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 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. Um, this is the I should have said this
before, the Wednesday, February 4th, 2026 meeting of the Lynenburg Conservation Commission, and it is 7:03 p.m. I'm going to do a roll call. Uh, Teddy Ducet >> here, >> Andrea Bernett >> here,
>> Mike Larouche >> here, >> and I am here. We do not have Richard Burch, Mary Wilson, or Carson Germaine. I'm going to just send a quick text to Rich just to get confirmation that he won't
be here if he's not going to be here. Okay. All right. All right, we do not have any appointments tonight. Um, do we have any public comment? Would any members of the public like to make a comment? Comments are to be limited to 3 minutes and on a subject matter under the director
jurisdiction of the commission. Comments about current agenda items are to be made during the comment period of the specific agenda item. Please address all comments to the chair. I'm not seeing any hands go up. Okay. Um, has everyone had a chance to review the
minutes from the 128 meeting? >> Yes. >> So, you have Okay, everybody else? Andrea. Okay, Mike, you have your hand up. Does that mean you did or no? >> Uh, I did, but I also wanted to make an announcement. >> Okay.
>> Is that permitted before we do the the minutes? >> Absolutely. I wanted to give a shout out to uh two of my fellow commissioners who sort of saved the day last week when >> the scheduled
um heating system service was to be performed. I got the call saying, "Mike, >> uh I don't know where you are. However, there are there's two feet of snow. We can't do the servicing. Uh can you
help?" And fortunately for me, I called upon Teddy and Chris, two of our great commissioners, who said, "Oh, yeah, we'll be glad to do that." So, they really saved the day. And I want to thank them both uh right now to say,
"Hey, you know, you really really uh really stepped up and I was very lucky that you guys were available." And I can't say enough about uh uh your speedy uh acknowledgement and work and um it
made everything work. So for that I say thank you. >> Happy to help. >> Thanks. >> Thank you so much for saying that Mike. That was really awesome of you guys. Um that Chris isn't here. Um but yeah, no Teddy that was really amazing how you
jumped on that and you guys got that done. Um, you've been a very well, I'm so happy to have both you and Andrew. You guys are just both so such valuable members of the commission and Mike, too. Um, okay. So, thank you for that, Mike.
>> Okay. >> Um, all right. Minutes. Did you say that you also >> I did over the minutes? >> Yes. >> Okay. Do I have uh do we have any questions about the minutes or do I have a motion to approve the minutes?
I'd like to make a motion to approve. >> Second. >> Okay. Uh, roll call vote. Eddie Pet >> I. >> Andrea Bernap >> I. >> Mike Larouche >> I. >> And I for myself. All right.
We do not have any new public hearings tonight. Um, so we will move on to continued public hearings. Uh, all right. Pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40 as amended in the town of Lindenburg wetlands protection and
municipal bylaws, we have a continued public hearing at 58 Spring Street, a public hearing on a notice of intent by DD Dubbie Construction LLC for a project that involves the demolition of patio to pour a concrete foundation, construct a porch, and the extension of a deck. Oh,
they actually continued to February 18th. So, I'd be looking for a motion to continue to February 18th, 2026. So moved. >> Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Thank you. Okay. Um, roll call vote.
Teddy Det. >> I. >> Andrea Bernett. >> I. >> Mike Larouche. >> I. >> And I for myself. All right. Pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40 as amended in the town of Lynen Riverland's protection
and municipal bylaws, we have a continued public hearing at 30 Summer Street. A public hearing on a notice of intent by Safe Store Real Estate Co. LLC for a project that includes Floodplane Phil and Associated Compensatory Flood Plane Compensation. I see we have Greg
Roy on the file. >> Good evening everybody. Greg Roy with Doulson Roy this evening uh representing the applicant. Thank you for your time. Um, I sense I'm coming down with a cold, so if I sound a little nasely here, I apologize. Doing the best
I can here. >> Um, may I share my screen? Would that be acceptable? >> Absolutely. Oh, wait. Let me If it doesn't let you, let me uh There we go. Now you >> Okay, great. I see it. Yeah. Okay. So,
um, while I'm pulling this up, we, uh, we were here a few months back to open this meeting, um, and then, um, asked sort of acknowledged the DP had a few comments. Um and we we have a joint
public hearing process going with the planning board at present and um we wanted to sort of um get all the comments in front of us um both from the from from from you folks but also from
the planning board and their uh peerreview consultant. uh before we um before we came back to your comm before we submitted revised plans, we wanted to kind of do things in a holistic uh manner. So, we appreciate your patience on this one. Um but we did
uh get a peerreview letter uh relative to planning board. Um the planning board filing, by the way, is is not only a site plan approval, but it's also a special permit for um sort of an overlapping special permit with what you're reviewing relative to the flood
plane. Um the town of Lunberg uh requires a a special permit when there's work proposed in a flood plane. So we have a joint filing uh with planning board and also a storm water management permit. So um we did address the peerreview comments with planning board
and also have addressed um via a letter uh dated um January 15th. um we addressed the uh DP comments um relative to the um to the
proposed project. So, I'll just go over this really quickly and just give you another brief overview because it's been a few months since we've been here. Trying not to take too much of your time, but c can you all see my screen here or you're looking at um >> are you looking at the letter or the uh >> the plan?
>> You're looking at the plan. Okay, great. So, um the site as you as you referenced is at 30 Summer Street, which is uh very close to the Fitsburg line. If you were to go uh left uh plan left, you'd get to Fitchburg um after only a few
properties. Um so, we're pretty close to Fitchburg here. Uh there's a railroad grade uh the the um in the back of the site and then Summer Street is of course right here. Um the site today is almost completely paved back to where we're
proposing the building. Um there's a building in the in the a smaller building in the middle of the site and then the balance of the site property line to property line from the building all the way up to the street is paved uh today. So it's a it's sort of a pre-existing imperous site if you will
with the exception of the back of the property um which is uh which is un unpaved today. Um, so what we're proposing here is a um fourstory indoor climate controlled
public storage facility. Um, and so it's a rather large building. Um, you can see it here in the in the uh the hatched uh sort of rectangularish. Um, let me highlight here for you. The building here is is is this uh box like
this. And then we're proposing a parking area in the front uh right in this location here which would have an access on the summer street like like this. And the net result of this uh project is actually a reduction in the impervious area on the
site. So, it's one of those unique situ unique times in land development where we actually have an improvement um to storm water uh and impervious cover uh just in virtue of the fact that the practically speaking the entire site is
paved and we're going to be removing a net uh reduction of impervious area on the site. Um so, D I'm and like to just go through a couple of D the D comments that they issued. There was seven of them. Um, I did issue the letter. I I
don't know if you have it in front of you, but I'm I'm going to do this in summary format. So, if I go too quick, please just stop me. Um, number one, um, they, uh, DP commented on the, um, on the the fashion in which
we were proposing our compensatory flood storage. So, just a quick, um, just a quick summary on on compensatory flood storage. So, I guess I should also say for for just just as a reminder, unlike
normal wetland filings, this particular site has no wetlands associated with it. It has no riverfront associated with it. The only thing that we're filing under is bordering land subject to flooding because the part portions of the site are within the
100-year flood plane. And so it's a little bit different um performance standards than the commission might be used to. In the case of bordering land subject to flooding, you're really dealing with just needing to comp um compensate for the loss of of
flood plan that you're filling. So effectively, if you fill a,000 cubic feet, you have to compensate 1,000 cubic feet. So that the the performance standard is that the net result in flooding after the project has to be zero. you know, it has to be uh neutral
or less, right? You have to you have to demonstrate that you're providing the same level of flood storage on site. And we have in fact done that. Um the performance standard um sort of the the the minimum standard if you will that
the Wellland Protection Act requires is that you meet the if you're flooding between a certain elevation that you compete compensate for that at the same elevation on site. We actually exceed that in this case because we're filling
I'm going to go to this table here which is a little bit easier to see. Um we can we we did this table where you can see uh we have the elevations. So elevation 362 to 363 um 63 to 64, 64 to 65, 65 to 66. 66 is
the the limit of the flood plane elevation. So anything above that is is is outside of the flood plane. And you can see here that we're uh we show you the total volume that we're filling at each elevation. and we compare it to the
total volume that we're compensating. We have a net uh result of an additional 2,000 cubic feet of flood plane uh that we're uh flood volume that we're compensating for. Uh in this case, we're actually compensating below the flood
elevations that we're filling, which it in my view exceeds the standard because as the flood as the flood waters come up, we're providing more volume at the lower ele at lower elevations. So, we're filling up here and we're providing more flood storage down lower. Um, so as the
flood waters come up, the net result is that at at any point in the storm, we're providing an an exceedence of the amount of flood storage uh on the site. So, I just wanted to point that out. That was number one.
Number two on the letter uh was that the the comment was the commission may exercise their discretion in requiring a wildlife habitat evaluation. Um and actually I'm not exactly sure what happened here, but you got a draft of
this letter that um was a was a previous iteration that I had actually edited. Uh so some of the wording uh didn't go out as I had intended it. that um our response to that was that we we don't have a dispute with that. We actually do
have a dispute with this that the site is completely impervious essentially. Um we do not see any reason why the commission would need to do a habitat evaluation on this site. If we were proposing a project in the middle of a wooded resource area with significant
tree loss and things like this, it would be a different story. But in this case, we're proposing to construct um a new building and parking area uh in the limits of an existing parking lot and building and and and we're also going to
be creating additional green space. So, we respectfully request that the commission not require a wildlife uh habit habitat evaluation for this site. It is in fact not located within a um any areas of estimated or priority
habitat as as indicated on the Massachusetts excuse me GIS database. So that's number two. Um number three uh the applicant indicates that the proposed compensatory
storage areas will double in use to mitigate peak flows and provide storm water recharge. Additional calculations should be provided to mass DP demonstrating uh that compensatory uh flood storage and specific elevations will be available to the storm event. We
do not need any um any storm water uh volume to meet the Massachusetts requirement for a reduction in peak flows from the site. We're reducing, as I mentioned, we're
reducing the impervious area on the site. Um, so if we did no storm water management at the site, we would have a reduction in the amount of runoff offsite. I hope that makes sense. And that's just in virtue of the fact that we're increasing the green space on the
site. So the same amount of rain is going to fall and more of it's going to infiltrate into the ground because we have more uh pvious area as compared to the pre-existing condition. some of the storm water is going to flow into the compensatory flood storage
areas. So, we have modeled it and we have shown how that's going to interact. But if the flood compensation storage areas are full and the runoff is flowing off the site, it's still going to be less than what would be happening under the pre-existing condition, if that
makes sense. So um we've um we've addressed that I think uh narratively in that respect um and I think it comes up yeah it comes up later. So so that's number three. Number four is related um we had initially
um modeled the uh storm water areas or the flood plane compensation areas if you will uh as recharge basins. Um again we do not need to do any recharge be to do to construct any recharge BMPPS to
meet the recharge standard on site because we're reducing the impervious area on the site. So just naturally speaking there's going to be more recharge on site because there's going to be more green space on site uh after we're done uh constructing the project. So what we have done is just removed the
infiltration um exfiltration from the the storm water calculations because we do not need them uh for uh to to document compliance with the Massachusetts storm water management um infiltration standards. And that negates
the need to do soil testing on the site because we don't have to worry about uh documenting how fast the uh the storm water is going to infiltrate uh because they're now no longer classified as infiltration BMPs.
Um five uh TSS uh was a question on TSS. Um again we've addressed this this is really a topic that's been reviewed all
of these things by the way have been reviewed by the peerreview consultant um and we are providing uh TSS removal through the use of some floor bays and some treatment but again um
if you compare there's a there's a small building on the site with a m with a with a large amount of pavement All right. And TSS, which is total suspended solids, is a calculation of the amount of sediment loading essentially uh that gets that
those particles in the in the sediment that are uh small enough to be suspended, so not settle out so to speak in the in the uh storm water. You you really worry about that from the paved areas because that's where we have salt and sand activities in the wintertime.
We are s not only we're reducing the impervious area on site but we're converting a significant percentage of the parking lot from parking lot to roof and the roofs of course will not part will not add to TSS because we're not going to be sanding or adding anything
uh to the to the to the rooftop. So the proposed and let me zoom out here and and compare this area here will be the only portion of the site now that is uh that's paved and you compare that to
the pre-existing site which essentially is property line to property line all the way back here up to the building wraps around the building all the way back like this all the way up to the property line. that entire portion of the site uh is paved and runs off the site. So
again, in virtue of the fact just just in virtue of the fact that the way the project is is uh being designed, we're going to have a reduction in the TSS uh standard on the site six. Um given the extent of flood plan on site, the applicant should pick the
location of the stockpile areas. I think we did do that. Let's see where. Of course, I'm not going to be able to come up with where those are. Uh, let's see. >> I >> Yeah, >> I thought I saw it somewhere.
>> Yeah, I thought I did, too. Um, it's got to be here somewhere. I don't know. I'm not even seeing where we where we showed them, but I know we did. Um, but I can talk through this a little bit. So, again, um,
we don't anticipate a lot of stockpiling really on the site. Most of the most of the proposed project is a is a building. So, we'll be excavating the foundations u frost walls for the foundations. will be adding the fill required under the slab and pouring the slab and then
building the building um over it and then constructing the parking lot in the front. So, you know, there's not and then the you know, the excavation of the uh flood plane compensation areas will be done, you know, most likely prior to the foundation and trucked offsite. So,
I I don't really see much stockpile uh requirement in this in this site. Um, my engineer that pulled this together said that we did depict them, but honestly I'm not seeing what we depicted them at the moment. This was a few uh
weeks ago that we did this. Um, so I apologize for that. But again, I don't see much real need for stockpiling. This isn't a site like a uh a large site where you're going to have large areas of, you know, where we're stripping top soil and we need to yard,
you know, have piles of top soil for long periods of time until we have to restore the site. It's really not that type of site. Um so, we're going to be removing the pavement, excavating the uh the flood plane compensation areas. Again, most of that material will be trucked off site u
because it's not going to be needed. We'll be excavating for the uh frost walls of the building. doing the filling that we need inside the building in preparation for the slab and then building the parking lot in the front. So, I really don't see much of a stockpile area uh really needed in this case,
but we are wrapping the site with erosion control barriers. Certainly, any stockpiling that would occur would occur on site upgradient of of uh the proposed erosion control barriers. So, I don't think we have any concerns with any uh soil migration or anything like this.
And then uh the last one is just that the commission may require the submission of an asphalt plan um as a condition and we certainly have no objection to that. Um so I wanted to just I wanted to highlight those. Um and one of the
reasons why I wanted to wait uh to get to come back to you for these things is because is to tell you that all of those things have been also peer-reviewed by Graves Engineering. um not through your board but through the uh through the planning board process. Um they have not
come back and uh sort of given us the allclear yet. We did just we submitted to them a few weeks back. We haven't gotten the all clear from them yet. So the board may want to may want to wait for that which would your commission may want to wait for that which would be acceptable. Um, but I did want to know I
did want you to know that I know I'm talking storm water management and maybe that's a little bit above some e some some maybe out of your expertise. I talk about it all day long every day all all week. Uh but um you don't have to take my word for it because um all of that
stuff has been peer- reviewviewed um and and that is um our responses to that peer review are still under review by uh by Graves Engineering. So that's it. I'm happy to take any questions.
>> Okay. So um the peer review is being done by Graves, but you haven't actually received a report yet. >> We received their initial comments. We replied back to them. You the revised plans that you see today are a response to those in in addition to these to to
the comments that we just went through. They're also uh we also went through their comments. Um and we've delivered those back, but we haven't heard back on that revised plan yet. >> Great. Mike, you have your hand up. >> Yes, Madame Chair. Uh,
Greg, is there a uh IPM plan um going to be integrated in this building? Are you >> I don't know if I know what that means, Mike. Sorry. >> Integrated uh integrated pest management. We want
to make sure that the building is not going to um have any escars, which is the um second generation anti-coagulant rodenticides. You know, I'm assuming
this building is going to protect itself against pests. And >> you're impressing me. You're impressing me, Mike. I haven't heard this one yet. >> Okay. Good. >> Well, we went to a conference and they
said that commissions uh should be asking um um firms to make sure that if they're proposing buildings that they um are aware that there's rules in Massachusetts that include uh
restricting toxic toxic ro um rodenticides, which are short for uh escars. And I'm just curious to see if that's something on your radar. uh something >> it it is not but I mean if it is a uh if
it is a mass regulation or law um we certainly don't have any uh you know we we certainly acknowledge that we'd have to comply with it but I I I'd have to check with my client if they have any um if they have any policy or
or any um you know procedures surrounding that. Mike, I I I haven't talked to him about that, but I certainly can. >> Okay. I I appreciate that, Greg. >> And that I assume the issue is you you you um I'm going to use layman's terms.
You poison the you poison the mouse, the mouse goes outside, the eagle eats it, and the eagle gets sick. >> Correct. Or dies. >> It's a big problem. Yeah. >> All right. I I appreciate that. And since this is a storage area that's proposed,
>> you know, um I'm sure that there may be things that are being stored there that >> uh may attract uh rodents and I'm sure the company's going to try to um um
alleviate the problem. And you know, I'm just concerned that they alleviate it in a safe way so our wildlife isn't uh um at risk. >> Yeah. No, that's I I appreciate that. I'll ask. >> Okay.
>> Thank you. >> Thanks, Mike. >> Teddy, you have your hand raised. >> Yeah. Um I want to say Mike, that was a good question. I like that. Um and thank you, Madam Chair. Um Greg, I think I remember going out to the sidewalk and there were some trees surrounding the
property. already being removed. >> But you know what? I feel like you asked me that last time. >> I just had an old crap moment. Um I'm not sure. I I'll have to get back to you. >> Okay. And
>> I think so. I think the answer is yes. In the back of the site, I think that we're pushing the woods line uh back towards the railroad grade a little bit. Um, in this case it's a little bit I guess we didn't bother locating them like we would if we were working in the doing work in the 100 foot buffer zone
because I don't think that we'd be required to mitigate them uh per your bylaw or regulations. >> Yeah, understood. I um just curious and there's increased green space going around this site. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Could you highlight that for me, please?
If it's >> I can. Yeah, I can. Let me try and delete some of these uh some of this highlighting so that it's easier to see. So the green space that we will have that we'll be creating and it's going to be a little bit approximate, but
all of this area here. I'm I'm highlighting some of the sidewalk here, but all of that there's a little bit up here all the way up to the sidewalk and down like this. Again, with the exception of this little piece of sidewalk in here, all of this
is new green space. And then similarly over here like this all the way back to somewhere in not exactly sure where it is, but somewhere like this all the way up like like this.
>> All that all that's new green space there. >> And I assume that's just going to be grass. Yep. All >> righty. >> That's all I have, Madam Chair. >> Thank you, Teddy. Good questions.
Okay. Um, do we have any other questions from members of the commission? doesn't seem like >> so I would say for me um so we're no per that you haven't been issued any permits by any of the
>> the only permit we've gotten so far is we've gotten a special permit from the zoning board of appeals for the use um but we're we I I guess I'm I'm hoping to close with with planning board on Monday um none of the comments from graves were really sign they didn't really have any
issues with the way we analyze storm water or any of our flood plan compensation they were more like sort of dot your eye and cross your tea kind of thing. So, I guess I'm kind of hoping we get an all clear before we go to planning, but um there's a chance that we may have a couple of cleanup items to do and it may take an extra couple
weeks, but that's where we're at. >> So, you're not going to slow me down if you decide you want to continue this for a few weeks. I guess it as I'm reading between the lines. If you want to wait to get a, you know, to kind of see where where
planning goes and to make sure the peer reviewers all settled with it, I' I'd be fine with that. >> Okay. I'd say for myself, I think I would prefer that. Um, but >> yeah, >> I'm just me. So, let's see. Do any other commissioners have any comments or
>> I'm also I also understand that you have a you're you're a a fourperson board tonight. Um, so perhaps uh I I while I didn't remember any real significant comments from the opener few months ago from Rich or anybody else, um I I'm
happy to wait until we have, you know, a a fuller quorum in a few weeks. >> I appreciate that. Um I know I felt as you were going through it, I was like, this is you were you were doing so good. I was like, oh, I feel bad if he's gonna
have to go through it and go, oh again. >> Oh, it's all right. It's fine. like I you know if we if we get through uh we we have site plan approval and a special permit and a storm water permit even if the planning board closes it on Monday um we're going to have a 20-day appeal period from the time they issue the
decisions. So we're talking about a you know we're 30 days from being to have an an effectuated decision from planning board anyway. So um hopefully we can get through concom in a few weeks. Um that would that would be my my hope. Y
>> I'm happy to kick the can down the road. That's fine. >> Um, so do I have any comments, motions from members of the commission? >> I'd be happy to kick the can down the road, so to speak.
>> Okay. >> Um, but Greg, I I do want to say you explained this uh plan very well. Yeah, >> I appreciated it. I mean, if you have if you're thinking that you would like to do a motion to approve, Teddy, I'd also, you know, we could also visit that.
>> Yeah. I mean, we we'll definitely take an approval if you you're ready to do it. I just I I didn't want to be presumptuous. I mean, honestly, this one's not um this one's this one's really not that difficult really in virtue of the fact that we're reducing impervious area.
That really changes the game. It's a different kind of site. But I again I don't if you feel more comfortable getting through uh you know hearing back you know me being able to report that we have an all clear from uh peer review that's fine with me.
>> I I would like that personally. Um okay >> I being green in this uh like greenhorned in this sort of aspect. I would just like to uh have all the ducks in the row. >> Yep. 100%. So, am I hearing a motion to
continue to February 18th for you or a motion? >> So, moved. Yes, please. >> Okay. >> Do I have a second? Is that Was that Mike? >> It's Mike. >> Okay. All right. So, uh, roll call vote. I almost said my own name. Uh, Teddy
Ducet. >> I. >> Andrea Bernat. >> I. >> Mike Larouche. >> I. >> And I for myself. Thanks for that great explanation, Greg. That was really good. But we're gonna continue February 18th.
>> Okay. Let me just write >> and you're still staying on for 27 Fire Road, right? >> I am. Yeah. Is the next one continued? >> Um I believe so. I'm actually checking the notes now because uh I'm not seeing the
engineer on the call. >> Well, drag your feet because I got to use the the facility. So, I'll be back. >> Okay. I will I will read very slowly. Okay. Um, up next we have a continued public hearing pursuant to MGL chapter
131 section 40 as amended in the town of Lunenberg Wellins Protection and Municipal bylaws. A continued public hearing at 763 Northfield Road. A public hearing on a notice of intent by the town of Lunenburgg DPW for the replacement of the deteriorated culvert
at the northfield crossing over Mulpusbrook in order to mitigate further deterioration prevent potential flooding caused by the existing undersized culvert and meet the Massachusetts River and stream crossing standards to the maximum maximum extent predict practicable.
Pros replacement is a 38T 4ft diameter pre-cast reinforced concrete pipes culbert with pre-cast head walls at both pipe ends. Do I have an engineer or a representative on the
call? I am not seeing the representative. Let me check the notes here. The applicant is the town. So, and just see if I'm missing anything. Okay.
Oh, they requested a continuence this morning to 218. So, I would be looking for a motion to continue to February 18th, 2026. >> So, moved. >> Second.
All right. Who said second? Was that you that said second, Mike? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, I'm gonna go motion to Teddy, second to Mike. Um, roll call vote. Teddy Dette. >> I. >> Andrea Bernab. >> I. >> Mike Larouche. >> I. >> And I for myself. Continue to February
18th. Perfect timing. Greg. All right. Up next, we have a continued public hearing pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40 as amended in the town of Lunenburgg wetlands protection and municipal bylaws. A public hearing on a notice of intent at 27 Fire Road 15A by
Steve Bean for a project that involves the demolition of an existing cottage and construction of a replacement house and deck on the property. I see we have Greg Roy on the call. >> Nelson Roy representing the applicant. Thanks uh thanks again for your time
this evening. Um and I will share my screen again if that's okay. >> That's absolutely okay. >> Okay. All right. You see the plan? >> I do. >> Okay. So, this is actually the plan that
we came before you um about six weeks ago with u I wanted to start there. Um, and just just as a um a reminder here, there are three cottages on the property. They're shown in these um uh
these rectangular areas. And then you can see the red here. That's the existing cottage. We'll talk about that one in a second. And then there's another cottage over in this location here. Um the middle cottage, uh again shown in red, um is what the applicant,
uh Mr. Bean is looking to um to remove and replace. Um it's in, you know, state of disrepair and he he'd like to uh like to renovate it. Um well, not renovate it. He'd like to raise it and reconstruct it is what we're looking to do. So, we came before you with a rather
aggressive plan. Um I will admit um and I want to highlight where things stand here. Of course, Lake Shirley is up uh is up on the top of the plan here. You can see in large print there's a uh there's an existing stone retaining
wall. Several uh different wooden type uh retaining walls here as you walk walked yourself up the uh up the property. There's a there's a rather large uh this this area in grey hatched is a rather large area of concrete patio. Um
the limit of the 30foot uh no touch zone is right here like this. Okay, the limit of the 50-foot zone is right there like that. And the plan that we had showed you before, um,
like I said, was was admittedly aggressive. Um, as you can, as I, as I mentioned, the red, um, dashed line here is the location of the existing structure, and we're looking to replace it with the proposed structure, which is shown in in
dark here. So, we had a good portion of this deck like this. All of this here was was sort of new work that we're we were hoping to convince you uh to allow in the 30-foot no touch zone. And we
kind of dared doing that because we are going to be converting a pretty significant amount of of area here from imperous uh to pvious surface. I'll talk a little bit more about that in a minute. Uh, in addition to that, we're also going to be doing some restoration over in this area inside the 30-foot zone.
Fast forward six weeks. Uh, we didn't get great feedback from you last time. So, I I went back sort of to the drawing board with the with my client and we uh we came up with a plan that we submitted a few weeks back and that is this plan. And just to highlight this again, um
this is the location of the 30foot right there. So you can see that um we have pulled everything out of the 30foot. Now we're not proposing any new um any new imperous surface within the um any new structure or impervious
surface within the um within the 30ft zone. Um we've incorporated this this jog in the building here and we've essentially pushed the building back into the slope. uh also the deck here back you know
further away from the lake as as compared to how we were showing it before um to try to overcome the issues that we heard before. Um again we this was on the initial plan too but we um we've anytime we're proposing work um in
a situation like this where um we have a pre-existing non-conforming situation with a structure in the 50 foot andor in the 30-foot um we always do a comparison of um you know what exists today versus what is being proposed. Um, so we have
this impervious area summary on the plan to document to you that we are actually um with the removal. We're going to be removing this um you know the gray in gray here. The um which is an impervious concrete
patio almost entirely within the all entirely within the 50 foot uh between 30 and 50 feet. We're going to be removing that and creating a permeable surface there instead. So when you factor all of this in, you end up with a
um a net uh reduction um of um and and actually there's a typo here. There's 14 square ft of impervious area within the 30 foot existing. We're proposing none. So there's actually this should be minus4 here. I'm not sure why
we didn't carry that through, but we're reducing the amount of impervious area in the 30. We're reducing the amount of impervious area by 235 square feet between 30 and 50 feet and we're effectively moving it back outside of the 50 foot uh into the portion of the
outer 50 ft 50ft buffer zone. Um but in in spite of that overall we still have a reduction overall in impervious area when you when you compare it to the entire you know when you look at the entire buffer zone uh project. Um none
of that incorporates um what we're intending to do is take a not insignificant amount of area right along the uh the water's edge here and convert which is now lawn and we want to convert that back to a naturalized uh
edge. So, we're trying to um we're trying to overcome you would technically need to to issue to grant waiverss uh to I think the your 50-foot no structure zone. Um in this
case, you have a structure an existing structure in the 50-foot uh zone. So, you know, historically speaking, we have that situation. Um the commission has been willing uh to to grant the waiver to allow the new structure to go you know essentially in the same place. You
know we're proposing a slightly different footprint but when you look overall uh with the with the entire plan that we're proposing with the other uh areas of um conversion of imperous surface to imperous uh to back to pvious
surface um you're looking at a reduction in the overall uh imperous area. um uh and or structures within the uh within that 30 to 50 foot zone um of the uh the buffer zone. Um so that's what we're
asking. Um there were a few D comments. Honestly, I didn't address them because the the most significant one that I can recall and honestly I don't even have them in front of me. I apologize. But um they were they were fairly erroneous when when we
filed the um the notice of intent online. DP filings are now done online. And um when we filed and hit the submit button on the fee transmitt uh portion
of that filing, we had inadvertently left the riverfront area box checked on the fee. Um which increases the fees by a multiple of one and a half times. Um there is no riverfront here but DP had a
couple of comments relative to riverfront area and alternatives analysis and none of those apply um because there's no riverfront here. We just inadvertently check the riverfront box on the fee and unfortunately once you hit submit on the D online portal
you cannot amend it. Uh so we're sort of stuck with it. Um so I think that you know there's no riverfront filing. This is a buffer zone only project relative to D. I think that you have more review to do relative to
your bylaw um and and associated regulations with the 30 and 50 foot uh zones uh than really arguably would exist with the wetlands protection act. We're doing all the same things that we would normally do uh erosion control barriers
um you know construction period um erosion control uh process and things like that uh that we would normally do uh with projects in the buffer zone. So that is where we stand. Um I would be happy to take any questions.
>> Uh do we have any questions for members of the commission? I'm just looking over the um I was looking at the D comments. >> Yeah, if there's any I didn't There might have been a few that I didn't address. If there's something you want me to address, let me know. Let let me know what it is and I'll
>> Mike, you have your hand up. >> Uh yes, Madam Chair. Um, Greg, have you thought about how to replace that minus 48 imperous um
square footage in your plan? Um, to something that may be advantageous to mitigate against the fact that we're going to lose some impervious
Well, I think uh so the minus where we at here. So that's a that that represents a net redu. So you can see here that this this table might be a little bit it's it's it's not exactly how we usually do them. So I apologize I had a different engineer work on this one. The top line's existing. So, um,
over here you have 3900 39, excuse me, 3,941 square feet of impervious area in the buffer zone today >> in this in this area in the area that we're in this central cottage area. The
proposed if if after the project is completed would be would be 3,892. So, we'd be reducing. >> So, it's a reduction. >> Oh, I understand. All right. I did not. And then and then you know so if if I can just carry that through would the you know if you look at the 0 to 30 foot
no touch zone >> Mike >> existing today there's 14 square feet of impervious area in the uh in the 30 foot zone within that 30ft zone we're proposing zero so we're going to pull that 14 out >> I don't know why there's a typo here this should say instead of zero for the
difference it should say minus4 I I apologize that's just a typo plan >> and then but when you go here between 30 and 50 ft Today there's 859 square ft of impervious area and we're going to be at proposing 624 ft of impervious area. So
we'll be reducing that in the 50ft zone by 235 ft. Um but effectively if you then if you carry it through to the 50 to 100 we're adding some of that back the 201 we're we're we're going to be increasing the amount of imperous area
between 50 and 100 ft by about 201 ft. But the net result total in the buffer is minus 48. >> Okay, I get it. Thank you. >> You bet. >> I was looking at the D comments and they
were talking about the planting plan. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Which is but I don't even I see the proposed planting schedule, but then when I look at the site plan, I don't see any plants on there. I don't see I don't see where they're being proposed
to go. May I just >> It It's right up here. >> Oh, hold on. Let me uh >> Right. Right at the uh on the right side of the of the plan up along the water. >> Oh, okay. I was looking near the house.
>> Yeah. No. So, we're proposing to Again, it's all one site. Um it's all lawn essentially up up against the um up against the uh the it's a wall. off to Lake Wall for most of it. Um, so the line goes right up to the lake
wall. We're proposing to reclaim some of that in this location here and naturalize that border. >> Um, >> and so that the plan thinks we're proposing and I don't think we have any real affinity to these. if the commission has
any has has some that would they think would be better. We're proposing ink berry, low bush, blueberry, and button bush. >> Yeah. And I mean, those are all great plants in my opinion. Um the DP was worried about where they were going. You know, button bush is definitely a plant
that likes a lot of water. Low bush blueberry also is, which I thought was kind of >> I don't know. Um >> Yeah, that might need might need to be high bush blueberry, not low bush blueberry. >> Yeah. Well, low bush blueberry likes to be low. High bush likes to be high. >> Well, well, no. I think high bush
blueberry likes their feet wet, doesn't it? Most of the time, a lot of times when this high bush blueberry, that's where the wetland flags go because it's like a fring. It's like they like to live right on the edge of the I just I just know in my house I have a pond and the all the high bush blueberries are right along the edge of
the water and they do great. >> Okay. Low bush blueberries you see in the middle of the woods up on like ledgy like rocks and you know areas of you know I I I think a low bush blueberries is dry. High bush blueberries is wet. >> Okay. I always thought it was
>> No, I think it's I think it's the So I think maybe we I don't know. We can we can look at that. We obviously want to do plants that are uh you know either um fringe you know sort of faculative if you will not not not
all all the way fact w or faculative upland. We want to do like a faculative plant or a plant that does well on a on a uh bank. You know >> according to the native plant trust um high bush blueberry is located in wetland margins. So
>> I think it's probably Right. FAC faculative. Do you see the >> FACW or FAC? >> It might be FACW. >> They FAC minus maybe FAC minus. But anyway, fringe.
>> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, um but anyway, that's our intent is to do do things that would be that are um normally occurring on the banks of Lake Shirley. And I think that you'd see those ink berry for sure, button bush, but also I think probably high bush
blueberry, not low bush. >> Okay. Um I see that you have a turbidity curtain proposed here. Uh would you not be doing this during a draw down or >> Yeah, we we don't need a turbidity curtain here. I not exactly.
>> I mean, I'm all for turbidity. I just had to do one for my house. But yeah, >> if you're doing it during a draw down, I don't really see the >> what is it gonna be in? >> We're not proposing any work on the wall, so I'm not sure why that carried in there. Um I that needs to be taken
out. We don't need a turbidity curtain here. >> Okay. Um so can you go back to the the house itself? >> Yes. >> And then blow it up a little.
Okay, pants. Um, oh, Teddy, you have your hand up. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Yeah, so this is the in this project, we have to grant a waiver to build in the no build zone. Was that the
>> That's what they are asking. >> Okay. >> Um, I have reservations about that. I uh I don't I mean our our bylaws are our bylaws. I know that we have granted waiverss in the past, but my understanding is that typically when we
grant a waiver, it's because it's somebody who's living in the house. Like that's a it's a house that is currently being lived in. There's a reason for it. I know that you're also proposing to change some um pvious surface to impervious or impervious surface to
pvious surface. Um, I just, uh, you know, I'm not really sure how I'm feeling about this because obviously if we >> grant a waiver for something like this, then this is
>> we have everybody asking and like kind of the bylaws or the bylaws. Um, >> well, to be fair, it's not a bylaw we're asking away from. It's regulations. >> Regulations. So and and you know there's a difference between someone
coming to you to ask for new structures that are not there um you know new an increase in structures or impervious area in in the particular zone we're we're asking you to re we're asking to reconfigure them. So we need a we need a
waiver um but we're not asking we're ask actually asking the waiver would actually result in a reduction in a previous area. So I think in the past you know you have uh looked favorably on those type of applications. Um I I I
have observed your commission over the past several months uh relative to these things. Um but um I think that it would behoove the commission to um to perhaps look a little deeper into um you know
net benefit. um because there's got to be there there are proper way there are proper reasons for granting waiverss and I don't want to put words in your mouth. You may find that this isn't a proper uh situation but there's got to be there's got to be
some room uh for you know for relief when when it when it's warranted particularly when you have a project that I think would result in a net benefit. So that's my two cents. Ped >> you have your hand up. Yeah, I
I I understand the net benefit of this and I do appreciate the restorative aspect and the increase in impervious zone. Um whereas it's I believe in the last
uh meeting we when we discussed this the property was going to be like full demoed and built back up. Is that right? >> Yeah. This is going to be a complete re tear down and re and reconstruct. Correct. >> Um, is there no
way to move it onto area that's outside of the no build zone? >> Not really. Because if you see here, you've got the f you've got the fire road 15, which is effectively the driveway. Um, and the grade is
exceedingly steep. So, we we're we're proposing a retaining wall here, which is probably about 7 or 8 ft in the worst spot. Um, but you can see here, this this scale doesn't really do this justice. This is at 1 in equals 10 scale. So, you're used to seeing most of
the drawings that you see are 1 in equals 20 scale. So, we're only talking about like 10ish feet between the back corner and this and fire road uh 15A, the edge of the pavement. So there's not really much we can do to move this thing
back. So that's that's the exercise that I did with a client over the last six six weeks is we looked at how we can move this thing as far back from the from the water as we possibly could. Um and so you know that's kind of that back wall really represents I mean there
might be a few more feet we can get out of it but um we're starting to approach the the practical limit of what we can do uh given the grades on the site. That's fair >> because because we have to we have to we have to match the existing grade at the low side, right? And so what we've done
here is we've we've we've set the f the the basement floor at the existing elevation uh down here so that we're not proposing any any additional grading down here in the 30 in the 30-foot zone. And then we're putting in a a tall found a taller than normal like a 10-ft pore
foundation. Might even be a 12ft pore foundation. Yeah, we're we're proposing a we're proposing a 12 foot pour on the foundation uh to get this to get this to work and to get the grades to work in the back. So, you're talking about a normal foundation height is 8 ft. So, you're
talking about adding 4T of depth to the foundation to kind of get that to work. And I understand that's not your problem. Uh but it, you know, it it speaks to the alternatives that we've been reviewing with the client to try to get it to be
as far back as we can. Another um issue that I see is that so this this structure right now does not have a foundation. It's just you know dirt
underneath. So it would have to be excavated to >> Oh yeah. Yeah. >> And I don't I haven't been on the commission that long. Um, but I as far
as I know, I mean, I guess if we were rebuilding a house that people are living in or but this is an abandoned house. Um, we don't typically >> I can't speak to whether it's ab I don't know whether it's abandoned. I I
>> went out on a sidewalk here. >> Okay. >> Um, this is this house hasn't been lived in in a very long time. >> I'll take your word. I I don't I don't know that to be the case, but I'll take your word for it. I don't I don't I believe you. >> So, um it's just I mean this is a lot
for this site. >> So, what if we were prop I mean I guess let me just be devil advocate. What if we're proposing to put the thing back in the exact same configuration? I mean clearly that's a that that's not an issue. Correct. >> That's not an issue. Um, but I still I
am still unclear on how I mean if they weren't going to do a foundation if it was still going to be >> well done that I mean you can't I don't think you can deny people the right to put a found to put a structure that they have with a foundation under it.
I mean how can you do that? It's a structure and what's the difference to the commission? What's the difference to the to the lake or the resource area if there's a foundation under it or not? Wouldn't it be the digging down? >> Yeah, but it's temp it's temporary. That's what erosion control is for. >> Yeah. >> I mean, you know, we're not talking
about, you know, like the the the the process of excavating for a foundation is temporary. I mean, you you should be reviewing the permanent changes that we're proposing. That's fair. I I I completely understand that. But but the temporary disturbance for excavating
frost walls and and restoring, I mean, what's the what's the difference? At the end of the day, there's still going to be a struct there that'd still be a structure there. It doesn't really matter how it's anchored to the ground. It's still an impervious area. >> Wouldn't it be I mean, it would be digging further down, so it would be altering
what's there now. >> Yeah, but it but it's but it's temporary. It's wouldn't a foundation be permanent if there's it's I mean right now it's it's basically a house on it's just a it's sitting on like >> I understand what you're saying but
what's the like I I like I said I I can understand this argument in the in the context of the fact that we are proposing a few spots of of expansion on the lakeside on the with the foundation that I get. But let let's just let's just throw that out and say for for the
for the moment that we were proposing just to remove the structure, excavate it, excavate a foundation in the exact same footprint of where it is today and rebuild the structure on top. It >> there's no excavate >> a foundation of where it is today. There's no foundation today.
>> Excavate a foundation underneath where the building in the same footprint of where the building is, right? So that the outside of the foundation was the same footprint as the building is today. after you're done building it, there'd be no different. The the wetlands would experience the lake would experience no
difference. Do you see what I'm saying? You would have had temporary disturbance to excavate that you would have to restore and you'd have to seed and stabilize and have erosion control during construction, but there'd be no difference. You'd still have the same impervious area. It's just you'd have a
foundation under it, but there'd be no difference. I mean, I just I don't I fail to see what the difference would be from a wetlands or resource protection standpoint with a foundation versus a non-foundation. >> Okay. Um
>> I'm not trying to be controversial. I just >> Yeah. >> I I just don't know what the I don't know what the difference would be. I like I said it is proper for you to review the you know tweaks and you know give and take that we're proposing with
the impervious area uh sort of um shell game if you will to to use a negative term but we are proposing to bump out in one spot and take you know and convert some area that that's that's in uh that that's that's currently concrete uh and
and make that permeable. Um, so that's that's proper, but I just don't think that the fact that there's no foundation on it makes a difference. >> Okay. Um, do we have any other questions for
members of the commission? >> Andrea, you have your hand up. >> Um, yeah. I was remembering something from our previous meeting on this I think um where one of the other commissioners I can't remember who it was um had a question about whether this
was a deed road and I'm not really sure what that means you know what the any implication would be there but I would like some um you know further um explanation of that if possible. >> Yeah I can give you a little a little
bit on that. I'd probably have to get you a better answer. I won't be able to tell you whether or not it's a deed road. I can tell you without with no sha without a shadow of a doubt that it's a private road. Uh at the at the maximum. Um
uh it's it's not a public way. Um it's it's a private way all the way from Round Road, which is quite a quite a distance uh down. There's five three or four or five houses that rely on that fire road 15 and 15A. Um, but you know,
I I guess I could get you an answer to that, but I think that it doesn't really matter uh from a conservation commission standpoint. I think that even if it wasn't a you know, even if it wasn't a deed way and it was just a an easement uh where there's access, it's still a
lawful house and um you know that that's existed for some time and it it doesn't really play into um the you know the subject that we're reviewing. >> Okay. Um, but I can I could, you know, with all due respect, I don't want to be I can certainly find the answer out for
you. >> Uhhuh. Yeah. I just I didn't know what it meant and um I look into it, but I had forgotten about that. Um I had another comment. >> Um just that I would like to see
>> um something besides sod going in next to the house. Um I've been I've been hearing that um you know saw is better than than concrete obviously but it's it
actually does not add a lot of um pvious area um kind of depending on how it's managed I suppose but you know the typical lawn which is um fed fertilized and and moan
and um it gets very compacted and it doesn't actually in the long term it's not so great not like um you know some bushes or something like that would be >> so more naturalized areas that you're looking at something
>> right okay >> I I would like to see something like that >> okay I can take take that back for sure >> you have your hand up >> thank Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, I
just like to echo um Andrea's sentiment on the uh sod whereas like I I do agree that it's like better than concrete obviously um but more naturalized land like soil itself is like an ecosystem
and just adding sod on top does not feed into that ecosystem very well. Thank you, Teddy. Okay. Um, just do it quick. I want to see where everybody's at. Mike, do you have any comments about this or questions or do you have any
ways that you're leaning or things that you would like to see? Not bad. Is Mike frozen? I think it looks like you might be frozen yet. >> Teddy, you have your hands up. >> Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I I think
that I would be willing to um vote to grant a waiver on this given the uh like an increased pvious um landscape. Uh, and the restorative aspect I I do
appreciate in an area that would otherwise not have the native flora. Um, I think I think I would need to see the some something other than saw it added into the Oh, sorry. Uh, Mike's in the
waiting room. There he goes. >> Okay. And um yeah, I would just like to be able to see it on on the plan. We'll come back and address these these things for sure. That's fine. >> But I'd be I'd be leaning towards
voting to grant a waiver on an on a project that adds to the local ecosystem. >> Okay. Thank you, Teddy. Um, did we get Mike back? >> No. >> Yes, madam chair. I am back. I was
>> Where are you? There you are. >> Out here. I am back. Uh, you asked a question, but I don't think I got the full question. Oh, >> okay. Um, I was just wondering how if you had any questions about this or if you were leaning in one direction or if
you if there's anything that you would want to see. >> Um, I I'm intrigued with your question about the uh foundation. Uh, is there going to be a basement here or just a foundation? >> Yeah, it will be a it will be a base. We
intend to put a essentially a full basement so that the the slab will be set at the low side on the water on the water's edge and then we'd have like I said maybe you cut out Mike but we're actually proposing a like a 12 foot high wall
foundation wall in the back of this building um to get the grades to work because it's okay it's it's a pretty significant slope. So we're building it into the hill so to speak. >> Okay. And then we're matching the we're kind of matching the grades um
you know along the edges uh along the sides um to existing grade. >> So you don't see a foundation and a basement uh acting as a barrier blocking natural
flows uh causing water to pull anywhere um or destabilizing the soil. Um, >> no, that that's good. So, we we the the the the plan that we have here, the reason why we have a retaining wall in
the back here, Mike, can can you see the screen here? >> I do. >> The reason why we have this retaining wall and and we're creating this sort of alley here, so that we can have a place where the water can can drain around that foundation like this. >> Okay. >> Um so that it's not coming right down into the into the house um like it does
today really. Um and um and stabilization is a definitely a fair question. And I think that's in the spirit of what Andrea and and what Teddy echoed of maybe trying to find some um some alternatives to just a standard saw
type of treatment uh there that would um you know not only stabilize but also be a little bit better alternative than you know environmentally speaking that uh a better alternative to to a conventional sod which we're willing to look at.
Does anyone else have an issue with the fact that this building is going to be much bigger than the existing building? Um, I have an issue with that. Um, given that it would set precedent over
um, you know, I like your idea, Greg, of going back and what if you were to propose the same project on the existing footprint? Uh, I would feel much better. >> Yeah, I I I said that sort of tongue and
cheek rhetorically. The the applicants not that that's not their interest to to do that. They're interested in, you know, the the back. You wouldn't be able to expand. This half of the building here is all outside of the 50, right? But if you
were to expand, if you were just to simply expand this footprint, you'd still have to expand a little bit in the 50. There's no way you could do it. The 50 foot is here. So even if we were to do all of this work >> outside, you know, in the back, you know, on the opposite side of the lake, there's still be some work we we would need to do in the 50. And I guess the
the point the point that I'm trying to make here is that we understand that and we would never come well we did at first but we we've we've sharpened our pencils and come back to the drawing board here to make sure we had a plan that at the end of the day reduces the amount of
impervious area so that yes we're asking to give a little bit here but we're also giving back you know over here in the patio area where all this mass of concrete which is really no different than a roof from a from an environmental standpoint point um is is there and
we're going to pull that we're going to convert that to to a permeable surface. So, you know, and historically we have done this, you know, around the lakes. So, I mean, um you know, >> how much are we increasing the square footage of a building from the existing
to the proposed? >> Um I don't know. I would have to get back to on that. Probably not quite double, but um but close. >> Okay. Yeah. So, >> um Teddy, you have your hand up. >> Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just
wanted to answer Mike's question that like yes, I do I do take issue with it being a much larger uh floor plan and I but I also respect the um restoration
aspect and the decrease of pvious or sorry imperous space and life's a balance and if we can add to the local ecosystem them a little bit by adding more um native shrubbery and
adding to the soil ecology. I I'm willing to to bend a little bit there. >> Thank you, Daddy. Andrea, you have your hand up. >> Um yeah, I also wanted to um um answer
Mike and say that I am concerned about the um increased size. Also, I I keep um just looking at this proposed twostory replacement. Is that two stories on top of the basement or what?
>> Um good question. Um I could probably find that out, but it would take me too long. I think I probably have the architectural plans. Uh I don't remember if it is or not. >> Okay. So I when you say that the is it going
to be a walk out on the wateride >> that >> having been to this site doesn't make a lot of sense to me and I think maybe Andrea maybe you can correct me but when we were at the house at like the level of the door that walks into the house we
were significantly higher than the water. Um, so for them to have and we're talking like there's no there's no foundation there. So they're we're at like the level of ground where the house sits on. Like you can actually see into like the dirt floor in the basement when
you're at that deck. Um, for there to be a walk out basement near the water level, that would be some pretty significant excavation. Unless I It was snowy. It was like that little snowstorm that we had. Yeah. >> I think in I want to say December maybe.
>> Um it's been a while. But Andrea, did you feel like you were up really high? >> Um yes. That's what I I remember. >> I felt like we were like maybe 20 feet >> up off the water at the the ground level of the >> Yeah. >> Oh yeah. We're not going to we're not going down to the water level.
>> Sorry if if I misspoke. We're not we're not excavating down to the elevation of the water. >> Okay. >> We're we're dropping the SL. So roughly when you're standing on this concrete slab uh down here, you're at roughly elevation 310,
our slab elevation is going to be 307. Roughly 3 3077. So about 2 and 1/2 ft below you. >> So if it's >> and that just that matches the existing grades down here at the proposed um at the proposed
uh low side of the house. >> Okay. But we're not proposing any significant excavation any excavation down here. We're just matching the grade if you will there. So that all the excavation occurs with the foundation back here, you know, further back as you
get back into the slope. >> I mean, I can when I come back to I can get I can I can put a cross-section of the plane if you'd like. It might show it a little bit better. >> Okay. So, um, do we have any other comments from
members of the commission? Okay. So, is is it possible to where um where the structure goes back when it you know that where it corners the 50 foot >> just having it go back there and gaining
that >> area back. I mean, I think everything's possible. You balance that between what the cl what the client's looking to to do and not want to give up, you know, like um the fact of the matter is there's already a structure there with a certain amount of impervious area. And
you know, we're we're trying to, you know, you know, we're we're we're trying to strike the balance between meeting the the regulations or at least the spirit of your regulations uh with with trying to achieve what the client is ultimately looking to do.
So, I mean, I I can go back. I mean, I I'm understanding what you're saying. I'll go back and do it. I just I I just, you know, we really tried hard to um you know, to to strike a balance here with with something that again provides
that net benefit. Uh restores some portions of the site that, you know, that are that are manicured lawn back to naturalized, you know, border bordering uh bordering on the lake. Um you know, and we're willing to look at
these other things that you're asking asking about, but um one thing I want to ask about relative to the size of the house, what what's the issue with increasing the size of the house? I mean, is it is it just I mean, would it help if we like infiltrated the roof or or what what what's the actual concern
with I mean, because again, we're reducing the overall impervious area. So, we're essentially converting we're converting some impervious patio to roof. So, >> I mean, for me, it's just increasing what is in the buffer zone. which is in my experience on the
commission, we haven't in the entire time I've been on the commission, we have not and we've we've obviously grandfathered structures that were previously existing. I have not seen us allow somebody to um
increase their size in the buffer zone in the no build outside of the 50oot. I have for sure. Oh, okay. That's what I was going to So, in the You're talking about not buffer zone, but >> I mean, sorry, the 50 foot and between the 30 and 50 and then obviously nothing beyond the 30 and we've had I mean, we
just had somebody who had their deck a little bit overlapping >> the 30 foot. We asked them to, you know, bring >> Yeah. And I almost I I know and I almost spoke up because I thought I thought it was crazy. >> It's the president. >> I'm not I'm not going to pull I'm not going to pull any punches on that. I
just I thought that was crazy because you know I at the end of the day and you guys could disagree with this so this is respectful. I'm trying to be respectful here but at the end of the day here you got to look at the big picture and see you know and again I I understand you don't have to grant waiverss. We're
we're at we're beholden to you folks, but um where you have a situation where you have a proposed project that this give and take. This happens from time to time where just based on the configuration of the lot and the the way things lay out um sometimes it makes
sense to add some here and take some here. Um so I mean again I don't want to get into a you know a long drawn out argument here. There's other people that look like they need some of your time. I think I have um a good handle. I think
there's still some work to be done here on our end. Um it seems like I I think maybe you'd agree that we're moving in the right direction. Um and that, you know, maybe we need to uh we need to come back with a with a few more clean up here to uh to see if we can get you
in a place that that makes you feel a little more comfortable. But >> I just want to >> clarify. So, for this entire area that was concrete, that's proposed to Well, I see it says proposed to be turf. That's the entire concrete area that was there. >> Um,
>> that's true. Yes. >> Okay. Because I can't I can't remember exactly what was concrete, but it seems like it was most of that pinkish red area >> is what it's going to change over. >> Um, >> okay. So, I do want to echo what Teddy
and Andrea said about turf maybe not being I mean obviously like some turf, some lawn, but um if you know there is there is that where the big tree is or is that a little bit further over? >> We're not true. >> I think this is the big tree right here.
>> There's the big tree. Yeah. So, that's their deck right there. >> Yeah, there's there's a tree kind of growing through the middle of the deck. I don't know if we have that one shown. That one might be over here. But um we uh we're not proposing any tree removal. >> Okay. I know they he said they loved that tree, so I wasn't
>> Yeah. No, he didn't. He he uh Yeah, he he didn't want to lose it for sure. >> Okay. >> No. All right. I I mean, fair enough, folks. And I I'm also I I understand that uh there's only four of you here um tonight, too. So, um but I'm I'm
catching the uh catching the gist. But I appreciate you hearing you're hearing us out. >> Um, yeah. So, I think we'd be looking to Would you want to continue to February 18th? >> Yes, please. >> Okay. And, um,
yeah. Okay. So, I have a motion to continue. >> So, moved. >> Second. >> Okay. Uh, roll call vote. Teddy Det. >> I. >> Andrea Bernett. I >> Mike Larouche. >> I
>> and I for myself. >> All right. Great. Thank you very much, folks. I appreciate it. >> Thanks, Greg. Hope you feel better. >> Thank you. >> Bye. >> Okay. Um, up next we have administrative
determinations. Um, we have a 833 Flat Hill Road. Do we have the applicant or representative from 833?
Well, I don't I this is the third meeting. I'm going to have Herlin check in with him. I also don't have any notes from Hurlin on that one. So, um, have to check in with her on that. Uh, up next we have 72 Hemlock Drive administrative
determination. Do we have the applicant or representative? We do not. Okay. We do not have any extension request permits. Uh, we don't have any certificates of compliance or notice of
project changes. I checked with her. We don't have any updates on enforcements. Um, let me pull up the full agenda because I'm looking at my print out and it looks like it was set on maybe a 8 by14, but I print it out. So, half of
it's missing. So, give me one second while I just look at the rest of the bottom of it. Um, we don't have any encroachment issues. We don't have any emergency certifications. Uh, do we have any topics unknown?
Does anyone have anything? Okay. All right. Up next, we have um our Hickory Hills Lake update and we have is it John Fortune on to go over the Hickory Hills management plan.
>> Yes, we do. I can >> Thanks so much for hanging out with us. >> No problem. It was very interesting. Had I been on a commission, I would have suggested that he turn that house uh 90 degrees and run it parallel with the uh with the road, but I'm not.
>> Yeah, >> I appreciate the suggestion though. >> So, hi, I'm John Fortune, 50 Hemlock Drive. Uh tonight, I am representing Hickory Hills Land Owners Incorporated. And if you would allow me to share my screen, I will uh do so and go through
the presentation. >> Thank you. See, this one that's good. Share it. That That's not what I wanted.
Holy moly. There. Can you see that? >> Yes. >> All right. It's probably way bigger than I wanted it to be on my screen, but I'll let it go with that. >> It looks pretty good on my screen, so >> looks good on yours. All right. Yeah, perfect. Problem is I can't see if you raise hands or not the way this is going
on mine. So, wait a minute. Let me just do this a little bit differently. I'm going to make it bigger and we're going to Sorry. >> No worries. >> There we go. Problem is I can't see you. So, if you if you're uh raise your hand
or just speak up if you have a question. Okay, >> we can do that. >> Perfect. Thank you. So, again, John Fortune, this is our annual review. Uh, I sent all this information into you a couple of weeks ago, uh, including the report from, uh, Wendy, Jenner, and Arc
and the, uh, Solitude report. So, you should have it. I have a couple of small updates on this one, but we'll go right through it. >> All righty. So, we have an order of conditions. It was issued to us in July 25th of 2022.
basically is to give you this update every year. I won't go through this in the in the uh uh interest of time, but this is basically what I'm going to go over. Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. So, who does all the work?
So, as I mentioned, we have um Arc Wendy Gend uh does all of our water testing, any algae mitigation and some testing that we do there, storm water testing, and really is our lake consultant. uh we use for a host of different things including today she happened to be on
the uh lake uh doing some DZ measurements through the ice. >> So uh we do quite a bit with her. Uh Solitude Lake management uh Dominic does all of our treatments uh the pre-treatment surveys applications to D
in your cells or through your cells uh treatment and post treatment follow-up. So we pretty much work with those two uh throughout the year really. And beyond all that, really a tireless group of Hickory Hills volunteers. Uh we live in a great community and we've got
people that are volunteering their time and energies on many different things including survey. We have divers that are in the lake uh throughout the summer. We do fan wart removal, erosion control, goose addling. We maintain our dam and do a bunch of other things. So
that's kind of who does the work. So, wallet water quality test data. So, this is a look at our lake. Um, we have four different uh areas in the main lake that we do uh most of our water quality
testing. They're designated as HH1, 2, 3, and four. Uh the SED uh numbers one, two, three, four is where they've done where we've done sediment testing. And up in the top right is Little Hickory. Uh the five acre pond uh that's adjacent
to us. Actually was once a cove and then they put a road in there and now it's a 5acre pond that's next to our the main lake. The main lake is about 315 acres. All right. >> Okay. >> So water quality in the main lake. Um
this is just a summary of what we have. Uh and again I mentioned the HH1, two, three and four as well as Little Hickory. Uh so what we have is Wendy does multiple tests throughout the year May, June, July, August and September. And again we've did some testing even
today uh February but do a lot of testing and measuring of total phosphorus, total nitrogen, um nitrite and nitrates and uh total solids. So that's kind of what all those
numbers are on the left hand side. Anywhere where there's a red is uh says that it's over those numbers are over what we want them to be and to we should be watching. So phosphorus ends up being our big problem. It continues to be a
big problem. Although it's kind of interesting if you were here last year uh you see all the red that's in HH3. Uh much of that was in HH2 last year. Um, and I'm just going to back up a little bit. So, it went from the B the
the right side of the lake in that area, which is reasonably shallow, uh, now the we're seeing more phosphorus and HH1 really in the deepest part of the lake. And that's where we would expect to see it. Um, especially as the lake
stratifies. But anyways, the real point of all that is it moves um you know the phosphorus is moving a bit and settles in in different areas and each year it's going to be a little bit different. If I've learned nothing else from Wendy, it's that you know one or two years does
not make a straight line. It just makes one or two years of observations. But the the the highlight here is the average total phosphorus is slightly increased since 2024 on both the surface and the bottom. And that's
one of the things we keep chasing uh throughout the year and with our storm water testing etc. So this is total phosphorus actually for the last 32 years we started measuring the original measurements I was able to get were from 1993.
Um that was actually when Dominic was uh part of a much smaller company and had done some testing for us. So that's where that data came from all the way up until uh September of 2025. Um and this these are we're calling this uh HH1 is where most of this testing has
been done. So in that particular area. So overall we're maintaining uh the levels pretty much below that. 02 number. Um, but you know, as you can see, every year or in some years, we get stuff that's uh a little bit higher and
it's really hard. I tried to look at this earlier today and say, well, do we really have a trend? I would say early on we did. It was getting worse, but we've kind of stabilized some of that. And I think that's just a lot of the educating we're doing with people around the lake, uh, around the shorelines.
uh things like not fertilizing your lawn right along the you know edges of the lake and leaving some buffer zones and things like that. So we're we're stable. We're just not it's just not great. So I focused on the phosphorus but really there's a ton of additional uh
test data. If you go through the arc report, if you've had the opportunity to go through it, uh you'll see that there's a lot more data in that and uh everything from phytolanton to zup plankton, dissolved oxygen numbers, the bottom grand grab samples that we've
done, uh phosphorus and total suspended solids, chlorophyll, uh pH, conductivity, turbidity, and transparency. All that data is in the ARC report. She really does actually a very good report and you'd see that obviously between us as well as Lake
Shirley. So aquatic plant survey that's another uh one of our requirements. Uh this year we chose to do a little bit uh differently. Last year we did 201. Um it took uh two days and uh we Wendy
talked with us about this quite a bit and and said you know you're probably not getting a ton more data by doing those extra 80. It was actually 201 81 sites than you would get from doing just a day's worth and 120. So we tried that this year and we're pretty comfortable
because the things that we saw um last year are similar percentages like the area of the lake that didn't have uh vegetation you know in some of the deeper parts of the water area had areas that had thick vegetations.
Um all that was all you know kind of kind of consistent and it talks about that in the report. there was some decline in bio volume but it was uh last year we had a real big bladder wart uh I wouldn't say a problem but an outbreak
and um so there was a lot of bladder wart last year there was much less this year uh and less bushy pond weed so the decline as I said earlier could be seasonal could be attributed to the low water level we had during the summertime
uh we had a reasonably good draw down last year so that could have, you know, been part of that. But again, nothing that makes us nervous about what we're seeing. The good news, predominantly native plants were found, although we'll talk about it in a few minutes. We continue to have a fan warp problem and
we'll continue to monitor this on a yearly basis. We've been doing it now for quite a few years and we'll continue. So, non-native uh plant remediation, we have a team that's focused on removing fan wart from us. And as you can see
along the top row there, um the numbers keep increasing. And actually, I did get the final numbers for this year. And for 2025, uh they removed about 91,000 plants. Now, think about it. These are divers
that are swimming down to the bottom, hand pulling these plants and uh putting them in bags. Once the bag is full, they bring them back up to the boat, dump the dump the uh bags, and you know, return down with another one. Those divers and what are there? Five divers removed
91,000 plants this year. >> A lot of plants. >> It's a lot of plants. It's a lot of work. And again, we are so lucky to have such dedicated volunteers uh working with us. They really are kind of our best understand uh our best tool for understanding what's going on on the
bottom lake. You know, we we do all this work from the top, but honestly, Wendy talks with the divers as well to kind of see what they're seeing. Um so, you know, that's been helpful. There was um I think they did 136 dives this year. uh
795 uh dive uh dive team hours. So again, a great great effort and uh a lot of a lot of work being done. The issue in the end is as you as you can see the numbers keep increasing
significantly, right? They're 30,000 more this year than they were last year and that was you know almost 40,000 more than the year before. We know we're going to come up to a full lake treatment at some point in time. it's probably in the next couple of years. The way we kind of look at it is it
becomes how much are how much are the residents willing to tolerate um to put up with the the fan wart that they see. And we're starting to see a lot more of it. When we did the last treatment in uh 2020, it was basically you couldn't drive anywhere and not see fan wart.
We're there are some areas where there's a lot of it. Um, but you know, we it'll be another couple of years and we'll we'll end up having to do it again. So, a summary of our lake treatments. Uh, again, Solitude does all the uh
chemical treatments. We're we're very comfortable working with Dominic. Um, so one of the things we do and have done in the the beginning of the year, this was June 11th, we put in uh Fumi, right?
So flumioisin in uh some of the areas and I'll show you that in a minute. Um will do some spot treatments and what that does is it it knocks down the fan work in those areas uh so that the divers can concentrate on other areas and then um
you know by the end of the year the fan work starts to come back. The flumey is uh basically it kills the plant itself but it doesn't kill the roots. So the roots basically come back. All right. And so we've done that in the main lake. It
just buys us some time. Uh but during that only during that particular summer um pack treatments, we've done those in little uh hickory. We did 150 gallons of that. It's a phosphorous remediation. Again, if you remember back to that
phosphorus um slide I had, uh Little Hickory's numbers were going up significantly and uh the the pack has really helped us kind of hold that down. Matter of fact, Wendy said to us this year, we may want to
consider skipping a year and uh you know, seeing how the how the pond reacts. So, we're talking about that now, whether we're planning on doing that or not. But, it it's worked very well for us. that water is extremely clean and tri. We did a little bit in Little
Hickory as well uh because there was some bladder wart and brittle niad problems that we were seeing uh in that. So the main lake, a lot of the bladder work cleared out of the main lake, but it was still uh sitting in uh Little Hickory. And if you're familiar with the
lakes, Little Hickory does have a culvert that runs into the main lake, although it's most of this year would have been out of the water. Uh so there's very little water that goes back and forth uh between the two bodies of water. Uh most of it is done through the
ground. So they can be very different uh between the two bodies of water. These are the areas of uh recent flumey treatments that we've done 23 24 and 25. So as you can see in 25 on the right uh those were the areas we've done. uh you
may recall with uh doing flumy treatments you can't do the same area I think it's once every four years you could do it um so you know we've been bouncing around the lake um but anyways that's that's where we are uh we expect to do something in 2026 but right now
that wasn't clearly identified so I don't have those slides to share with you yet all right draw down so we do a draw down every year a 4oot draw down. Uh these are kind of from the the fall of 25 and spring of 26. Uh so we removed on on
October 11th, we removed uh three levels of boards uh because the water was below those. So it was at minus 25. Uh the water would be zero and we have 6in boards. So three levels are 18 in and it was below what we called
below the concrete uh at our dam. So we just took all the boards out. Um on 111 the water had come up a little bit. We started uh all eight siphons that we have. So we have uh siphons to draw the water out of the main lake and push it
down the Mulpus Brook. Um so you can see level check. We had a siphon that failed. Um by 118 we do level checks. By 11:20 we're at minus 47 in and we stopped the first so the first four siphons inward then stopped.
Uh by 121 we stopped siphons five and six. We were able to maintain that minus 48 level with one 8 in siphons run siphon running and one 6-in siphon running. Uh we did that right up until yesterday. We shut off the 8 in siphon.
And what we're doing now is we'll leave the 6-in siphon running. And the 6 in actually does a little a little more. We'll siphon out a little more than half the water that an 8 in uh can do. Um but anyways, we'll slowly bring the water
level back up. And if we leave one siphon running like that, the six inch, uh, then it just allows the ice to come up a little bit slower, helps scouring along the edge to, uh, rip up any, uh, weed roots or anything like that that are sitting along the edge of the lake.
And we'll be back up to full um, capacity by April 1st, uh, doing it this, we've been pretty successful doing this the last few years. And if we get a lot of snow or rain or anything like that, it'll just come up faster. Ultimately, mother nature decides um how
long it'll take. So, community events and outreach. Uh we do fishing tournaments on the lake. We have seven resident fishing tournaments um uh per season. So, those were done. I basically have been just keeping this uh
the data I have since 2018. uh the average weight tournament uh tournament average fish weight, number of fish, uh total fishing hours, and average fish per hour. Just to give us some numbers, the average weight this year was down a little bit, and this is
kind of interesting. Um two things on this. The So, the average weight was down a little bit during the summer. We because of the year that we had a pretty warm year, not a lot of big storms. Um
the stratification of the lake was pretty pretty strong. And uh the people that tend to fish the tend to catch the biggest fish in these tournaments always fish deep. And honestly at some point in time during a few of the tournaments,
the biggest fish were only two or three or under three pounds where typically there's a five pounder that comes in almost every tournament. Um, so that brought that average down a little bit, but in general, the number of fish that
were caught, the uh total hours, and the average fish per hour um were pretty consistent with what we've seen in the past. And as my uh grandson like wanted to say, he said, "Grampy, it's 2025. You hit 67."
I don't know. All right. outreach to residents. We have a an office manager. We have an office uh at on at 19 Island Road. We have an office manager that keeps regular hours there is always available
uh by email or whatever whatever needs our phone exa etc. you know throughout the year. Uh we do residential email blasts on a regular basis uh for different things or community events that are going on or honestly down events that are going on.
Um, we have a communications committee that's responsible for getting information out to new residents when they come. Um, you know, holding different events, uh, putting out a newsletter, a monthly newsletter called the Hickory Hills happenings, uh, just
to kind of keep people up to date on what's going on. There's all kinds of pamphlets and handouts uh, that are available. We do a comprehensive quarterly newspaper uh called waves which is you know several pages long and has a lot of different uh data and information in there.
We have a yearly shareholders meeting which is required by the bylaws uh on the third Saturday of September every year. So that's that is always done but there are other residents and shareholders meetings as well um that uh might be topics for general concern for
folks. Uh so that happens. We have our own Facebook page. Actually a couple of different Facebook pages. Um one is the corporate Facebook page which is basically a flow of information out. There's a second one that's privately run uh that allows people, you know,
conversation back and forth. Uh websites. Exactly. So that's where all of our policies are, forms, letters, etc. We have a fun events committee that's uh now been in place for the last couple of years and done a tremendous amount of
wonderful things for the kids and for adults. Different types of uh activities just to get people together. We have some formal classes uh for of course for our divers uh when people sign up to do diving. Uh Hiker Hills Landers pays for that after uh they've
done some amount of uh diving for us. Uh so it's it's basically a give it a little bit of a give and take. Uh boat launch certification. If you're going to be launching your boat here, usually there's a security person in place, but if they're not going to be there's not
going to be somebody there, then uh there's we require a training and then we have security people as well on the lake uh that we do training for them as well. Of course, there's all kinds of social events and then there's, you know, a personal touch. Some people just like to go door tod door and uh chat
with the neighbors about, you know, what's going on. So, plans for 2026, you may notice in the top right, uh we're going to celebrate 100 years this year. So, it turns out in September of 1926, the lake was full. Uh Dickensson declared the
lake to be full, water was running over the dam, and uh we're going to celebrate that this year with a whole bunch of different events uh throughout the year. So, we're pretty excited about that. It's an interesting note. Many man-made lakes or structures, as you probably
well know, uh don't live to be a hundred years. Um there's a lot of things we've seen, all kinds of uh you know, mil dams and things like that that have uh gone away through the city of Fitsburg or other places. Uh so we're pretty lucky to have a lake that's still as healthy
as it is uh and still going strong after 100 years. We're going to maintain our contract with Ark. Uh we enjoy working with Wendy. She's been extremely helpful and uh so we're going to continue, you know, doing our water quality monitoring, our
algae monitoring. Last year we we really had very little algae problems. So um you know, but every year is different. The year before that we had a lot. We were able to do, if you read any of the ANC report, we're able to do some storm water assessments. So that was helpful.
Um and we're starting to get a better idea of what's coming in. 90% of the water in the lake comes down the mulus. So, what happens upstream in the mulus is real important to us. Um, I talked a little bit about the uh fan war control. We'll continue our our
hand pulling and then those early season herbicide treatments. Uh, purple loose strife as well. We had a couple of things last couple of uh uh group events last year that people went out and picked uh purple loose stripe out from along the edges to try to keep
it from uh taking over. We've done erosion control around the islands. We do that every year. We invest, you know, a few thousand dollar uh and core logs and u or rocks or other things that are around the edges. I mean, sorry, uh to get to put around the edges. Anytime
somebody's digging a new foundation around the lake, we usually get a group of people to go over there and pick rocks and then use those on the islands. Um algae control, as I mentioned, we've done uh um the alum sulfate in the past
in little hecky. Uh we've done a little bit of that in the main lake. And if we if we get a bloom that just goes crazy on us or starts growing in toxicity uh then we have used copper sulfate and again we would look to use that in
the future if needed. Storm water I mentioned continue uh gathering our data on that. Uh we have plunge pools around the lake. We maintain those work with the town. The town helps us to maintain those. And uh there are rain gardens as well, both private and uh at some of our
beaches we have uh rain gardens. Finally, uh last couple of things, goose control. We have done addling uh over the last couple of years. That's a state-run program. We work with the state u to
uh file for to be able to do that and then send them all the information. uh we have in the last few years probably uh it's usually to 30 or 40 eggs we add every year. Um so it's it's significant to keep the goose under
control. Uh and this fencing we've do it around the islands or we've done it on the dam and people tend to do it on their properties as well to keep the geese out. Really trying to make the lake less attractive. Uh they can go downream in the mulus to the
conservation land and enjoy that. So, and finally, uh, tree removal on the dam. So, I'll talk about that, uh, in the next couple of slides. All right. So, that's the main report that I wanted to share with you and then
I'm going to move on to uh to look for approval and I'll talk about that in a minute. Is there any questions on the on the main report? >> I have two questions. >> So, my first is what is gooaddling? This is new to me. I've never heard of that.
>> Ah, well, goose addling is uh really birth control for geese. Uh, it basically someone has to go to the the eggs uh remove the goose that's sitting on the eggs and they move away when you get close. Um, and then you uh dip the
eggs in corn oil. Uh, so it basically suffocates the eggs. You put them back in the nest. Uh, so it's not breaking or anything like that. If you break a goose's eggs, they'll lay more eggs. But as long as they think they have uh eggs that are, you know, can be viable,
they'll sit on the same ones. So they'll literally sit on the eggs until they finally just don't hatch. Um so it's a form of uh birth control basically. That's that's what it is. >> Okay. Um sad, but And then
>> No, it is what it is, right? We had, you know, at one point in time we had 50, 60, 70 geese running around >> and uh that's a disaster, too, cuz that just pollutes the lake. >> Yeah, I get it. I live on a lake, too. So >> Oh, do you? Okay. Yeah. >> Um and then as far as the fan wart goes,
when you're hand pulling the fan wart, um are the people who's we have fan wart here, too, and I know it's if you pull it and you don't get like the whole rooe out and little fragments float around, it can actually get worse. Are they being really careful or or have you guys
looked into like that vacuum method that they're thinking about doing on Whamm? >> Oh, so do you live on Whamm? >> I live on Whamm. Yeah. >> Yeah. Okay. So, we did that. Um, the vacuum method. It's called Dash, diver assisted suction harvesting. Um, we did
that quite a bit. Uh, I was involved a lot with that actually helping to build a boat and everything. And so, you can get fragments from that. So, first of all, fan watt self fragments. So, it's going to fragment no matter what. >> So, if you leave it in there, it'll just fragment itself, you know, on a windy
day. >> That's how it that's how it survives. Um or boats hit it or whatever. So, it's going to frag. But yes, when we go and and uh pull them out, it's hard to get all the roots, but the idea is to get as many roots as you can um and find out
where the roots go to, cuz they'll run 10 ft. you know, a root will run 10 feet 10 feet away. So, the divers try to do that. And as they're doing it, there's actually two divers in the water all the time. So, one is if as they start to get big, uh, one diver is picking the roots
and the other one is watching the top trying to grab all and they both have bags to put pieces in. >> Okay. >> So, they'll do it that way. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. Thank you. Um, do we have any other questions from members of the commission on the main report? Right.
Doesn't appear so. >> All right. I I can usually bore people pretty good and put them right to sleep. >> I thought this is very interesting. >> All right. So, I'm seeking approval uh for tree removal at the toe of the damn slope. And I'll help you understand what
that means. So we do because we have a large dam and we hold back a large amount of water. we have we are required to have a state inspection every two years and uh so one of the findings this year uh and it's
it's come up a little bit in the last couple of years but this year uh the Tai Bond is the company that we hired the engineering company that we hired to do the work they basically told us you really need to do something about this and what it amounts to is at the toe of
the slope so where the dam comes down and starts to level off there is supposed to be um 20 ft from that point of non uh tree. So some other vegetation, grass or um you know clover
or whatever, but basically not a rooty, nothing with roots, nothing with big roots there. And the reason is if the dam gets overtopped, water rushes down and knocks down a tree. Well, the tree is going to the roots are going to rip
up from the soil and that will that is a place where erosion can start to erode back to the dam. So that's what it's all about. So that's why they try to have 20 ft from the toe of the slope figuring 20 ft away if erosion well first of all
it's flattened out so it's not as likely to erode back to the dam. All right. So this year uh this recommended minor repair is to do just that. remove trees and brush on the embankment abutments and within 20 ft. So, our embankment, if
you've lived here long in Lunberg, at one point in time there were trees all along the dam and those were all removed, I think in the '9s or early 2000s, um, and all back filled with gravel, etc. Uh, so they've taken them, they before my time here, they took them
off the dam itself. Uh, but at this year, they're saying, "Look, we really need to be taking those trees down." And I'll show you in a second where that is. Um, and take out both the stumps and the roots. Remove them in their entirety. Uh, and then back fill that with gravel.
All right. So, if you look at this top top one here, this is Townsen Harbor Road. This is the concrete portion of our dam. Uh, the main spillway, the auxiliary spillway. And if I walk down along the
dam to about this corner and I look down, I am standing like down here. So I assume you can see my pointer. >> Yeah. >> So this is basically where I'm looking down back into the area. So on the top here, I'm saying this needs to be 20 ft
right in there. And this is kind of where that is. I'm trying to designate the same thing. It's 20 ft from the toe of the slope. So where we basically starts to flatten out down here. 20 ft back in. And so that's here. And if I look again from the same spot, but
looking directly in. Sorry, where's my little pointer? There I am. It's the same thing over here. So this is flat here, and I need to go 20 ft in. So that means take this brush out. Uh we can leave it. We can leave
it. Uh this brush is all small. What do I do here? This brush is small. Uh so you know we would just cut that all out. But there are some bigger trees in here like there's one or two of these bigger trees that we would ask uh to have a tree
company come in and take them down. So the procedure is basically measure and mark the 20 ft uh cut the brush and remove it out. We'd have it chipped and hauled away. Uh same with the cut the large trees. We'd have a service come in and do that. We would have somebody come in and
remove the large stumps. Um, I know you folks know Matt Proctor. He lives on the lake and has really usually been very helpful with things like this. Uh, so we'd have have the large stumps removed. Those holes would have to be filled in with gravel and then the gravel, we
can't just leave the gravel open. So, we'd end up with uh trying to, you know, have top soil on that. So, we could grow some type of grass or ground cover uh in that area. We'd probably try to grow clover or something like that, micro clover or something. Uh, so we don't have to mow it. But that's what the
procedure would be. Um, you know, this is a requirement of the office of dam safety. So, I would request a vote um from conservation here uh to approve the removal of that brush and comply to for us to be able to comply with the office
of dam safety. So, um, where it would be being removed is it was mostly that brush in the front and there's a couple of trees there and then you're proposing to, you know, kind of reveate it with something that wouldn't need to be mowed. >> Correct. Yep. We mow the dam now. Um,
but there are areas in that space that it wouldn't make sense to mow it if I could avoid doing that. Would you be able to maybe put like uh like some smaller native plants there instead that could just grow or >> uh probably something like blueberries
and things like that would be okay. I'd have to run that by tie and bond to make that sure that was okay. The biggest thing is that they can't have deep roots that pull out and leave voids. >> That's really the that's really what we're after. >> Okay. because it'd be great if we could use that area just for maybe some native
plants or something rather than just clover. But, um, okay, that's my >> Yeah, I' I'd prefer to have one of the things that some of the people on the lake have talked about is um, you know, an area that, uh, might be bee friendly,
um, you know, with floor and things like that. So, I'm sure I could get a group of people to, you know, help with that if we had the right soils in there. >> Okay. Yeah. Yeah. I mean that would be amazing that good use of the land. >> Exactly. >> Sure.
Okay. Doesn't do any other commissioners have questions about the tree removal. >> Teddy, you have your hand up. >> Oh, Teddy. >> Yes. I would just like to comment that um I I'd be all for putting in native native plants that are bee friendly. I
think that's an awesome idea as opposed to having trees there. >> Yes, exactly. I I think that's a good idea as well. Um and we've had some people that have been interested in doing some of that. Um but you know along the dam itself and
you you haven't been around Teddy for some of some of the time here, but in 200 18 uh we did a project that overtopped the whole dam with um a geo web. So there is uh webbing basically on the whole dam
and then there is the lom and everything is on top of that and there's grass growing on it that's grown in through that webbing. So we couldn't do it in those areas but this might be a nice area to do something like that. >> Yeah. Especially where it's like a kind of a low traffic area too, right?
>> Exactly. Yeah. There's not walking. We have walking on top of the dam but not uh not in that area. >> Yeah. >> We'll go back to this uh Yeah. If I go back to this picture here. Yeah. So, there's a walkway here. Um, but that's where people stay so they can
see the water and whatever, you know, we're talking about down in here. Okay. Yeah, it seems like some maybe smaller native plants, pollinator friendly plants would be a really good option there because it would also fill in really well. You would never have to
mow it. >> Right. Exactly. And that they would obviously they have pretty shallow roots. >> Yeah. >> All right. So again, I' I'd be looking for a vote to be able to go forward with this. Um I'm not sure if that's something you're
comfortable doing now or, you know, but I' I'd like to get that underway where the ground is frozen if we can. >> Okay. I um so I mean you already have an NOI. The NOI is good for at least five years, right?
>> Did you guys do a fiveyear one or did you go threeear one that ended up getting extended for five years? >> No, I'm pretty sure we had a fiveyear one that got extended to seven, I think. >> Okay. Um, so
procedurally I think we can vote to allow you to remove the trees or not vote or vote to not depending on how the conservation commission feels about it. Um,
so does anyone else have any comments on that? We feel comfortable taking a vote on that tonight. I'd make a motion to approve in in so far as that we can add native plants
replacing the trees that are taken down. >> Okay. >> Second. >> All right. So, um, roll call vote. Teddy Bette >> I. >> Andrea Bernett >> I. >> Mike Larouche >> I.
>> And I for myself. So that would be uh a motion to approve that you can remove the brush in trees to comply with the office of the dam safety requirement and just >> get some native plants in there. >> They don't have to be big, just some small ones.
>> Yeah. No, they can't. I mean, they Yeah, they'd be, you know, they would end up being uh um stuff that flowers, you know, throughout the year. If we can get something like that, that would be great. >> Yeah. Like some milk weeds or some golden rod or smaller stuff. Blueberry. >> Yep.
Yeah, exactly. All right, very good. That's all I had then. If there's no other questions, I will get out of your hair. >> All right. Uh, I have no other questions. Anyone else have any questions? >> Thank you, John. >> Yeah, that was a great presentation.
Thank you so much. >> Are those real palm trees behind you, Mike? >> They are. >> They are. >> That is Mike. >> That's why someone else said, "Take care of your driveway." Yeah. Very nice. I'm glad you can enjoy it. >> Thank you.
>> Mike is very tan right now. >> Yeah, exactly. >> Yeah, like not pasty white like the rest of us. >> All right. Well, thank you so much. Um >> All right. Thank you. Thanks for making this happen. All right. Have a good night. >> You too.
>> Okay. We still have one person on the call. I want to see if there's anything else they could possibly be here for. I see Bobby Turington. Are you Were you here for Hickory Hills?
>> Uh yes. I was just here to listen to uh John's presentation. I'm a member of the board and uh Lun um Yeah. Right. Um lake management group. >> Awesome. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something that you were
here for, like a hearing or something. So, >> no, I'm just about ready to bow out gracefully. >> Okay. Thanks so much. Have a good night. >> Thanks. >> Okay. Um, let me pull up my agenda because I have
the bottom half. Did anyone else print it out and realize that it's way too big for one piece of paper? Um, okay. up for so for bylaw discussion. Um I did send a message to Herllin and Jen about the
best way to get going because Herllin starts with us full-time on February 9th of the best way to get going on revamping some of our fee structure and also our um our consultant fees. So waiting to hear back on that. Um
and then did we have anything else that we wanted to talk about for bylaws? from anyone. I know that was the big thing that was on some people's minds were revamping our fee structure to be more in line with other communities
nearby. No. Okay. Um, we haven't had any Mac training. Um, Earth Days. Does anyone have any talk about for Earth Days?
Oh, yes. I wanted to discuss more with you, Jenny, on planning. >> Oh, yeah. >> Um because I know Mary said that she usually does it, but >> um I'm hoping we can rendevu at some point. >> Yeah. >> And >> definitely
>> uh discuss a plan for volunteering for, I don't know, cleaning up litter or what have you. >> Yeah. Um okay. Yeah, definitely. I am just reach out to me whenever. I know Christina from the pollinator habitat. I
saw an email come through from her something about planning um a planning meeting. I think maybe I'll bring up I'll go to that meeting and I know Mike
won't be there. He'll be there in spirit. >> Yes. Um, I think I'll go to that meeting and uh, and know Teddy, I don't know if you're interested in, you know, being on some of the stuff for the pollinator habitat, too. I can ask them to send that to you. I know you're pretty active
with Robin. >> Yeah, I'd like I'd like that. >> Okay. So, there's a there's a meeting on Tuesday, February 17th. I'll forward you this and then maybe we can talk to them about or I can talk to them about having something going on for Earth Day. I did try to talk to Christina about it and
she seemed to think that we didn't have a lot that needed to be done around the Earth time, but maybe that's changed. So, um could figure out more maybe at the the thing gets Oh, it's Tuesday, February 17th from 10:30 to noon. I will
be at work. I'm always at work. I work way too much. I'm like ready to fall asleep right now. I'm so tired. Um okay. Yeah. So maybe I don't know if you're around at all during the day, Teddy. Well, Andrea, do you go to those? >> Um, yeah, I was planning to go to that.
>> Okay. Maybe you could be if Teddy's working too. Um, maybe you could talk to them about if they have anything they'd like to do for Earth Day. And you can also talk to Christina separately. But, um, we would love to I think that would be something. >> Yeah, I I will bring that up. >> Get going.
>> And then also, anything else we can think of, Teddy? Um, I don't I don't know how much um bandwidth we have between, you know, people in the commission, but I could I could definitely head up one thing. Uh, and
and if I can get ideas from Mary too about places or Bob on things that need to happen in the conservation areas like if there's maybe even we do trash clean up um or, you know, putting up more trail markers or, you know,
cleaning up trails, maybe doing some I would love to do some invasive stuff, but April isn't usually the best time >> for invasive management. Usually the best time is September. Um just because that's when they're kind of dying back
and sending stuff back to their roots. April things aren't even really around yet at that time. But yeah, I am open to all ideas and I would love to chat with anyone who has ideas about the
Earth Day. So yeah, Teddy, we just can talk about it at some point. >> Yeah. Oh, and Herland sent out a hydraology program to all of us today. >> I did see that >> which I I signed up for. I look forward to that.
>> Um, did you see that, Andrea? Did you see that, Mike? >> Yes, I did. >> Yes, I signed up for that, too. >> Yeah, I love it. You guys are awesome. Did you sign up for it, Mike? Or were you >> Uh, I'm still looking at my schedule to see whether I'm available on that day.
>> Might be playing tennis. uh played today. >> That's And you're And you're playing and everything's going well with your knee. >> Playing playing every day uh Monday through Friday. >> And uh N's doing fine. >> Awesome.
>> Yeah, we played a tough match today. So, um not one of my favorite tennis days, but it was still fun. >> Yeah. can't always >> you have a tennis court right in your area there, right?
>> Yes, there are two two courts in our park. >> Nice. >> And we rotate uh playing uh women and men every day. It's a lot of fun. Uh I'm on a mixed doubles team as well as a
men's team. So it's it's a very active team. And um as I said, it's a lot of fun. Uh >> yeah, >> sounds pretty hardcore.
>> Well, it's it's it's mostly fun >> even though, you know, we do keep score. You know, we'd like everybody likes to win, but you can't always win, >> right? >> But um >> All right. Well, I hope I hope someday
retire and just play and play tennis. That would be >> tennis and biking. >> Yeah. And there's really good bike trails around there, right? >> There are some bike trails. >> Yeah. >> Um Yeah, there's a uh a great little place
uh in Santael Island called Ding Darling. It's a national park and it's just, you know, it's about eight miles of biking and um you know, all kinds of shore birds and uh you could see some
alligators. My wife was there today. I had to stay behind because I had a tournament, a tennis tournament. So, she had more fun than I did. >> And Santa Island is that that's where you are, right? Toal Island.
>> Well, I'm near there. Uh we're a >> place called Asterero. Um it's about a Santael's about a half hour away. >> Okay, >> cool. Oh yeah, Sarah was an island, too, though.
>> I'm just a >> It's a village. >> Okay, >> it looks like Oh, yeah. It's like a peninsula. >> Yes. >> Okay, cool. All right. I miss I miss the ocean.
Okay. All right. So, yeah. So, we will get some stuff going for Earth Day. >> Um, old business. I do not have any conservation budget updates. Um, for the Hollis Road residents, we had Teddy and Chris went out and shoveled a path,
which was amazing. I know Mike already brought it up, but I just wanted to say it again that that was amazing. Um, I still have not gotten the Marcel, which I have to do. >> My My car was in the shop that day and when Mike texted me or emailed me, I was like, "Oh, yeah. I'll be right over."
And I realized I didn't have a car and and luckily Chris was around and was able to pick me up. I I asked Mike if he could pick me up, forgetting that he's in Florida. >> I know. It's funny. I was like, my husband, but I forget he was somewhere
that day. He was skiing with my daughter. We um we did get the invoice from Cam's Heating. It was only $265 out of the $400 that had been approved.
And I sent it along to Michael Gale for payment. And he was appreciative and said uh that they're in the queue >> because they're so that was pretty good.
>> Yeah. Yeah. So, I don't think I think that they weren't set up as a vendor for us. The way that Lunenburgg works is every vendor that if they work with a different department, they get a different vendor number instead of being like one vendor that gets paid. So, whenever we bring on somebody, even if
they've worked with Lunenburgg before, we have to wait for them to get set up as a vendor before we can send them payments. So, >> okay. >> I do think they got the first two payments though, too. >> So, this will be the third one. Um, don't quote me on that though. >> Okay.
>> I'm pretty sure it's definitely in the works. Um, but thank you for taking care of that, Mike. >> Okay. >> Um, committee reports today. Do you have any update? I mean, we we just talked about it last week,
but do you have any updates on the master plan steering committee? >> I was muted. Um, no. We I had no updates. Okay. Um, we did, so Mary and I both did some grant applications that we
submitted on the first. Um, one was for the Raino parking lot, one was for the Table Rock Wetland replication. And we did put those notes that you gave us into one of the questions they ask is, is their community um,
gosh, like does the community want this? And you giving us that information really helped us show in our respective applications that the community does want, you know, the trails to have to intersect more and to be more accessible by public
transportation and things like that. So that was really helpful. So thank you for sending that to us. >> Good. Good. I was worried I gave it to you guys too late because Mary already came to us with like the vote um and she had sent me the email like days before and I
I flagged it so that I would go back to it, but that it took me longer than I expected. So, I'm glad that worked out for you guys. >> Yeah. So, I mean, we're all we're all volunteers trying to get this into our our busy schedules, right? But no, so when we took the vote last week, that
was actually part of us um saying that we had support from the conservation commission. So, we put that into the application that the conservation commission had voted to support the um us using the timber rights funds to put
So, the way that the grant works is we ask for we're asking for roughly 60,000 for each grant respectively and the state will take pick up 80% and we pick up 20%. So, what we were voting for was that we were saying the Conservation
Commission has endorsed that they would be willing to pick up 20% of the costs of that grant. But we actually it wouldn't even really be 20% that we'd be doing because we also have those inind donations from the volunteer hours. So,
we can use that to whenever we have volunteers come out and do stuff. I think right now Mary said we get about $42 per hour from the state in in kind matching for volunteer hours. So we use that also. So we don't actually end up using the full 20% out of the timber
rights fund if that makes sense. So it didn't make sense to me until I actually submitted a grant application. So, all the times that Mary has been talking about grants, I've been like, I kind of get it. But now I get it a little bit more since I've done one. Um, hopefully
we get them cuz that would be great if we could uh get some. It would be nice to have some parking at Table Rock and at Raino is Table Rock just has I don't know if you've been there, but it just has the parking across the street and Raino has
none. Although if you ask my daughter, my daughter was like, "More parking lots." I was like, "They're gravel." >> Yeah, I have like similar feelings because I don't I don't love cars, but I do like when people participate in conservation efforts.
>> Yeah, I know. It's tough cuz I thought I feel I you know, I feel the same way. I definitely want more better like better public transportation and better I I would prefer, you know, to have way less cars and other countries have figured
out how to do it. We just we love our cars here in America. So, but you know, while we are in Lunenburgg and I don't know there we do have the mart um I don't know we're going to have you know good public transportation to get people
to conservation areas anytime soon. So, this is at least we'll be adding some handicap spots. We're hoping to make the trails more accessible. So, stuff like that is really what we're aiming for. So, um and then also we're trying to connect them to the the mart. So, the
mart stops at Lenberg Crossing, which is the Hannerford uh and Walmart parking lot. And then behind that, we have a property that we're trying to intersect into Northfield Park, which is right across from Table Rock. and then right next to
Raino. So people could get dropped off at the Hannerford on the mart and then actually walk up the trails all the way to Ashby at some point if all of this comes to fruition. So it' be all these trails that are kind of intersecting which would be really cool.
That's the goal. So Okay. Um any other for master plan steering? You didn't really have one. I kind of did one for you. Yeah. Yeah. I have nothing.
>> Okay. Um, Stormwater, we are presenting to Fincom tomorrow night. Uh, we are hoping to get a bylaw established at the town meeting. So, we're talking to FinCom. We're talking to the select board. I have I'm spending like every
waking moment that I'm not at work doing town stuff right now. I can't wait for town meeting to come and get to little get a little break. But yeah, so we're doing Fencom tomorrow night. We doing a joint meeting and then on the 10th we're doing a joint meeting with the select
board and the planning board. Um so to get this kind of socialized before a lot of the town boards and committees so that they aren't they have all the information that we're going to present at the town meeting in May.
Um, and where is the rest of the We do not have Chris um here for open space. And do we have any other communications or public comment from
the commission? And it's no there's no public. Okay. Um, and then I do think that Chris is probably going to be stepping down before his um
his term is up. Um, he's just he's got a lot going on at work and stuff and which means that we'd be looking for somebody to fill the open space uh representative. Uh, I know Teddy, you're doing
master plan. Um, I don't know if you might be interested in that, Andrea. It they meet like once a month, but if you are interested, maybe I could give you a little bit more info. Open Spaces. >> Uh, it seems like you were kind of interested in it when we were talking at
the >> Yeah. >> one of the conferences. >> Uhhuh. >> And they're they're planning on becoming like a full commission, I think. So, >> there might be some And it also, you know, conservation is part of that open space and recreation plan, >> right? Um, that's a big component of it.
So, if that's something you might be interested in, I would >> sounds doable. >> Okay. Um, yeah, let me talk to Chris and see if he wants to if you're if you're interested in it. If just I don't want to like
>> put you on the spot. So, if you want to if you are interested, let me know uh like in an email or something >> and then give if you want to take some time to think about it. Um, but I feel like it would be kind of in line with your interests, but if you are interested, I'll let Chris know that you would be willing to be
>> the representative from the from the conservation commission. I don't think Rich is going to do it. And Mary already was it and Chris took over for her. So, um, if it's if and if you're not if you don't want to do it, no worries at all before I became the storm water
representative. I don't think that there was one from conservation for like six months or something. So, I can't say that for sure though, but yeah, that would be great if you could. >> Um, and then other than that, I would be
looking for a motion. Oh, the next meeting is February 18th, 2026. And then I would be looking for a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Don't Don't get too excited. All right. I'm going to give Mike the motion and
Teddy the second. Roll call vote. Mike LaRouche. I >> Teddy Deette. >> Hi, >> Andrea Bernup. >> Hi. >> And I for myself. Thank you all so much. >> Thank you. >> Have a great night.
>> Thank you. You too. All right. Bye bye. >> Bye.