A lot healthier. Mary, I don't know what an RDA is. A request for something.
An RDA is a request for determination of applicability. It's a um application that you would file uh you would go on open gov and file that and then it would um come before us and determine
if if the work is okay to do would give us a more detailed plan. Right. Okay. All right. So I think it's a good start just to be just for me to be clear and for everyone here to know that it it's with it it is workable area. It's not in
the touch zone and then I'm glad to go ahead and do the um RDA. And Mary, did you have your hand up? U Thank you, Madam Chair. I just um thought that uh Rich's recommendation about the RDA was probably a really good one.
Um, you know, I'm aware that there's a little bit of of history there, uh, with, um, you know, the neighbors abudding and so it's it's probably best for all concerned to, you know, really go through the rigor of the formal process. Yeah. And I'm and I'm fine with
that. I just want to kind of, you know, put a stake in the ground, so to speak, and just move forward and and present a, you know, a plan so that um, you know, it it's it's all good going forward with the commission and
and the town. Oh, yeah. Thank you for coming to us and asking. Um, so I think that we would be just recommending that you go on. Do you know how to file on open gov? Uh, no. I can, you know, if there's a set of
instructions, maybe it's on the website. I I can go ahead and and review that and I'll I'll uh find my way, I'm sure. Yeah, I believe it's on the conservation portion of the website. Okay. There's an area to file an application and it would bring you to
the open website to file an application, upload pictures or anything you needed. Yeah. Okay, I'll do that because I do think um there is going to be some fill uh involved. Uh so that's the other thing
that sort of makes me nervous. Yeah. So we'd be able to take a look at all that. Okay, that's great. Thanks so much for coming on. Thank you. I learned a lot listening to everybody.
You too. All right. Good night. Good night. So, um, next we have enforcements. I do we have any updates on any enforcements? I know, uh, I was out at
40 Fire Road a couple Fridays ago and they still have some stuff there. Oh, Mary, you have your hand up. Uh, well, I was just going to mention that you had been out at 40 Fire Road 12 and the town, I think, is going to uh put those
boulders in place uh to act as a physical barrier, which I think was the last item that needed to close out the current order of conditions. Uh but you did mention that uh one one person still has they've moved stuff out
of the original area and they've put the trash now in a different area. Um and I would make the recommendation that we would uh treat that as a separate incident and track it separately and as soon as the boulders are you know placed
that we uh you know have our current administrator uh file for a COC because I think that's the last thing that had to had to formally happen there for 40 fire road 12. That would be my recommendation. Y and I agree with that. So, I'm going
to I have to check in with the DPW and see what the when they plan on getting those folders in and then we can move forward with trying doing that. Oh, yep. Mary and um regarding 10 mass a uh I
don't have any update but I think that I mean at least I would recommend that as soon as you know we can I mean if we've got an interim uh administrator uh maybe somebody could follow up with Dillis and Roy. They had sent us a letter confirming that they had taken on that
project. Um, but that one's been lingering for a very long time. I think, Madam Chair, yeah, I think the last thing that they sent was that they wanted three to four weeks about a week and a half ago, but um, yeah, I definitely will put that on their
radar. Do we have any updates on any others? I don't believe we do. Um, so for new business, um, I had Oh, Pete, you have your hand up.
Yeah, I just had a a kind of question about the other day I was working at somebody's house on uh Goodrich Street and got to talking about a property that is adjacent to 78 Goodrich Street that's
right on the edge of a wetland that they're doing something on. I don't know. Have you guys is it something? Are you aware of that lot? I think it was a an environmental protection, you know, file number on the lot. Um, and I think they're going to
build a house there. So, I would have thought it had gone through the process already, but they're starting to do something. And I I just didn't know whether uh anyone knew anything about that. Was was that 78 Goodrich Street? It's
it's an unnumbered lot on the corner, you know, if you're famili Oh, it's not Goodrich Street. Uh, excuse me, 78 Kilburn. It's on the corner of Kilburn. You know that when you get off of Lemonster Road, you go down Kilburn, it turns toward Goodrich
and then it's like wetland everywhere there. You think they'd never build a house there. It's actually 4.88. They came before us already. Oh, they did? I think yeah, I think actually that um guy we were just talking to the pine trees with was one of the uh oh
subdivisions of that uh parcel. All right. So they probably we've already look somebody's already they must have silt fences and everything already up down in that thing then. All right. Never mind. Oh, I was just uh double checking because the address that we had
there Oh, it already shows was the address. It was 20 Kilburn was the way it had been presented to us. All right. And and then the It looks like the subdivisions might already be
shown in the Well, all right. There's 20. This might be something. Well, 20 is maybe they broke it off, but yeah. Yeah, it looks like what the subdivisions have already been broken off. maybe a number in the uh I was just
looking at you know uh mass GIS and 20 was the might have been the existing lot and then they've cut off a triangle of about 4 acres and that's where they're actually doing the work. Yeah, I think that I think that is and I think that came before us as 20 Kilburn lots one,
two, and three or something. Oh, all right. No, my my memory is not foolproof. So, if somebody else remembers something different, you know, feel free to speak up. All right. No big deal. I just don't I'm
sure with the D number down there, they must have done the process to get that first, right? Yes. All right. You were able to let me back in, Mary? I was able to let you back in, Jenny. I I was very surprised. I apparently uh Rich
earlier was trying to do a lot of stuff to get my attention, but I totally ignored him. But you on the other hand, I uh my laptop is plugged in right now and it died. It just started back up,
but I it doesn't appear to be charging. It's like it's just sitting there on one person, which might not. Anyway, um okay. So, sorry about that. Thank god you were able to get me back in. Um whether
you So where were we when I left off? We were talking about the interim admin. We were about to talk about the new interim admin and just kind I was going to announce that I believe. Yay.
Yes, we have a interim admin. Her name is uh I believe it's pronounced Chamberlin and she is the Fitsburg agent. So she is uh she she's from close by and she's going to help us get rid of
some of this backlog. I don't know. I was looking at their um their town schedule. It looks like their meetings are also on the first Wednesday night. It looks like they might only meet once a month though. I don't know if she'd be able to if Sophie
for some reason is still out at the next meeting. Um if she'd be able to fill in at the meeting or not. I haven't gotten any clarification on that. So, um the other So, for new business, the other thing that I wanted
to I had asked to have on the agenda for tonight is adding associate members to the commission. Um we don't have associate members right now. I would really love it uh if we could. I don't know if we would be looking to add one or two. I don't know what the standard
for that is, but I would love for Mary to be able to stay on as an associate member and you know, attend meetings if she wanted to and be able to go out on sitewalks and just still, you know, do a lot of the stuff that she still does. Oh, Mary,
I I would like to ask to be uh retained as an associate member. my commission is up at the end of June. Uh but I uh I would like to help out, you know, less formally the commission where I can. And then I think it's probably uh easier for
the commission if I maintain uh the role as the um grant uh administrator for our open uh mass recreational trails grant. Um and so retaining, you know, the title of associate uh commissioner would would
help out with that formality as well. So I think now uh is that within our jurisdiction to vote to have associate members? It's my understanding, Madam Chair, that it's at the discretion of conservation
commission about associate members. Okay. Um so I I motion that we accept um the position or we can endorse the position of associate
um commissioners or associate members. Okay, I have a second. I second that. Okay, so I have a motion from Chris and a second from Mike. Uh so roll call. Uh, Chris, hi Mike. Hi,
Pete. Hi, Richard. Hi, Mary. I and I for myself. And then, so right now, so we just voted to create the position of an associate member. So now, would we move to approve
to nominate Mary to that position? So moved. Uh, I don't think we can do that while she's a member. I think you may have to wait until Okay. Well, I don't I don't think she can have both positions. Can we uh can we could we do the vote?
Uh, and we certainly don't have to do it tonight. Uh, but we could do it with an effectivity of July 1, or we could table it to a future meeting as well. You know, honestly, I think technically unless you resign, you're a commissioner
until you're replaced. And I don't know what they have for people uh interested in the positions that are becoming vacant. I'm going to resign at the end of June if I'm not replaced. Okay.
I'm sorry, I'm burnt out. Yeah. I guess I would recommend we just hold off um on appointing Mary as an associate until uh she's no longer a member. Okay. So that's looking at the the last meeting in June if technically
that's her. I mean although her or would we have to wait until the July meeting? You could just wait until the July meeting. Uh yeah. Uh and the July meeting might be on a weird date, huh? Because of the holiday.
But that's fine. Okay. All right. So, all right. So, we have we have created the space for an associate commissioner to be filled in the future. Yeah. It looks like the the fourth is on a Friday, so we should be able to have a
meeting on the second. Oh, yeah. Great. Only a day in between. Okay. Um, great. I'm glad we did that. Um, new, so that's new business, old
business. Um, do we have anything to discuss about the peerreview process? I know. No updates. I had taken the action to go offline with uh with Rich and uh come up with some numbers so that uh Sophie um or whoever is the land use
manager could uh actually scope uh uh the work for an RFQ for horizontal engineering for a year and I've not I've not initiated that yet. I I anticipate having a little bit more free time now. I could do it.
Yeah. Okay. So, default continuation practice Do we have any update? I know that we had so the last that we had discussed on that was that Adam had mentioned that
we don't need to continue if the applicant isn't that we don't need to continue if the applicant is repeatedly not at meetings. we could close the meeting and then I think
Richard thought that that might be wrong. That's correct. Uh well, as I recall it, uh and and Rich can keep me honest is that uh Adam told me that the uh the practice was
um not not stable, right? and and was at risk for being overturned. And uh Rich pointed out that as long as the applicant is coming into the meetings, like we've opened the meeting on time and the applicant is
coming into the meeting and uh we we still have open actions that the applicant owes us that uh Rich thought that we were on stable ground for the default continuations.
Um but I uh and you know he and I were going to again get together offline uh which I have not done and come up with uh kind of a a rubric of here are the places where we think we shouldn't do it and here are the places where we think probably we can do it and then ask um
the town manager to give us uh uh you know 15 minutes with uh with Adam Costa to confirm our understanding of the regulations. Yep. That sounds about right. Okay, great. And then big
five that is, if I remember correctly, um wanting to get everyone at least the the five core classes offered through
MAC. Actually, Madam Chair, uh I had put this on here and you could of course it's your agenda now. You feel free to strike it. I I had u proposed this as um an opportunity to allow commissioners to socialize their training a little bit and talk about their big five takeaways
and not not intended to be a big time overview anything just, you know, five bullets. These are my takeaways. Um, I think sometimes commissioners are um don't really know what they're missing when they don't go to the
training um that's available and may not know what a class is really about. So, if they have a colleague that's taken it uh you know and they say, "Hey, I just took such and such. I learned all this great information that it might encourage others to go do the training and I thought it would also be a good opportunity for the commissioners to
hear about any training that the um office staff were doing as well." um and another opportunity to socialize in that regard. Anyway, it's an idea. Uh but um feel free to uh continue it or not any any way that you want. And I know you recently did a violation training. Do
you have anything you want to share from that while we're on this topic or Yeah, one of the things I learned in the violations training uh which I thought I had already knew but had heard some differing opinions about is the uh daily
uh daily fines. Uh the maximum is $300 per day that they actually have to be issued every day. Um you you can't issue the first one and then have the presumption that the others are still applying. They have to be issued every
day. That that they definitely confirmed which is definitely different than what I had thought. So I'm really glad that you asked them that question and let me know. Um and that was the MACC training. Um I did a open meeting law uh training that
was taught by Katy Law. Um and that was after I had talked to uh Adam Costa about the uh presumption of uh continuation and Katy Law for open meetings. They were
very they said most of the time the reason why uh commissions got overturned on decisions was failure to act. So not adhering to the timeline and that's a place I think our office has been having a hard time executing to the um you know
uh regulatory timelines. And then the other one was um uh you know commissioners having informal dialogue offline uh that you know so text and and uh emails right uh
that involved more more than uh you know equal to or more than a quorum. Onetoone conversation of course is not a quorum and is okay. uh those those were the most uh most of the time that's where they saw the most uh lawsuits, right?
Where the commissions would lose jurisdiction. And then the other thing that they had was uh shoot I just had it in my mind um oh public uh uh participation in social media. Uh they said that uh
commissioners had to refrain from uh commenting on any jurisdictional item uh in in social media uh because uh if there are more than you know if there's a quorum of commissioners also on that
same page or on that same you know following group that's a violation of uh open meeting law as well. Anyway, I had never really thought about the social media thing. So, so that was interesting. That's all I had. Awesome.
Thank you for sharing all of that. The Did anybody else have anything that they've learned recently that they wanted to share? Nope. Hey, Mary. Yes, Rich. Did they have any recommendations for a workflow
software so we could be following along in the office from the time an application's received? No. And I didn't ask that. It seems to me like the um I mean Madam Chair, assuming that I uh can
answer that question. Uh it seems to me like open gov that should be a feature in open gov. Uh, but I I I think uh Jenny was going to ask that question of uh Sophie and Brian, but I think uh Jenny may have been waiting for Sophie to come back to ask
that question. I mean, it really seems like that ought to be a standard feature in Open Gov uh to do some type of timelines or, you know, alerts or notifications or something. I mean, most other
workflow software applications have that kind of feature. I just don't happen to know specifically about this one. Giving that a lot of thought since our um training last week trying to keep the office in line
with the all of the dates and not that we have to make sure that we memorialize with applications. Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. It appears to me that open gov does have the functionality. It doesn't seem that it's set up in there, but I know, you
know, if Sophie sends me a task in open gov, I do get a notification and if I ignore it, I get another notification um when I set a task. So, the functionality appears to be there, but I can't get into the full workflows to see
what's really in there. Um ideally what you would want um open gov to be able to generate every week like u like uh or every two weeks right the uh action item list that's you know anything that's getting ready to time
out or getting ready to you know uh be an urgent issue. I mean that's that's what I would think if I were in the office that would that's what I would want. Yeah. Um any do we have any other comments on that topic?
Yeah. Um April Earth report. I know Mary had gone over how well her Earth Day event was. Um does anybody else have anything they want to add? Yes, ma'am. here the uh pollinator
habitat had a very successful uh Earth Day event where uh many of the volunteers were there. Um and it looks like we did quite a bit of work. Uh we utilized a donated
fencing to go around uh that famous cherry tree that uh was hit by uh a young person with his vehicle uh last fall and it looks like it survived the
winter. So we're putting a fence around it so we can keep the deer away from eating uh the cherry tree leaves. And uh that was completed. Um and also that large tree that had fallen over the
winter uh it was pretty rotted out and it was kind of in the walkway from the front entrance going into um the pollinator habitat and that was all cut up and taken out uh as well. And
um I think uh uh other volunteers did some great work in clearing out and cutting down grasses so the new grasses could come up. And I was busy doing other things. So I didn't really um get
a handle on some of what some of the other volunteers were doing in the winter plantings of different seeds. Um, and um, I'm not sure if this is a good time to uh, see if we could put in
our uh, our last request for the pollinator habitat. Is is that something I can do right now, Madam Chair? Yeah, or do you want me to wait till the Hollis Road resident topic comes up? But
either way, time. Uh it looks like the pollinator habitat has put in their final order for plants for the season uh which amounts to $218. And also they've requested a
trimmer um to uh I'm surprised that they did not have one of these, but uh it looks like for $229 uh we could get um a heavyduty 18VT
um trimmer so they can do some of their work. Uh, and it's battery operated, so it's lightweight and, uh, they don't have to worry about putting gas in it. So, I guess I'm requesting, uh, the
plants order for $218 and the trimmer for $229 um, for a total of $447 to be taken out of the HA account. Um, which, um, I'd like to,
uh, suggest that we vote on an invoice for the habitat so they can finish their work this spring. Okay. So, um, did you say an 18 volt string trimmer? Well, it's 40 volts, but
it takes a an 18 volt battery. So, Okay. Where is um who who retains that? Um Mike uh who retains the equipment? Yeah. It's put in their lock shed on the
pollinator habitat. Okay. Uh at 123 Hollis Road. There's a little shed on the property. Not It's actually not near the residence. It's on the opposite side. The opposite side. And it is And it's locked.
I assume it has power to the shed. There's no power to the shed. However, uh you know, the the battery would have to be charged somewhere. Uh um and I'm sure Jenny just lives up the street. I'm sure
she would be fine about charging the battery. Um, and 18 volt is a popular battery. It's a Ryobi and I have a lot of Ryobi equipment. So, uh, I too can charge the batteries myself and also
provide extra batteries as this trimmer does come with a battery and a charger. Um, so I'm sure with um my batteries uh cuz the battery lasts about
40 minutes. Um um so it's good to have an extra battery if you're doing a big uh work area. But it's as you know if if you do any gardening, trimmers are very uh useful in clearing out uh and
trimming areas that need to be trimmed. uh and it doesn't take a lot of time to do so. So, I'd like to u uh recommend that we extend uh to the pollinator habitat their last order
plants and their trimmer in the amount of $447. Looking for a motion to approve. So moved. Second. Is that Richard for the motion and Mary
for the second? Yep. Yeah. Okay. Um, roll call vote. Pete Stellar. Yes. Uh, or I. Mary Wilson. I. Rich. I. St. Germaine.
I and I for myself. Madame Chair. Uh I think for the record uh we need to say that that comes out of the haw uh fund. Oh okay. Um and that is approved to come out of the haw fund and that was what was the amount on that again? 42747
47 447 and there's roughly $4,000 in that account. Okay. Okay. Um all right so that was approved
447 the h fund um conservation budget do we have anything to discuss on that no updates there okay encroachment 315
Lancaster a we don't have any updates there uh that that's an encroachment that had started a number of years ago. Um and uh the office has not had time to follow up on uh whether or not the the residents have
removed the encroaching materials. Okay. Okay. Yeah. The last last I remember hearing about that is sometime last year. Okay. Um and then chapter 61 open gov workflow. I
don't think we have any updates on that. No. And then grant update. Uh no updates on the grant. Uh well, we did get the paperwork uh uh filed for
the table rock um permit. Uh but that's minor paperwork thing. So awesome. Um, conservation land improvement. We talked about that a bit tonight. Um, do you have anything else
other than what went on at Table Rock or there's anything we want to talk about future conservation land improvement? I don't have anything to discuss right
now. All right. Hollis Road residents. Do we have any updates on that? I don't think that we have I mean unless Mike has regular husbandry updates. So most of the stuff we had last discussed was part of executive session. So we we
can't really talk about that an open meeting. Okay. give anything and I have nothing else extra to add to that meeting. Madam Chair, um anything from open space, Chris? No,
the first meeting didn't have a quorum. We haven't met since. Okay. And then storm water um did go uh did go to town meeting and talk about the uh storm water utility. I don't know
if anybody was there for that. I was out on sitewalks. I know that was first the town meeting. Um, so there is, you know, there's going to be a discussion and introduction and hopefully approval of a
storm water utility, which would be not a tax, but you know, a utility that would help pay for storm water infrastructure and a lot of the things that uh the town and the DPW has to do to comply with storm water standards. So, you'll be seeing more about that
coming up in the future. Uh, communication, public comment, anything that anyone has to add? Yeah, I did have just a quick uh comment on the newspaper advertising.
Yep. So, I we have been using the Lunberg Ledger um a to support a local business and b because it does have a a subscription in Lunberg, but it is a weekly newspaper. If we do get into a pinch, we can
advertise our meetings in the Fitsburg Sentinel, which is a daily andly shrinks down the window of notifications because it's there's a big window to hit that Friday um publication date for the
Lunberg Ledger, but I think it's just a 48 hour window to get our ad in the Fitsburg Sentinel. It just is much more expensive. Okay. But that is thing to let um and I didn't catch her name, our intram administrator know if we do run into um
tight windows with notifications. And then where where it's much more expensive, how would that work um with the applicant? Because that gets passed on to the applicant. Correct. We would just say if they were hoping to get in sooner,
they have that option. Yep. To Okay. So, it kind of be up to the applicant if they wanted to. I u I was a little curious about the ledger. I don't know it I don't know why I sound like nothing to nothing against it or
anything but is there any requirement like that from a legal standpoint for certain some of these notifications you know the Sentinels like even though no one reads the newspaper you know what I mean? I'm just wondering if you could
get into a problem with in such a small I mean it is local to Lunberg. Could you get into a problem where I don't know somebody that wanted to I don't know. I'm just curious about if if if the method is you know what I mean if if if
you're using the right medium. It's such a small Yeah. I think most most boards in town are using them the Lunberg ledger and it is a it is a subscription paper in town and it is available at public stores in town so it does fit the
requirements needed for uh newspaper notification. All right. I have no problem with it. Like I said it's to me it's always been crazy when you do things you have to certain I forget what I had. Oh, I my mother died uh you know, you have to uh
to process uh death notice. Yeah. Yeah. And I just they just died I due to the Sentinel, but uh I don't know, you know, so I think I think we're good. I just I was just curious. It seems like newspapers are such a fargoing thing. Agreed.
Yeah. One thing I was going to say about the ledger though is they also do some people I think it's cheaper and you get it emailed and you get it every Friday than having it delivered. I think I'm actually shocked by how many people
get a ledger in town that are it's a lot almost everybody I talked to has a subscription to it that I've met since I moved to Lindenburg. Yeah. And I wasn't um pushing to move it from the ledger because a ledger is more
um economical, but just if we do run into the time frame where it's a smaller window to get it published and it is a daily to get it published. So yeah, that's a that's a great option. I love that. Yeah.
Okay. So I think that that is all I have for tonight. Our next meeting is scheduled for May 21st. Um, does anyone else have anything they'd like to add? Just one other quick comment. I did happen to look and Fitsburg does only meet on the first
Wednesday of the month. So, if the administrator doesn't come to our next meeting and then Sophie's back, if you do talk to her, Jenny, it may be um a good question to ask her how they get around the 21day notice to action where they
meet once a month. on my list. I actually was talking to Mary yesterday and we we were wondering the same thing because with that, you know, that one application that we'd had recently where it's 21 days from the date of the
application, I don't understand how they could possibly get around that if they have it if they have an application the day after their meeting. But I did notice last month they had a special meeting. So, I don't know if maybe they just have a special meeting when they need to, but I'm definitely going to ask
her that. It's on my It's the first thing I'm going to ask her when I talk to her. Super. Try to say hello first. I'll say hello. How'd you get around your 21day meeting?
I'm Jenny, by the way. So, all right. Do we have anything else to discuss? Nice job tonight, Jenny. Yes. Excellent job, Johnny. Very nicely done. Thank you. Yeah, you're you're now a veteran.
Yeah, my second meeting. Well, thank you guys. Madam Chair, the for all the help. The other thing that has been recommended to me by the people that transcribe our notes is to actually say out loud the time that we're adjourning uh so that they can record
that just as in the meeting minutes. Okay. Um, so I think I would be looking for a motion to adjourn at 10:05 p.m. So moved. Second. Third. Richard for the
motion and Mary for the second. I think Chris got the motion. Oh, Chris for the motion and Mary for the second. No, actually it was Mike. I didn't say a word. All right. Mike for the motion. Yes. And Mary for the second. It's a group event.
Okay. All right. Um, roll call vote. Pete Stella. Uh, I Chris and Germaine. I, Mike Larouche. I, Mary Wilson. I,
Richard Burge. I, and I for myself. All right. Have a great night, everybody. Good night. Good night. Good night. Bye. Do it.