Right. [clears throat] I'm calling to order the meeting of the Lunenburgg Conservation Commission for Wednesday, November 19th, 2025 at 7:04 p.m.
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 the topics which may be discussed at the meeting and those reasonably anticipated by the chair. Votes 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 Lunenburgg 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 the 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 following the conclusion of the meeting.
Okay. Going to start with a roll call. Uh Chris Germaine >> here. >> Andrea Bernup >> here. >> Mary Wilson >> here. >> Teddy Ducet >> here. >> Richard Bers
>> here. >> And I am here. Jenny Puther. Um Mike is not here yet. All right. Um we don't have any appointments tonight.
Uh do we have any public comment from members uh from anyone on the meeting? >> A warning that if I mute I might be coughing. I'm just trying to get over a cold. All right. Does not look like we have
any comments from members of the public. We have some meetings uh minutes to approve. Uh I am good with approving all of these. I had two that I had um Michael update from the last meeting and he did get those updated and I am good
to approve all of these minutes. Does anyone have any concerns about any of the minutes listed on the agenda? Do you want to have a separate motion for each one? Um, >> I think I think we could do a motion for all of them if if nobody has any
problems with any of them. >> I would make a motion to approve all meeting uh previous meeting minutes as posted. >> Second. >> Okay. Roll call vote. Chris A. Germaine. >> Hi. >> Andrea Bernup.
Um, I from what I remember, I've only been to one of those. And >> that's right. All right, we got to split them up. Thank you, Andrea. Um, so >> motion to approve the meeting minutes from 93.
>> You're you're muted, Chris. >> Second. >> All right. Roll call vote. Chris Germaine. >> Hi. >> Andrea Bernap, >> I. Mary Wilson >> I >> Teddy Ducet >> I >> Richard Burch
>> also on that I >> and I for myself. >> Okay. >> Motion to approve the meeting minutes from 319. >> Second. >> Uh roll call vote. Cherine >> I
>> Andrea Bernap. Um, I didn't >> Oh, no. Sorry. Mary Wilson. >> I >> Richard Burch. >> And I for myself. >> We could do the rest of them as one because it would be all the same people.
Andrea and Teddy Kim. >> Okay. Motion to approve uh the meeting minutes from uh 35, 219, 25, 129, and 1218. >> Second.
>> Roll call vote. Christine Germaine >> I >> Mary Wilson >> I >> Teddy Ducet. >> Oh no, sorry. Richard Burstein. >> I >> and I for myself. Sorry, my brain is like a little mush tonight. Um
all right. So that is all of the minutes approved. Uh moving on to new public hearings. 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 notice of
intent by Safe Store Real Estate Company LLC for a project that involves flood plane fill and associated compensatory flood plane compensation. compensatory flood plane composition. Okay. All right. Uh do we have the applicant or
their representative on the call? >> Madam Chair, Greg Roy with Dillison Roy. I'm representing the applicant which is Safe Store this evening. Thank you for your time. >> Thanks for being here. >> Would it be acceptable to share my screen? >> Absolutely. You should be good to go.
>> Bear with me. Did I do the right one? Can you see the plan >> that looks like? Yep, that's the existing building. >> Okay, great. All right. Um, and now I've lost all of you fine folks, so hold on. >> Um, one second. I'm just getting my uh
>> Take your time. >> Okay. All right. So, um just a brief introduction to the project and then I'll I'll I'll narrate um a little bit about the specifics, but just just starting with the overview. Um as discussed, uh this is a property at
30 Summer Street, uh which is very close to the um Fitsburg line, um if you're familiar with that part of town. Um the existing site that you have in front of you um is has historically been used as
an auto dealership. Um so it is primarily uh it primarily consists of a um a small building which you can see uh right here and then everything from this point up
and this point up uh is paved. So um there's about an acre just under an acre point um I have it written down here.99 95 acres of the site u is paved uh today or impervious I should say paved or um
uh rooftop [gasps] um the reason we're here this evening is is a little bit different than what we are normally here for. Um, typically we um were before you because we've identified
uh either a boarding vegetated wetland um or a riverfront uh you know a perennial stream or something like that on the property with an associated buffer zone and riverfront area. In this case uh there are no none of those resource areas on the site. So it's a
little bit unique. Most of the time when we're before you, we have at least one of those areas if not both of them. Um here uh in this case um we're here only because we have bordering land subject to flooding on the site. And so just a
quick um tutorial of what that is and how that is defined. Um, bordering lands subject to flooding is defined by the Wetlands Protection Act as those areas that are mapped on the most recently
um effectuated FEMA flood rate insurance maps for the for the various towns. So, and and it's associated with the 100-year uh flood plane ele uh flood plane areas. So, if you were to look on the latest and greatest uh FEMA maps,
and I'm going to call them FEMA maps, um you would see that the elevation of the flood plane on the site um is elev is is listed in this area as elevation, I think it's 366. Doesn't really matter. Um there's a there's a significant
portion of the site that is indeed within um areas mapped as um 100year flood plane elevations. I did want to give a little bit of commentary on this because I think it is it is at least interesting and probably a little bit gerine to the conversation. Um we our
firm started with this project in the spring. Um we were contracted with safe stage source sometime in the in the spring late spring early summer. Um, and we started down the path and
as as um as luck would have it, uh, FEMA issued their um their newly revised flood maps about 3 days after we completed our existing conditions survey, which was fortuitous because
um, if we had um, if we had used the old flood plane maps um, we would have had some conversions to do on the site. So, I did want to drive home the point that the elevations that we're reporting on these on these plans are based on the
newly published 2025 FEMA flood maps. Um, but a little bit more commentary on that just because I think it's a point of interest. When we initially looked at this uh at this site, when we were putting together the
proposal uh for this um we were still using the 1980s era uh flood plate maps because that was what was published. Those are of course based on old datams uh um the a vertical datam of 1927, a
very old, you know, an older datam. New flood plane maps are based on a newly published uh vertical uh datam. This is all surveying uh ease. When we use old flood plane maps with the 1927 datam, we have to convert the elevations to 1988.
So all of the filings that we've done in the town of of Lunberg prior to June or July of this of this year when the flood plaps flood maps were updated. Uh we converted 1927 to 1988 because all of our surveying calculations and
elevations nowadays are based on that 1988 datam. We expected uh when you looked at the conversion of the elevations on that older datam and you simply convert new datam down to
that um down to that 1927 datam. We expected that actually less of this site was going to be located within the 100-year flood elevation. As it turns out, when they published the new maps, the flood elevation that they
published was actually substantially higher than what they had published if you just did a datam conversion from the old map. Um, and I I'm saying this just for your edification because I still remain a bit skeptical that the
published flood elevation on the new on the new FEMA maps uh went in the right direction. It looks to us like they adjusted it in the wrong direction. Um, be that as it may, the flood maps
published, the wetlands protection act defines bordering vegetated wetland um, excuse me, bordering land subject to flooding as referenced on the latest and greatest published FEMA maps. So, we have held the newly published uh,
elevations as sort of gospel. But I'm giving you this um to to understand that if the flooding that is depicted on the 100-year um the 100-year flooding were to occur in this part of the town, you would have flooding on Summer Street
that I don't think any of us have ever seen. Um and you know, we've had some pretty big floods over the past 10 to 20 years. Um I I remain skeptical that the flooding that the flood the flood elevation out there is is is is accurate and true. But I just want to uh say that
irrespective of my specul of my skepticism, we've treated it as if it's gospel and we've and we've we're going through the process uh along those lines. So, with that, I just want to I just wanted to preface uh you know, sort of why we're here and sort of a history on late breaking history, if you will,
on uh on the uh updates of the FEMA flood plane um in the area and really all of town. So, this kind of affects all of town. Um but that incremental change did not exist on other parts of town. So, we've that's one of the
reasons why I remain a little skeptical because um we didn't see this change in elevation um on other po parts of town. [clears throat] Um so, I just wanted to I just wanted to make that and actually if you just go around the corner, I'm working at the corner of John Fitch and 2A
in Fitsburg. Um the elevation the the the modifications to the flood planes based on the same map update actually uh happened exactly as we would have expected them to. So, it's just a little weird. But anyway, I just I just wanted to to point that out. Be that as it may,
we have a site here that's a little bit over an acre. 1.15 acres, I believe, is the existing conditions uh is the existing site. About an acre of it, uh.995 uh acres of it. So, just just a share a hair under an acre is either uh parking
lot or roof. And what we're proposing um is to convert that existing use to a proposed um climate controlled
uh self- storage facility. Um so the um bulk of the site would be uh I'm going to highlight here the bulk of the site would be converted to a building.
That building is a fourstory building. Um so all of the units are accessed from the inside. that's going to be more gerine to the to the planning board uh process that's coming up starting next week next week Monday. Um and then there's a small parking lot area uh that's on the up that's on the front
portion of the site. The balance of the site um around the around the perimeter is all going to be green space and our flood compensation storage. Um the net result is [snorts] that the proposed site actually reduces the impervious
area on the site by about 15% almost 15%. Uh about 14%. So we're going from.995 square ft of imperous area down to 08
58 uh uh acres of imperous area. So it's a reduction of of impervious area on the site. Um, I say that because that's important for storm water management. Um, and it's important for um, those type of metrics. We could do nothing on
the site for storm water management and we'll be reducing the amount of runoff off the site just in virtue of the fact that we're reducing the amount of impervious area which will allow more more of the uh, rain water to infiltrate into the earth. Um, so I just I just wanted to point that out. Um, be that as
it may, we have filed along with this application to your board, but also to the planning board who will be reviewing this, we we'll actually be reviewing three permit applications that we uh that we submitted. They'll be reviewing a site plan review application.
They'll be reviewing now I'm going to forget the middle one now. Oh, storm water management permit. And they'll also be reviewing a flood plane uh management permit. So, we have to get a special permit uh from the planning board because we're in the flood plane. We have to get um a storm water
management permit because we're altering over 40,000 square ft of of land area and we have to get site plan approval because of the commercial use of the property. Um, so we've submitted storm water calculations to your uh board to support this filing, but also to the planning
board, and we expect that those storm water calculations as well as the plans will be peer-reviewed uh by the planning board's peerreview consultant. That hasn't happened yet. Um, so I I say that because whatever happens with this meeting tonight, I'm going to give you a
little preview. I do not want to uh uh get put the card before the horse. I think that your board in in virtue of the fact that this is a flood plane compensation type of metric, I think your board would find value in getting the results of the peer review uh from
planning board. So I I want to make sure that I get the that we keep this open long enough to get you that information. And I also want to make sure we run these public hearings concurrently uh because sometimes there's some things that we have to revise for either your board
that will relate to the planning board or vice versa. Um so I'm just kind of give that as a as a preference uh a preface. Um finally um I want to talk through we did get some peer uh some review comments
from D when they issued the file number. I want to go through those very briefly. Uh, but I want to say that I am going to be providing you more uh direct backup to this, but I want to give you sort of a preview and I do want to talk through a couple of them. Um, if if that's uh
acceptable to you folks. Um, and then at the end of it, I'd like to get any comments and feedback that you folks have, of course, because we want to have uh we want to start to dial in on what we have for comments and questions so we can um answer these things in a in a comprehensive manner. Um, so DP had
seven comments and I'm just going to go through them um and summarize them and and give a few um and give my my thoughts on each one. Again, we will formally respond to these in the future. I just didn't do that for tonight's meeting because I see this is a little bit introductory in nature uh based on
where we are with the permitting. The comment, the first comment um relates to the uh the nature of the way that the comp uh the flood plane um compensatory storage numbers were calculated. Um
we have um approximately and we get we we put this on the plan um we've we provided a detailed breakdown of how much flood plane we're filling between what elevations and where the the flood plane uh is where that volume is
compensated for. Anytime you fill a flood plane, you have to compensate for that in an equivalent, you know, in an equivalent manner so that you don't lose uh flood plane storage in the area. We're we're filling a total of 11,000
excuse me, a total of 9,370 cubic feet of fill on the site and we're providing an additional 11,378 cubic feet of of c of of storage on the site.
In all cases, at all elevations, we're providing the comp the compensator the compensatory volume at or below where we're filling it. And that's really important because flood waters come from the bottom up.
So, if you fill the top foot of your bucket and you provide compensation, one way to compensate that is to fill it at that elevation or lower. If you provide that same elevation lower when the flood waters come up, you're providing that that uh elevation so it
doesn't even have to get to that point you know before you know before you have the same amount of volume. So in all cases we're providing that compensatory storage volume at or below where [clears throat] the uh where the fill is being proposed. So that's that's number one. two. Um, and this is one of
the ones I wanted to talk to your commit. I wanted to get opinions from your commission on because you have some discretion. Section um 1057 4A3. You don't have to memorize it, but it's
a section of the um wetlands protection act regulations uh pertaining to bordering vegetated wetlands. Um it has a provision in that section for um uh for the commission to make a
determination that wildife wild wildlife habitat is not being impacted. And DP's comment is that the commission may exercise their discretion in requiring a wildlife habitat evaluation uh as the as thresholds set forth in that section um
have been exceeded. I am requesting that you find that in virtue of the fact that the site is completely paved, essentially completely paved, and we're reducing the impervious area and working in the portion of the site that is paved, that a wildlife habitat is not
necessary, a wildlife habitat evaluation is not necessary in this case to make that finding. uh that you don't that you can exercise your discretion in not requiring a wildlife habit habitat evaluation just because of the nature of the existing conditions uh on the site.
It's a it's a site that's that's previously disturbed and we're actually going to be reducing the amount of impervious area on the site. Um so I'm not asking you to make that finding right now, but that's that's my request to you um uh in respect to that that
comment. Um number three uh pertains to um the interaction between the proposed compensatory flood uh storage areas that we have on the site and how those relate to the
storm water management system on the site. And um I'm not going to go into this. I'm going to say that I'm going to provide you some more information on it. Um but this relates to the first thing that I said or one of the first things that I said is that we can do no storm water detention on the site, no new
storm water detention on the site and comply with the peak rate runoff attenuation standard of the of the uh storm water management policy in virtue of the fact that we're reducing the amount of pvious area on site. So I need to provide backup to this uh question so
that it it can be satisfactorily addressed. Uh but I just wanted to give you sort of a preview on that [sighs and gasps] four um asks us for uh soil test pits in the storm water uh areas. Um again this relates to the the last one. We will
certainly provide that if we need it. Uh we may not even need it because we may actually take the storm water uh detention off the table because we do not need it to document compliance. But I'm going to sort of leave that um that uh a little bit of an open uh question.
Uh if if we're going to take credit for these storm water areas, we will indeed do the required storm water management uh uh soil testing on the site to document that. Um five um is a comment related to our TSS calculations and we have no objection. We'll we'll make sure
we provide that that backup. Um and then six and seven uh six is uh given the extent of the flood plane on the site um that uh the applicant should depict the location of proposed stockpile areas um and additional measures of protection
during construction. We have no objection to that. We'll we'll make sure we document that. Um I would I would um I guess push back a little bit that I do not believe that the flood plane on the site is extensive. U we're talking about 9,000 cubic feet. So, it's not a really
large area of flood plane. Um, it's it's it's the top part of the flood plane that we're looking to fill. Um, we're barely in a lot of the site is in it, but barely. So, we're not talking about really deep fills. Um, it's it's
really just that, you know, most of the site the fill that you're talking about is like 6 in. And it's just like some of the site is like 6 in to a foot below that flood plane elevation. So, uh, we're not really talking about an extensive amount of volume in this case, but be that as it may, we're happy to
comply with that comment. And seven, um, the commission may consider conditions requiring the submission of an asthma plan to include final site elevations prior to the issuance of a certificate of compliance and perpetual conditions um, for the proposed compensatory uh,
storage areas in Stonewater O andM. You would do that anyway. So, we don't object. We certainly don't have any objection to that. >> [snorts] >> Um so I wanted to give you at least acknowledge those comments. I wanted to tell the commission that we will certainly be submitting you more um information as backup to these and also
uh we think that in virtue of the fact that um our planning board filing which includes a flood plane filing per that board and has some overlapping metrics um it will be reviewed by a peerreview consultant and I think you'll find that
valuable. Um, so I wanted to uh just make sure I got all that into the record this evening and now I'll stop talking and uh take any questions or comments that you folks have. >> Thanks so much, Greg. Um, do we have any questions from members of the
commission? Teddy, you have your hand up. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, yeah, so we went to the sitewalk last week and or last Saturday and there are trees behind the property. I was curious if those are coming down with this construction
project. >> Um, excellent question. Let me see if I can give you a good answer on that. I think the answer is some of them, but I will identify exactly which ones. >> Great. Thanks, Greg. Uh, Richard, you have your hand up.
>> H, a couple quick questions. Greg, how far is the edge of the work on this project from the nearest 100 foot boundary to the wetland? >> Oh, that's a good question, Rich. Um >> because it's clearly not in the 100 foot
buffer zone. >> Yeah. Um it's quite a ways, but I' I'd have to do a little bit more exploration on that. The Baker Brook is on the north side of it. it it's like way up here and it's even further. It's even further
than that. >> So, I'd have I'd have to look on um either fe either in the field or or via uh GIS Ridge, but I can get you that information. >> Okay. Yeah. Just where it wasn't marked on here. I was just interested in how far away it was, but I mean it's clearly
outside of that jurisdiction. >> Madam Madam Chair, if I could interject. >> Yeah, Mary. Rich, I did a satellite image um to Bakerbrook and it uh to the corner of the property and it was like 550 ft.
>> That sounds up with about 500 or so. Yep. >> Thank you, [clears throat] Mary. [snorts] >> Second question. What is the the 100 foot pl flood plane elevation? I don't know if you said that.
>> I think it's elevation 366, Rich. Um >> 366. Okay. So the the top of the slab was what? 367. >> Exactly. Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. So we're filling um when we're and we're putting the slab a foot above it
so that we don't have any any problems with um you know with with flood insurance. Um but it's only the portions of the site below elevation 366 that are considered in that uh flood plane filling if that makes sense.
>> Yeah. No, I was just wondering what the elevation was. So >> yeah. Nope. Good question. >> Okay. Thank you. Those were my questions. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. >> Thank you, Rich. Um Chris, you have your hand up. >> Yeah, Greg. Um I was just curious, why did you think that the um the
calculations from FEMA were in the wrong direction? As I understood it, I thought I thought the way I interpreted is that you thought that the the flooding would go flooding elevations would should be lower. I would think over time that the
flooding would get worse with all the you know with with buildings built getting built up over time. So >> yeah. No two and those are two separate things. And let me explain. So what I when I when I made my statement all I was saying was this.
When you looked at the 1982 I think maps and you found the elevation I think it was elevation 365 nominally something like that. when you convert from that datam okay which is on the elevation of n of at an
elevation datam of 1927 I understand that this is very difficult to understand and explain over a zoom call we we shoot our all of our sites now are shot with the 1988 datam which is what the new flood maps are based on that
conver the conversion between if when you want to take a 1927 elevation and you want to convert it to 198 1988 what the the scale factor is minus.8 ft.
So a 1927 datam of 100 to report that in 1988 when you shoot the same thing and you want to report it in 1988 you go to 90 nominally it's it's not it's not an exact decimal but it's n it's 90 99.2 two.
Okay. So, when I looked at the night at the published flood elevation when I first started doing this proposal, I saw it. It was it was whatever it was uh 365. And then I went over to the new GIS contour information that we have available on the mass GIS site, which is
by the way based on 1988 datam. And I converted it. I said to myself, "Oh, this is good news. Based on our experience with this data conversion, when we, you know, based on this 1927 datam, the old flood planes, we would
report the flood plane elevation with only being a corner of the site up essentially would have only been up in this location of the site. Um, we did we proceeded along that line. uh we did the surveying and it was actually
fortuitous with the timing because if the timing was different, we would have proceeded under that assumption without knowing that they had updated the flood plane maps until later. We would have discovered it eventually, but it would have been we might have drawn proposed lines already. [snorts] It was literally 3 days. We we we when we were finalizing
our existing conditions, we realized, oh, they updated the thing and we and that's when we noticed that instead of it going down, they actually bumped it up to 366. So, it just I we tried calling people to see if they had done new studies, if it
was based on new information. Um, we just can't get that information. So, we have no choice but to hold it or submit a letter of map amendment, which we may end up doing. But at this point, we believe we can comply with the performance standards, so we just went with it. Um, but I just I say that to
you. So, that's a different analysis than what you're saying. Um, when they do a new flood study based on new information and new impervious area and the upgraded watershed areas, that very well can really and truly increase the flood elevation. And maybe they did that
here. They just don't have a published flood study that documents it. So, you know, we have no choice but to accept it at this point. Um, but I just that's the commentary. So, that's all I was trying to say. It's that simple data conversion that that usually goes the other way and
it went the other way. It was just it was unexpected in this case. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Yep. >> Thanks, Chris. Um, I had a question. So, I moved here in September of 2023 right as all the
the flooding happened. Um, was this area not affected by that flooding that happened in September of 2023 or in July of 2023? >> So, I'll confess I didn't drive down here in this part of town, but I don't know of this being a real hot spot. I
know that uh the intersection of of um over by the around the corner over by the mall and on John Fitch um on Route 2A is a real is a real bad spot. I'd have to ask Bill Bernard probably if
this flooded during those events, but I don't remember it. I don't remember hearing about it, but it certainly could have. I just can't imagine there's significant portions of Summer Street that are lower than this site. And I just can't imagine that it gets up this high. But I mean,
>> I I could be >> I could be wrong. I I don't know. But I And we have no choice. We really have no choice. The published flood elevation is the published flood elevation. It's just I say that because I I I put it in context because I think it's germaine.
You know, it's it's not like we're it's not like we have a project that's immediately adjacent to Bakerbrook and is really looking to fill uh some bonafide floodway or flood flood plane of immediately adjacent to Baker Brook where there's no question. This is like
way off and I just don't see it personally. But be that as it may, it's there anyway. >> Okay. Thank you. Do we have any other questions from members of the commission? Does not look like it. Um, do we have
any members of the public? Does not look like that either. Um, so it sounds like uh you're looking to continue while we >> Yeah, we open the plan board meeting we open the plan board meeting next week. Uh, Madam Chair, so I think if we
continued for a couple weeks, we'd have some more to share. >> Okay. Do you want to get on the December 3rd meeting just in case you have an update or >> Yeah, I think that would be great. And if we don't, we'll maybe we'll continue, but I think that would be great. >> Okay. Yeah. So, um, so be looking for a
motion to continue to the December 3rd, 2025. >> So, move second. >> Okay. Roll call vote. Richard Burch. Hi >> Mary Wilson. >> I >> Chris Germaine.
>> Hi >> Teddy Ducet. >> Hi >> Andrea Bernett. >> Hi. >> And I for myself. Okay. And if you wanted to continue just if um put a note into open gov. >> Okay. >> And I'll I'll get it updated on the agenda.
>> Okay. Great. Thanks everybody. I appreciate it. >> Thanks so much Greg. Have a good night. >> Happy Thanksgiving. >> Happy Thanksgiving. Okay. So, we just 12. All right. Up next we have
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 Robert Hart for a project that involves drilling a water well 56 feet 6 in away
from the edge of Lake Shirley digging necessary water and retention pits installing necessary silt fence and hay bells Do we have the applicant or the representative on the call? >> Yes, Madame Chair. Robert Hart is here. >> Okay, great. Um, do you have anything
that you would like to share with us? >> Uh, this just an existing dwelling that traditionally [clears throat] has used water from the pond to uh supply its domestic waters and we're looking to drill a well to uh clean that water source up and have a reliable
uh source of domestic water. Um Hurlin did a site visit on on Friday and you know kind of saw the lay of the land. It's a very very very small lot and this is about as best we can do as far as uh staying within the lot and
staying um away from septic systems. The board of health has already issued uh its its permit to allow us to drill, but because it's within the buffer zone, we need your permission.
Okay, let me um just pull up. We have notes from Herlin, too, that I can read off. Just pull up and see if there's anything that we can share with the commission. Looks like there is a site plan. Um, so let me just
I'm going to share that so everybody can see it. All right. And let me make it normal. There we go. Let me get everything that Zoom puts in my way out of the way. Okay. So, I'm assum you I'm you can
everybody see this? It's a little uh small, but scale that tenth of an inch equals 1 in. Is that what that says? at the bench equals one
foot. >> One foot. All right. I was think Okay. So, there's the lake and this is the house right here. Is that right? >> It's more to the right.
Says existing. >> Existing cottage. There it is. >> Yeah. >> Okay. And um this is existing drilled well is what it says. >> Uh yes, that is >> that your neighbor? >> Yes.
>> Okay. And then yours is proposed drill dwell which would be right here. >> Correct. >> Okay. All right. And then so that's 56 feet 6 in from the lake. >> Correct.
>> Okay. And then did you say you're So you're getting your water from the lake now? >> We have had been. Yes. >> Okay. For your house, >> correct? >> Okay. Does it go through a fil I I'm just Does it go through a filter? I'm just kind of curious how that
>> uh not currently. We We don't use it to drink. We just, you know. >> Okay. All right. I get it. Okay. Um, do we have any questions from members of the commission? Oh, maybe let me read
Kurllin's comments quickly. She said she had an issue uploading photos, so she didn't upload any photos. Um, but where did my notes go? I printed them out though.
Okay. Um, so she had some recommended special conditions. Um, she it doesn't seem like she had any. Oh, Richard, you have your hand up. I'll let you ask your questions first. >> Oh, no. Read um read Herland's comments first. >> Okay. So, it doesn't seem like she had
any concerns. Um, she said recommended special conditions install sediment controls, silk fence, and hay bales, which I didn't know we were doing hay bales, but prior to construction and maintained until full stabilization. Retention pits must be contained within upland areas and no slurry or drilling
water may discharge toward Lake Shirley. Stockpiles must be covered and located outside of the 50- foot buffer. Any disturbed area shall be loomed, seated, or loomed seated and stabilized immediately upon immediately following completion. Conservation agent shall
perform a pre-construction erosion control inspection. Any modification to well location requires approval prior to work. All equipment, fueling, and maintenance must occur outside of the 100 foot buffer. Um, okay, Richard, that was it from
Harland. >> I just Do you have to do any other excavating other than the the slurry pits to get the equipment in there and get the weld dug there? >> Uh, no. No, we should be all set. It's it's right adjacent to the road, so um
we should be fine. >> Okay. Yeah. And I would concur then with the agents um special conditions. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Thank you, Richard. Uh do we have any other questions for members of the commission? It does not appear that we Oh, Mary, you
have your hand up. >> Yeah. Um Madam Chair, I didn't have the benefit of going out on the sitewalk. Um did other members of the commission go out on the sitewalk? >> We did not. We only went to 30 summer. Um Herlin had only tagged me with 30 summer
and then she went out and did she was planning on being here tonight but she had gone out to the the rest of the sites and I wasn't >> I was not feeling great this weekend. So there certainly understand that I'm horse myself. Um,
>> so, um, with this, uh, I just want to know, is there any tree work that's going to be done associated with this or is it already kind of cleared area? >> It's already pretty open that there'll be no tree work. >> Okay.
Okay. That that's really the only question that I I had. uh Hurling's been out there, Madam Chair, and uh validated the drawing um consistent with the um site itself, the physical uh attributes of the site. So, I'm okay with her uh
special conditions. Um I don't have any further questions. >> Okay. Thank you, Mary. Do we have any other questions for members of the commission? does not. Do we have any questions from members of the public? Does not look like it.
Okay. Um, let me Zoom hates me. Hold on. There we go. Stop sharing. It was hidden. Okay. Um, I think I'd be looking for a motion for a negative or a
negative determination. >> Madam Chair, I'd make a motion for a negative determination incorporating the uh conditions that our agent had spelled out as far as the silt fencing, the movement of the site,
and any other notifications needed. >> Okay. And I'll read those out again after a vote. if needed. >> I I second that motion. >> Okay. Roll call vote. Chris Germaine. >> Hi. >> Andrea Bernard. >> I.
>> Mary Wilson. >> I. >> Petty Det. >> I. >> And I for myself. Oh, Richard Burch. >> I. >> And I for myself. Sorry, Richard. Okay. That is a negative determination with special conditions to install sediment
controls. Silt fence and hay bales prior to construction and maintain full until full stabilization. Retention pits must be contained within upland areas and no slurry or drilling water may discharge toward Lake Shirley. Stock piles must be covered and located outside of the 50ft buffer. Any
disturbed area shall be lumped, seated, and stabilized immediately following completion. Conservation agent shall perform a pre-construction erosion control inspection inspection. Any modification to well location requires approval prior to work. All equipment fueling and maintenance must occur
outside of the 100 foot buffer. >> All right. Thank you so much. >> Appreciate your time everyone. Happy Thanksgiving. >> Happy Thanksgiving. Have a good night. >> Two. >> Oh, Chris, you have your hand up. >> Yeah. So, how do we know when to go do
that pre-insspection? How does that happen? Does is does the does the property owner call call us saying I'm ready for inspection or how does that work? >> Okay. >> So, uh they call the office. >> Okay. >> Leave a message or put it in open gov and then hurling goes out and does an
inspection. Make sure the erosion controls match what's on >> the either the plan or the the special conditions. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. So up next we have 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 Kenneth McNamera for a project that involves construction of a shed 16x4 ft approximately 75 to 100
ft from the edge of a stream. The shed will be set on concrete blocks that are 8 by 8x4 and that is for 480 MPUS road. Um do we have the applicant or a representative on the call?
>> Yes, I am here. >> Hi. Okay. Um can you say your name and your address? >> Kenneth McNamer 480 Mopus Road Lunberg. >> Thank you. Um, do you have anything that you would like to share with us on
>> basically constructing a 16 by4 shed that's roughly 75 to 100 ft from the edge of a stream. >> Okay. Um, let me pull up anything that we have
here. So, I have here um a land map uploaded under the site plan. I swear whenever I share my screen, Zoom just puts everything immediately in front of what I'm trying to share, which
it doesn't. You guys can't see that, but it blocks my view. Um, okay. So, we have this. I'm assuming this is the shed right here. >> Yes. >> And then this is the stream. >> Correct.
>> And what stream is that? >> That I'm not sure. >> Okay. And then also you plotted over did there oh there are that say does that say 50 feet right there? >> No that underneath it. It might have but
that was a different measurement that I took. >> Okay. Um what see there's another page here. Let me see what's on the second page. Um here. Oh so this is just without the >> yes
>> measurements. Okay. um what what did you use to measure this? And I'm just curious also um why can it not be closer to your house?
>> It's a sloped land. >> What land? >> It's sloped. So that's the uh flattest area. >> Okay. [snorts] Do you did you are there any pictures of the site? >> I did not provide any.
>> Okay. Um see what else we have in here. Okay. So this is the the shed. >> Yeah, this is a 16 by 14 shed. Uh, Mary, you have your hand up. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, are any
trees going to be affected as a result of this um shed? >> No trees. >> No trees. >> It's grass now. >> Okay. >> Where the shed will be. >> Okay. I was just looking at the satellite image and trying to orient
myself. Um and the uh applicant um is aware that under no circumstances can the shed be closer than 50 ft to the wetland. >> Correct. >> Okay. Um I was just keying in on the about kind of um part of the language
around the location >> like 75 to 100 ft from >> Okay. Madam Chair, uh it looks it appears like Hurling's been out to that site and she left notes, right, and didn't have a
particular concern about more extensive wetlands, you know, out in the location that uh you know sometimes when you look at Mass Mapp or other maps that that that you know uh bordering vegetative wetland is not as apparent. Uh but
Hurland didn't identify anything of that nature. So, I don't have any further questions about this. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mary. Teddy, uh, Richard, you have your hand up. >> Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. uh where this is a a perennial stream and it's
clearly on the um the GIS map, we really should be avoiding any sort of disturbance or development within the inner repairarian zone which is 100 ft from the bank of
the stream. So, I would uh recommend that the development of this shed be outside of that 100 ft inner repairarian zone of the stream. >> Okay.
So, let me I just um pulled up a let me share my screen. I mean this is just a like a Google maps but so this is the property right here and it looks like according to
the plan. Let me orient myself here. Hold on. It's going like this. This is the property. And you're saying so this behind up a little bit closer to your house is too
sloped for you to move it a little bit closer to your house. >> Yeah, it is. Yep. There's an existing shed there. Now you can see the dot. That's somewhat flat there. Um,
and I obviously don't want to put it in the middle of my yard. And it's kind of what I'm trying to avoid. >> So, is this the shed you're talking about right now? >> Correct. >> Okay. Is this replacing that shed? >> That that shed will be removed. Yes. >> Okay. And is it going in the same spot
as that shed? >> No. No. Okay. You don't want it in the middle of your yard. >> No. Correct. >> So that's You're trying it in in relation to this shed. Is it going in the same line as this shed or is it moving further back?
>> If you go diagonal, you see that big tree getting closer to the house >> this way? >> Yep. And a little bit further up to the right is where that is going to be. So it looks pretty wooded. Yeah. Somewhere in that area. Maybe a little further to the right.
>> Okay. And then where is So the brick is coming through here. >> Yes, it comes down uh and it kind of at somewhere around my house, it heads uh into the neighbor's yard. It it takes a left turn and goes into the neighbor's yard
and travels down. >> Richard, you still have your hand up. Did you have another anything else you wanted to add or should I text that out? >> Madam chair, I have mass mapper up if that's helpful.
>> Oh yeah. Share your screen like Okay. So, this is 480 right here. I'm assuming everybody can see this. >> Yep. >> Yeah. And um
the thing that I I wasn't clear on, uh Rich was saying this is uh Mass Mapper shows perennial streams. I thought Mass Mapper showed perennial and to some extent intermittent streams. That might be education for me. Rich, could you
clarify? Rich, you're on mute. >> Yeah. Uh, generally it would be if it's shown like that, but I'm going to try to bring up the um the US. >> Okay. Yeah, that's I guess that's a more
definitive resource. And I think where the applicant said, you know, the nice thing about Mass Mapper is they give you these um shadow lines for uh canopy. And it seemed like the applicant was saying they wanted to tuck the tree or the tree
the shed in here, right? So, >> we can uh kind of do, you know, like this kind of something and see where >> up to 107 ft. >> Yeah. But, you know, you'll you'll also
notice that this line is is actually not following the contour of the earth, right? So it's a >> it's a straight line and we all know streams don't go in straight lines, right? So if it comes out here and follows the contour of the earth a little bit more, that can make a big
difference in the proximity. >> Uh the the stream is not wet right now. I don't know if that makes it an intermittent stream or not. >> Um yeah, that's not definitive. And particularly, you know, we're just coming out of a and I don't even know if we're out of the drought. Uh, but that
can can make a difference. Rich is um looking up the USGS stream stats. Uh, and he can do a uh >> it does show on the and I can share my screen quick. It does show on the USGS map that it's a perennial stream running past and right through 480.
>> Okay. >> Well, that's the definitive resource. is 480. The 29 No, that's 296 is 296. >> Yeah, this is 480 down here. >> Oh, sorry. I have I have it super blown up, so that's why I wasn't Okay.
>> [clears throat] >> Yeah. So, and again, as long Harland can verify it as long as it's that she finds the top of the bank stays at 100 ft outside of that looking at it. Let me just So, the house is 150 ft.
And it does tail off as we go. So that's the that's the only thing you you want to keep development out of the inter repairarian zone. >> 100 ft from that. >> Yep. >> From the >> from the top of the bank. Yep. >> Okay.
>> Okay. Yeah. And I mean it looks like you said it was 75 to 100 ft from the edge. So if you can keep it at 100 ft >> or more. >> Okay. >> Um >> Okay. At at this point, Madam Chair, I I
would recommend um continuing and just having her go out and just verify with the owner applicant where the 100 foot line would be just to ensure prior to our um approving the project that he's
aware of where the 100 feet is. >> Yes, that would be helpful. >> All right. Okay. Um, so do we have any other comments from members of the commission
or questions? Okay. So, I think we'd be looking for a motion to continue to December 3rd. >> So, move. >> Uh, roll call vote. Christine Germaine. >> I.
>> Andrea Bernett. >> I. >> Mary Wilson. >> Hi. Teddy Ducet. >> Hi, >> Richard Burch. >> Hi. >> And hi for myself. All right. So, uh, that is we're going to continue until December 3rd, 2025. Um, and we'll ask
her to go out and measure 100 ft with you so you can make sure that you're keeping the shed outside of the buffer zone, >> okay? >> Or the preparing zone. Okay. Someone will be in touch or you can send a note to the office too if you like. >> Okay. Thank you very much.
>> Thanks so much. Have a good night. >> You too. >> Okay. Thank you, Richard. All right. Moving on. We have um pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section
40 is amended in the town of Lindenburgg wetlands protection and municipal bylaws. uh public hearing for on a request for determination of applicability by Malcolm Parker for a project to install a 5-ft chain link fence between adjoining properties which includes disturbance of the buffer zones
uh at 40 Hemlock Drive. Do we have the applicant or a representative on the call? I do see we have Malcolm Parker 40 Hemlock Drive on the call. Yes, ma'am. I'm sorry it's uh messing with mic. I'm here. Thank you for all for hearing me.
Hi. Um, okay. Do you can you just say your name and your address for us? >> Yes. Malcolm Parker, 40 Hemlock Drive, Lindberg, Massachusetts. >> Thank you. Um, do you have anything that you would like to share about this application?
>> No, it's relatively straightforward and stuff. I was uh we previously had a chicken wire fence between uh us and the adjacent properties, but we uh recently acquired a small dog and stuff who's quite active and everything. So I I uh
would like to put a chainlink fence up there to enclose the backyard and sort of keep him uh keep him to himself, so to speak. >> Okay. Is there All right. And this is this isn't here.
Okay. I have two applications for you. One started as a >> I just have I found it. One got stopped. So I'm looking at the active one. >> Right. >> Um well, did you say that? Is there a fence there currently? >> Uh there was just a uh a uh a chicken
wire fence. >> Okay. >> Very very temporary. >> Okay. Just gonna share my screen. If you'd like, I can share my screen where I have a photo that uh was by the
uh fencing company proposal. Uh >> yeah, sure. Share everything that you'd like to. >> Okay. So, this is our house here. Here's the neighbors on one side. We can't see the neighbor on the other side. Uh but I was proposing to sit there and to put it
uh straight down the property line to an existing tree here. Uh so the whole fence would be 100 feet. So obviously from the water it's going to be more than 100 ft, but it's within the 100 foot boundary. And uh this is 50 feet on
this side and would stop short of the uh short of the waterfront by at least 20 ft. Okay. Um, and there's no fence in there's a chicken wire fence somewhere, but there's not a fence in this area
already. >> Correct. >> Okay. And this is a chain link fence. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. Um, Mary, you have your hand up.
>> Uh, yes, Madam Chair. And this is more a curiosity than anything else. If you're not um fencing a perimeter, how does that help with the dog? I'm a dog owner myself and um and so I'm always curious about solutions. Uh well I [clears throat] I maybe I did
not completely answer correctly and stuff where it is described as having a tree here uh from the opposite side of this rather sizable uh tree uh down to the water
line. There is a an existing weldwire fence which has been there since before we moved in here. >> All right. So, >> that's going to cover this section. And this is basically down to uh almost the water line. And then I have a chicken
wire fence going along the water line uh just to keep the geese out and and effectively keep the dog in. [snorts] >> Oh, okay. Okay. So, so I think I'm clear on the on the right hand side as as
drawn uh that goes to the water line. Uh >> yes, exactly. Okay. I misunderstood. I thought you had said it was 20 feet from the water line. >> Well, yeah, it's almost to the water line. Yes. Sorry. >> Okay. Thank you. No further questions
from you, Madam Chair. >> Okay. So, I am not an expert on fences in the buffer zone, but if I recall in other times that this has come up, one thing that we
care about typically is uh wildlife being able to make it past the fences. And I don't think that that would be possible with the chain link by maybe things small things. Um, I'm wondering any Richard, do you have any
opinions on that? I'm curious what you think about this. >> I guess my concerns weren't uh quite pointing towards the habitat, more along the lines of how they were going to be installing the posts. Are they hand
digging them? Uh, and does any vegetation need to be um cut down or removed prior to putting the fence in? >> No. >> Okay. We do have some notes um from Her Lynn that I can read off. She did she
did do a sitewalk. Um so any soil generated during post setting shall be removed from the buffer zone the same day. No stockpiling, mixing, or wash out shall occur closer than 50 feet to the resource area. If machinery is used, refueling and storage must occur
outside the buffer zone. Sounds like we'd be looking for hand digging, though, if we were to move forward, maybe. Um, >> no clearing or expansion of of disturbance beyond the fencing alignment. Any change in fence alignment requires approval. If groundwater is
encountered, post shall be hands set and no concrete wash out may occur on site. But it looks like we'd be looking for handset regardless. Um Teddy, you have your hand up. >> Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. Just uh question came up in my head. Um how tall
is the chicken wire by the fence? Just curious. You said it keeps the geese out, but they fly. >> The the chicken wire is about two two and a half feet. >> Okay. And that keeps the geese out of your yard? Yes, it does because our
neighbor does not have any chicken wire along his waterfront. And so, uh, when I had sat there and originally put chicken wire across my waterfront to keep the geese from coming up and defecating on my lawn, uh, then they would sit there
and creatively go up my neighbor's lawn and then, uh, my and then transverse across onto our lawn and continue to defecate. That's when I installed a chicken low a
low chicken wire fence along this basically where this red line is here. >> Understood. Thank you. No further questions. >> Thank you, Tavy. >> Madame Chair. >> Yes. The only other thing I would recommend
uh if Malcolm hasn't already is to contact the building department and make sure that uh there is no permitting needed through the town >> especially where he's working on his property lines. >> I know the town has a whole fence bylaw
part of their regulations. So >> Okay. Um Okay. So, would we want do we think we should continue it and let him check with the building department because if there if things do need to be moved,
we'd want to know that. >> Yeah, we can do it either way. >> What were you going to say, Richard? >> I said we could do it either way. uh just give him a negative determination and if anything changes from the plot plan, he'd have to come back before us
and refile. >> Okay. >> Um what do you think, Mary? >> I kind of like to know where it's going. Um >> Okay. >> 601 half dozen of another Commissioner Bur always has excellent recommendations.
>> That is true. >> Thank you, Mary. Um, okay. Yeah. So, I guess that's I'm not partial to either. Uh, do we have Either way, if it changes, we would have
to you would have to come back. Um, so >> yeah. So, >> does anyone want to make a motion? I would motion to approve um his >> plan as is and come back to us if it changes.
>> Okay. So, negative determination. >> Yes. >> Okay. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Okay. Um, and then also with the conditions that Herurland cited,
um, if he doesn't have to come back, but let's do a roll call vote. Mary Wilson, >> hi. >> Chris Germaine, >> hi. >> Teddy Ducet, >> hi. >> Andrea Bernett, >> I >> Richard Burch, >> I
>> and I for myself. Um so that is a negative determination with the conditions that any soil generated during post setting shall be removed from the buffer zone the same day. Um no stockpiling, mixing or wash out shall occur closer than 50 ft to the resource
area. Um we are requiring hand digging. No clearing or expansion of disturbance beyond the fencing alignment. Any change in fence alignment requires staff approval. And then if anything changes, if you hear back from planning and you have to
change your um plans at all, please come back with a a new plan for us. >> Very well. Thank you for your consideration. >> All right. Thanks so much. Have a great night. >> You too. >> Okay. Um moving on to continue public
hearings. Uh, pursuant to MGL I just lost my brain. All right. Pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40 as amended and the town of Lunenberg wetlands protection and municipal bylaws, we have a continued public hearing on a notice of intent by the
town of Lunenberg DPW for the replacement of the deteriorated culvert at Northfields Road crossing over Mulusbrook um at 763 Northfield Road. the um applicant, which is the town, has indicated that they are still looking to
get permission from the land owner. I think they haven't heard back from the land owner yet. So, they've requested to be continued to 123 2025. Do I have a motion to continue? >> So moved. Second. Have >> a second.
>> All right. That is Mary with the motion. Chris with the second. Roll call vote. Chris St. Germaine. Hi >> Andrea Bernett. >> Hi >> Mary Wilson. >> Hi >> Teddy Ducet. >> I >> Richard Burch. >> Hi.
>> And I for myself. >> All right. Sorry. Um administrative determinations. We do not have any extension request permits. Um we have a certificate of compliance request at 55 Reservoir Road.
Um, and we have notes on this. Does not look like we have the the applicant on the call, but Herland said, "Applicant submitted asbuilts from board of health. The project has been completed in substantial compliance with the order of conditions issued on
January 20th, 2016. No outstanding worker resource area concerns were observed." Do we have any questions or comments on that? Oh, and make a motion to approve.
>> Thank you, Mary. >> Second. >> Okay. Roll call vote. Cursing. Germaine. >> I. >> Andrea Bernap. >> I. >> Mary Wilson. >> I. >> Teddy Duc. >> I. >> Richard Bers.
>> I. >> And I for myself. Um, violations. Uh we have indicated that there are no updates on violations. Uh we did add there's one that's added
which is 715 Reservoir Road. I know Herin is working on that one. And 199 is off and it'll be on the next meeting as a NOI. And then the rest of them that are there there's no updates but 48 metal lane she's in contact with
the property owners. 1168 Massav rear says violation fine to be mailed. Oh, that's actually an update. The violation fine is to be mailed because they did they must have contacted the property owner at some point. Um and then
1147 Massab certified mail returned which is still to figure out what's going on with that. Okay. And then the Does anyone have any comments or concerns about any of the violations? No. Okay. And then the next thing we
have is a wait, where is that? Okay. Oh, new business. Topics unknown. Do we have any topics unknown? I don't believe that we do. Okay. Um, bylaw discussion. I I have nothing to
add to this right now. I was planning on coming up with some stuff, but it's been it's been a really bad two weeks for me between I had food poisoning and now I have a a head cold. So, my brain has been half power.
Does anyone have anything that they wanted to discuss? regarding that. And then does anyone have any uh do they attend any Mac trainings that they would like to offer any insight onto anything that
they learned? >> No. >> No. Okay. Um so we have notification of well well abandonment. This is new to me. um at 451 Massav.
So there is a um has anyone else I'm not sure what the process is here? I have a Where is it? >> Share. Okay. So,
in Herland's notes, she linked to um Can everybody see that? >> Yes. >> Uh so, she linked to this. They're abandoning 32 groundwater monitoring wells at the site, um
which is 451 Massav, and it's PMG station, which is PMG Northeast LLC. They have um pursuing final well abandonment stage for the project. These well abandonment activities include work
proposed at the site within proximity to an unnamed stream and wetlands area. Monitoring wells are depicted on the attached site map. GES is abandoning 32 groundwater monitoring wells um including 19 wells adjacent to the
wetlands area as shown on the attached figure. Um specifically the surface water body of the unnamed stream would be considered a stream or creek representing the applicability of such areas subject to protection under the mass D wetlands
protection rules. Um wells will be pulled by hand or cut below ground surface if not able to be removed. Bentonite chips would be used to plug the wells. Road boxes and concrete would also be removed by hand. Um,
so is this something that anyone has experience with on the commission? >> I have no experience with this. Can we look at the diagrams? >> Yeah.
Let me move my this out of my way. I know you guys can't see it, but it's in my way. Okay. So, looks like these are the wells. There's a wetland here. Um,
where's the Is there a key of some sort? >> So, was there anything in the description as to why the wells were initially put in place? Um, >> this is not one I'm familiar with. >> These are these are monitoring wells.
They don't they don't Right. Just >> groundwater monitor. >> Yeah. So, >> it might be associated with the Massachusetts contingency plan monitoring um hazardous waste or oil spill. >> That would make a lot of sense because
there's a um gas station at the corner, right? Um so, >> yeah. Yeah. So, there's probably something to tip somebody off that there was at one point a spill of oil or hazardous material and that the wells were there to monitor
uh like movement of of some hazardous material or oil. >> I'm not sure if there's action that we need to take on this though. >> Well, I was just reading because I I I don't know anything about this either.
And I I I asked is there issues with abandoning monitoring wells that they're environmental issues and yes there are significant environmental issues associated with improperly abandoning monitoring wells. So it's I thought I I initially thought what's the big deal but I guess it is a big deal. So
>> it yeah, if there's like something there that I mean it sounds like a mass um DP jurisdiction. Um nope, that's not it. Wait, where did I go?
>> Madam Chair, if I might. Uh >> yeah, >> I I think I would recommend that uh maybe Hurland get in touch with the uh notifier and ask why the wells were there and why they're being abandoned because I I didn't see that, you know,
when you were showing the letter and um and then maybe she could ask D uh what actions we should be taking here. >> Okay. >> Or considering. Yeah, I I agree because if those wells were used to to track contaminants, uh
it's it's very it's to to to deact decommission them is um uh it's a it's a process because you don't um you if you don't do it correctly, you could actually introduce contaminants into the into the environment. So, we have to
find out what those wells were doing. >> Okay. Yeah. But I asked Carlin to talk to the property owner. Um, it looks like she has because they addressed the letter to her. So, we just have her reach back out. >> Was that even the property owner? It
seemed like it was an agency. >> Oh, yeah. I guess let's see. Talk to somebody. >> Madam Chair, >> yes. Actually, in reading this again, uh they are assuming an exemption that I
don't think is in our um wetland protection bylaw, our local bylaw. >> Okay. >> Which [clears throat] would require them to file at minimum uh an RDA. >> Okay.
So they're thinking that there's an exemption that's not requiring them to file an RDA, but >> the proposed work is considered exempt from the required permitting application RDA or NOI, >> but that exemption does not exist in our
wetlands protection bylaw because it is clearly work near or into the wetlands as it as they state in their letter. >> Okay. So, and obviously if they're going to be removing boxes or cutting boxes or
filling boxes, there will be disturbance in and around the wetland area that's not exempt under our bylaw. >> Okay. Yeah. So, let's um have Harland get them to file this >> properly. Inform them that it's not
exempt under our local uh wetland bylaw. >> Okay. Thank you, Rich. >> Okay. >> All right. Okay. So, we'll have Herlin work a little further on that one.
Okay. Um, let me conservation budget. Um, I'm still trying to find the Sean Kelly fund. I uh I have to work a little harder because I guess those funds are hidden to regular employees. So, still
working on that. Um and then at the next meeting, I'll have a the other funds uh what's the word I'm looking for? Balances. Um we don't have any encroachment
issues. Hollis Road residence. Um, an update is that the Hollis Road residence is mostly the the custodian has mostly moved out. Um, there's not a lot remaining. They're still kind of moving stuff out as we go.
We are I'm getting some quotes to have some people come up and come out and do some cleanup. Uh, I have not gotten an official quote back yet. I've reached out to two companies. Um, so I would say at the next meeting I might be looking for a
vote for some funds to have some people come out come out and do a cleanup, but other than that, there are no updates. Mike usually updates, but he actually messaged me and said he's not going to make it tonight. So there's not much else to update on that right now, but there will be more updates at the
next meeting on the Hollis residents committee reports. Um Teddy master plan steering committee. >> Yeah. So we had a meeting on November 12th um where they discussed the tour notes from the town hall and Ritter
building in Turkey Hill. Um which I can discuss further if you guys would like. Um, >> sure. >> But yeah, so the town hall, [clears throat] uh, they said like had good bones, like it was structurally sound,
>> um, and should be maintained, preserved, and renovated. Um, >> but they need to uh fix the lift for the to be like ADA compliant. Um, Kim Duffy said that she used it and it was it
works, but it needs to be more like it needs to be renovated and fixed up a little bit. She said it was kind of scary going in it despite it being safe. Um, and she said it should be made more ergonomic and easy to use. Um, cuz like
as an able-bodied person, it was still difficult to use. So she uh you wouldn't want to be um disabled and have to use something that's not um you know easy. Uh the Ritter building, they want to renovate and put in an
elevator again to make it ADA compliant. And they want to upgrade the meeting rooms um to make them just like up with the times um because they lack technology for efficient
meetings. And for Turkey Hill, um it seemed like a high priority project. And >> do you have the elementary school? >> Yeah. The um the layout of the building
like rooms aren't used for the their original purpose. Like for example, some classrooms are used as off offices. Locker rooms are not used as locker rooms. instead they're being used for storage or the policeman's office. Um
the art room was moved at one point and doesn't have a sink in the room. Um and the whole building I believe needs air conditioning. Um >> and there's there's probably more that I did not write down. uh such as like needing a roof.
And the the question in the room was like how many projects do we take on as a town? >> Um because all of these are not small projects. They're all pretty expensive and there are other things on the list
like Marshall Park um that we want to get up to date. We uh we went on a tour, Kim Duffy and I went on a tour with the parks commission
to Marshall Park to discuss the problems there. Um one of the biggest problems I think was the flooding on the 90 foot baseball diamond. Um, and I emailed
uh Karen, the chair of the parks commission, with like some potential solutions that I that I read at our library for how to in uh better infiltrate water into the ground. Um,
but it sounded like the plan for Marshall Park was to maybe um put in like put in a drainage system to just move the water cuz there's
a pro a problem at Marshall Park where it rains and then the water just kind of sits on the baseball field and the baseball field still might be used and it just tears the field. Um, >> is Marshall Park like a I've never been.
I know. I've been here two years and I've never been there. Is that like a sports field for the schools? I thought it was like a park park. >> Yeah. So, there is a jungle gym. There was I uh I believe there's potentially going to be a skate park being put in.
The jungle gym is going to be renovated. >> That's where the skate park is going. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Oh, cool. Okay, that's fine. >> Um, yeah. And there was discussion about
like how how do we want to like use Marshall Park because there's three fields. There's like a baseball field, like a T-ball field, and a softball field. Um, and there's there's a basketball court, but
it's kind of overrun with um like foliage and whatnot. Like it's not used, so it just gets taken over by the environment. And I feel like the whole park has a lot of uh potential and it's just like how does the town want to
go about using it and what do they want it to be in the future? Um, >> has it been there for a long time? >> Yes. >> I don't know why. Like, I thought it was new for some reason. >> They just got a grant to do a bunch of work there.
>> Okay. >> Big grant. >> You'll check it out someday. >> Yeah, it's cool. I um would definitely like to see it be used more for not just baseball, you know. I I asked
Karen about the potential of maybe using one of the baseball diamonds and maybe replacing the other diamonds with
I don't know just like something else just so that it's something that more people have access to because if it's just for like high school baseball it's being used like three months out of the here. >> Um, >> is that the um is that what is that where the high
school plays baseball? >> I don't think it's Well, I don't I don't know. Rich Rich may know. Um I know younger younger um you know leagues are playing there. I believe so. >> Okay.
>> But I maybe I I misunderstood or maybe they practice there or something. But they they discussed that like parking is definitely an issue when they have games because there's not good parking on either side of Marshall Park. Um and
there's like a fire hazard on I forget what the street is called. I want to I want to say Cherry Street, but that might be wrong. Um >> Chestnut >> Chestnut. Okay. Yeah, Chestnut Street gets like lined with cars and it's a fire hazard because like up
a fire truck cannot make it down that road when um there's excessive parking. So, they I think want to address that and put additional parking on the other side of the park. And we're going into winter, so I don't
know how much they're going to I don't think they're going to really do much until next year, but definitely keep keep Marshall Park in mind. Um, oh, when I was there, Kim Duffy asked me if we
had any um jurisdiction over area that was not like wetland. And I was like, "Oh, interesting that you say that because we just went to the area subjected or subject to flooding." >> Yeah.
>> Um, so I was curious if Marshall Park falls under that jurisdiction because it floods significantly. Um, so that map, if you go on, hold on,
I'll pull it up. So there is you ever want to see if something is BLSF. >> Can everybody see my screen? >> Yeah. >> Um, so that's what is Marshall Park's address? Does anyone know? Chestnut
Street. Just go to the center of town. >> This is That's okay. I can do it. All right. Ludenberg is here and then the center of town. Look at me knowing where things are. >> Yeah. Yeah. You You just Marshall Park.
There it is. Right there. Uh up to your upper left. >> Upper left. >> It's marked on the map. >> West. >> Keep going. Upper left. Upper left. Keep going. Keep going. >> West. West. Yeah. Um, left is over here. >> Keep going. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Keep
going. Keep going. Keep going until you zoom in. You can get there. Okay. >> All right. Oh, yeah. There's a big wetland right here. Um, there's actually a wetland in Marshall Park. >> The skate park was actually an RDA. >> Oh, okay.
>> Might have been an NOI. >> So, and then is it So, there's a baseball diamond here, it looks like. >> Yep. And that's the that's the big one, I believe. And on Yeah. on Chestnut Street there's like excess like parking um like overruns that street.
>> Okay. >> And so they want to put parking I think at the the other side of Marshall Park. Um and they want to uh if I'm remembering correctly, they want to like kind of rip up the field
and put in a drainage system onto uh leading to that. I believe the east side of that park. >> Okay, >> Madam Chair, do you know how we verify if that's the most current FEMA data? I
mean, uh, we just had consultants talking about the, um, FEMA maps were updated this year. So, I do not know how to verify that. But where is So, this is actually where I found the
BLSF um before we went to 30 Summer Street because this is not something that I was familiar with. And all right, so now let me zoom into Yeah, you can see Hickory Hills Lake and um and yeah,
Wham Lake. It's in between those three. >> You you you you're missing it. Yeah, there you go. That's Hickory Hills. >> That's Hickory Hills. There's There's Wham. >> There's Wham. >> All right. Mary is our map guru. Okay. So, this must be the center of town here.
>> Yeah. And that gray area is Marshall Park. >> Oh, there we are. Okay. So, the hundred-year flood. So, you can see what it looks like um over here. So, this is what they're calling the hundredyear and then this is the 500 year. So, it does not appear
that that area is on any of it. But let's see if it says what year this is. I mean, you would hope that it's the most
recent, but there's no Yeah, this page was last edited on April 3rd, 2024. So, um, it could be different if this page hasn't been edited since 2024 and they just updated it.
>> Yeah. There's no flood plane up there. I mean, it's the biggest problem with that area is just high groundwater. Yeah, >> it just doesn't drain. I mean, it's never drained. >> So, and I know there there's been discussions of parking and development
and things like that up there for years. >> Um, so yeah, there's definitely I mean there's definitely wetlands there though, Teddy. >> Yes, they're on both sides. Yeah. Uh, >> does not look like there's any BLSF, though.
Okay. So, but but we do have jurisdiction there then it seems. So, >> yeah, in the buff in the areas that are in the buffer zone. Yeah. >> All righty. Um, >> yeah, there was an NOI there a few years ago, I think, for a septic system for the bathrooms.
>> Well, and there definitely was for the skate parks, too. >> Yeah. So, yeah, there's clearly wet ones up there. >> All right. Well, thank you so much, Teddy. >> Yeah. And then the our last meeting for the master plan steering committee is is
on December 10th. That's our last time to give uh feedback to the like consultants before they come back um for the new year with a final plan and then I believe the master plan committee is going to be dissolved and
they're going to form an implementation committee. >> Okay. Like a task force? Yes. No, task force is before the committee, right? >> Per perhaps. I asked Kim about it um and
she gave me the rundown. I she just knows that there's or she doesn't know what it's going to look like, who's going to be on it, etc. >> Okay. um just yet, but we expect to hear back from the
consultants from over under um mid to late January, I believe. >> Okay. All right. Awesome. All right. So, Open Space Chris, do you have any updates?
>> Yeah, she had a meeting tonight. So, um >> Wow. >> So, >> and you chose to be here? >> Yeah. Well, that was nice of you. >> Yep. >> Ah, well, thank you for being here. >> Yeah. So, I'll get an update next time we we join. >> Okay. All right. Thanks. Um, Stormwater
did I was not there last night cuz I didn't want to get anybody sick, but Stormwater uh Bill did a presentation last night at the special town meeting, which I did watch this morning um on the recording and he did a great job. and he
um was asking for more money for uh the consultant that we are moving to because we've had some issues with the other consultant who does a lot of other stuff for build that does well but they just weren't uh prepared to get us over the finish line with the storm water
utility. So we're moving to another consultant who's worked with other towns to do that and um that was approved for the funding. So that's great. Um, so yeah, we're going to have we'll start talking to other committees. We have the
consultant kind of help socialize some of what we're working on with uh fincom select board and uh maybe hold some meetings in town. Not maybe we are going to hold some meetings in town regarding the storm water utility. And that's
what's happening with storm water. Uh, we meet again in December. I think December 5th or 4th. No, maybe the 11th. One of those days. All right. Do we have any Hold on. I'm going to cough. Sorry. Um, do we have any communications
or public comment? Does not I don't think we have any public comment. No communications. Uh, our next meeting is December 3rd at 7 o'clock p.m. on Zoom. And other than that, I think I'd be
looking for a motion to adjurnn so I can go to bed. >> Second. >> All right. For sure. With the motion. And Teddy with a second. Roll call vote. Chris St. Germaine. >> I. >> Andrea Bernap. >> I. >> Mary Wilson. >> I.
>> Teddy Ducet. >> I. >> Richard Bers. >> I. >> And I for myself. um adjourning at 8:46 p.m. on 11:19 2025.
>> All right. Thank you so much everybody. >> Thank you. >> Happy Thanksgiving. >> Happy Thanksgiving. >> And stay stay not sick. Don't [laughter] go near anybody that has a cold. >> All right. Good night. >> Good night.
>> Good night.