All right. Calling to order the October 1st, 2025 meeting of the Conservation Commission at 7:04 p.m. Um, open in accordance with the requirements of the open meeting law. Please be advised that this meeting is being audio video
recorded. The agenda lists all the topics which may be discussed at the meeting and those reasonably anticipated by the chair. Votes may be taken from these discussions. Not all items may be discussed and other items may be raised to the extent permitted by open meeting law. Please be advised that the town of
Lunenberg utilizes Zoom platform as host for its hybrid and remote meetings. That the Zoom platform utilizes AI technology known as AI companion to create audio transcriptions and 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 the AI technology may capture audio prior to the start of the meeting and or following the conclusion of the meeting. Okay. Um we start with a roll call. Um Mike Larouche
present. Mary Wilson here. Richard Bers present. Andrea Bernab present. Teddy Ducet here. And I am present. and Chris said he might be running late. Um, we don't have
any appointments. Um, for public comment, comments are to be limited to three minutes and on a subject matter under the direct jurisdiction of the commission. Comments about current agenda items are to be made during the comment period of the spec specific agenda item. Please
address all comments to the chair. Do we have any public comment tonight? does not look like it. Um, pollinator habitat check-in. Do you have any updates for us, Mike? I know we've been pretty quiet over there. Yes, I do. Um, I happen to be there
today and I met some of the volunteers and they said, "Oh, maybe you can help us with this, Michael." Apparently, uh, our latest, uh, rain barrel that we had as part of our Eagle Scout project,
um, looks like it collapsed. That last rainstorm put enough water in the tank, uh, that it collapsed forward on its own. So, um, the task was to remove, you
know, the 25% of the water that was in there. so we could actually empty it and put it upright. And so we were successful to do that. But it it kind of tells us that, you know, the other, you know, two
um water tanks that we have are within these metal um racks. So, it kind of protects the tank that is vinyl uh from perhaps, you know, unless it's
totally perfectly level. Um, chances are it would be fine, but I don't think the scouts put the the um the tank on equal footing. And I think
with all of the water that came in, it forced it to kind of collapse on itself from one side. So, we learned something. And um um we have, as I said, the two other tanks from the Eagle project. And
we'll probably think about um getting uh the metal uh cages that usually surround these tanks. Um, and I think that might be a lot um it would do a long go a long
way in protecting the tanks uh from this day forward. So um but um other than that um you know we are kind of winding down um the pollinator habitat. things
are are going to sleep and whatever fall does to the habitat, you know, they get um so that's what's happening. Although the some of the volunteers were watering plants and they were planting plants
still. So apparently it's it's not over for the habitat as far as uh what goes on. there's always something happening and um for that uh it's truly appreciated. Thank you so much, Mike, for everything
you do over there. Okay. And for the check-in. Okay. Okay. Um All right. We do not have any minutes to approve tonight. So we will um start our first public hearing. Pursuant to
MGL chapter 131 section 40 in the town of Lunenberg wetlands protection and municipal bylaws. Uh we have a request for determination of applicability for the reclassification of Mulpus Brook as an intermittent stream at one Howard 100 Howard Street.
Do we have the applicant or their representative on the call tonight? Uh, Maryanne Depinto, Three Oaks Environmental. Okay. And I believe Tanner's available. He's zooming from his phone. Yep. Okay. I do see him on here.
Okay. Um, do you would is there anything you'd like to present or Yes, please. Uh, in terms of the the description of what's proposed, it's not Mulpus Brook per se. It's a tributary to
it. I could uh I don't know if I could put up my on my screen, but I have a USGS map that shows the two intermittent stream channels that come together to form Musbrook. So, this is upgradient. Um we have pictures from July and we
have one photograph from August 1. Um showing the stream channel bone dry the whole time, even after two inches of rain in July. Um the the pictures that were taken immediately after that show the channel still not flowing and
completely dry. So is that just that upgradient section up to Howard Street? Nothing beyond that. You can share your screen if you'd like if there's something you'd like to share with us. Let's see if I can pull it up. Yeah. Okay. Hang on a minute. And is this also an open gov? I know I
saw a lot of pictures in open gov. Um open I'm not Oh, the photographs that we took. Oh, that's the wrong one. Yeah. So, the um all the attachments to the application uh we do have we have the WPA form one
and the site plan and um you know it's the photographs but is I don't recall seeing anything. Let me see. Let's we'll share your screen and we'll see what you have. Uh
yeah, I'm looking at h I had two two topo builder. Um I used too builder to check to see what the most recent topographic maps show and I did it in two different ways. One with
the background in it. Um I don't you probably can't see my pointer. U but if you start I'm not seeing your screen at all. Oh, all right. It looks like you weren't sharing your screen yet. All right. Uh, what do I click on? Hm.
All right. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. I have to go back to you guys. Hang on. Share screen. All right. Now, I have to be able to pull up what's in
Learn here. Let's see. Share system audio. If you just um at the bottom of your screen where you see there's there should be like a green up arrow that says share screen. I hit that and then when you hit that it should
um you can show either you can choose one of those browsers that shows up. It'll show you a couple different screens and you can choose to share one of those. All right, I hit share screen and now I have a a
topographic map on my screen. Can you see it? Did you click on it to show it? Yes. Uh, okay. I have that up. Let me go to the other I don't see anything. Yeah, nothing.
Just as a sanity check. No, I'm not seeing anything either. Okay. Uh entire screen window. There we go. Share. Ah, okay. Can you see that?
Yes. It's teenytiny for me. Uh let me see. Anyway, everything that we're looking at is north of Howard Street. Uh the stream channel is not
labeled as m Musbrook. It's a tributary to Musbrook. So I wouldn't want to call Malpus Brook, which is perennial, um an intermittent stream. And the photographs we have from July 3rd on show that it's not flowing and
there's no water in it at all. Uh just wanted to get it declared to be intermittent stream channel. Okay. Uh, so I'm I'm confused because the application does um you know state that it it the what is being done here
is to reclassify in Melbour obviously not the entirety of the brook to an intermittent stream, but I didn't see any call outs for it being a tributary in any of the documentation that was in opened up. Um yeah, it's specifically
the portion of the stream that's on uh Mr. Nicole's property. And to me, when I've looked at that on maps, it looks like that is Mulpus Brook and what we consider Mulpus Brook right now.
Mhm. Um well, that portion of what there are some topo maps that say uh branch of or tributary to Mulpus Brook. Um,
I ran in addition to the photographs to verify that the photographs were actually depicting something that could be verified using calculations. I did run stream stats on it. It comes up as 38
square miles. So, it's under that half square mile that would be a trigger under certain circumstances. Um, and it's not flowing as
from uh 10% of the year. It's not at least 10% of the year based on the stream stats calculations which I could bring up if you don't have them in front of you. Let's see. So I we do have the stream stats calculations in open go but
and that is for that is those are not stream stats calculations for Mulpus brook that's for a tributary it's it is it it has been labeled as a portion of Mus Brook the entirety of the
brook is not what what I just want to make sure that we weren't looking at the entirety of Mopus Brook because at a certain point it downstream it is perennial. So I just didn't want to confuse this is the area right now that is
classified as Mulpus Brook and right so as of right now the area that you are wanting to reclassify is considered Mulpus Brook and it's the area from where the headwater is to Yes. So so technically so that is that is Mulpus Brook right now.
Okay. Right. it. I want to make sure I'm not c I'm going to share my screen. I just want to make sure I'm not confused because when you're saying tributaries to Mulpus Brook, it's a and for me right now this is Mus Brook and I just want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding.
All right. It Yeah, it's just a matter of semantics and it on some maps it does show up all the way up to the headarters as Malusbrook. It does. Are there maps where it doesn't show as Musbrook? Oh, the one I have in front of us here that the uh the one in front of
us doesn't have it called Mopusbrook until you get to where the confluence of the two tributaries or the two branches meet. From there down it's perennial. Um can you Mary you have your hand
raised? I I just wanted to uh let you know that Mass Mapper shows it as Mulpus Brook up to the um pond that's located on the O'Brien property at 390 Howard. Yeah. And that's and that's where I was looking and I feel like Massmapper is a
you know a very um good authority and I believe it submitted that with the report too the attachments. So, the other thing I want to bring up is that um the D has commented that uh
I'm actually just going to read it. Give me one second. Did you see the D comments on this? Yes, I did. Okay. So, I'm just going to read them for commission.
Um where did I go? [Applause] I just had a minute. Here it is. While you're doing that, we looked at the uh drought declaration up through August 8th and it showed that there was no
drought through August 8th. Then when the drought committee met, they pushed the date back to August 1st. Okay, I'm just going to share my screen so that Okay, the commissioners can hear just I'll take it'll take over when I
take over. Can everybody see this? Yes. Yes. Okay. So, um D comments are mass D is in receipt of the RDA for 100 Howard Street. A new drought declaration was issued September 9th, 2025, reflecting
conditions as of August 1st, 2025. For CROO communities, the secretar's declaration finds that the central and northeast regions are in a level two significant drought while the southeast region has been declared level one mild drought. Please note that observations
of no flow made on or after August 1st, 2025 for any pending or incoming RDAs, ANRADS or NOIs may not be used to change the status of a perennial river or stream with riverfront area until level zero status is again declared. One of the pictures submitted as part of this
request is dated August 1st and therefore cannot be considered in determining the status of the stream. Um, so our agent did agent administrator did request that this application be withdrawn withdrawn.
Oh, I didn't know that. Um, just based on these D comments. Um, we were trying to find another photograph between July 3rd and the 28th or whenever the next photograph was.
have been unable to locate that. So, we didn't want to withdraw this because the stream was completely dry from the 3rd of July through the end of July. And Tanner, if you're available, if you can speak to it,
we have to hit pound six or something like that. Star six to It looks like he unmuted. Okay. So, everyone can hear me. All right. Yes. Okay. Um, yeah. I mean, can you just state your address for us?
Uh, Tanner Cole, 856 Massachusetts A, Lunenburgg. Thank you. And in terms of pictures, I mean, it's just the way the calendar worked out. I was I started taking pictures before I
left for a vacation and wasn't able to finish taking pictures until after I got back. Um, but I've owned the property since 2017 and I tell you
whether you call it a mit or a tributary that stream channel that flows through dries out every summer. That's just the nature of it. Um, I was actually pretty bummed out because
kids camping there the spring of 2018, just after I bought the property and Memorial Day weekend, we camped out there and there was very little water in the stream at that point. Um, so that's just
the nature of that stream channel. And in my mind, and I'm by no means a wetland scientist or expert or any of that, but the the 4day rule is a little bit
shocking to me to say that if you can find any stream channel that dries up for 4 days out of the calendar, that's considered it intermittent. In my mind, that's a pretty low bar. Um, I mean the
first pictures we took out there were July 3rd. We the last pictures were the uh 29th, 30th, 31st, August 1st, somewhere in there. And it was we
actually got a heavy rain during one of uh those um days. And it was dry as a bone. It was dry all month. Um, and so I did receive the administrator's
or the agent's comment to withdraw, but at that point we had already work. And if you're telling me that because I took the pictures Oh, I think did we lose you? That's theation. I I guess then
Oh, I think what it is, but that seems awfully arbitrary to me. Um, so at any rate, I hope you heard most of my spiel. I got I think I got most of it. Thank you. Yeah.
Okay. Um, do you have anything else to share before I move on to see what the if there are any questions from the commission? No, no. Okay, I'm also All right. Thank you. Do we have any questions from members of the
commission? Does not appear that we do. I say for myself um the implications. Oh, Richard, um, is this something we should maybe ask for a peer review on to take a look at the information that's been
presented? Yeah. So I yeah I was going to say for myself um I from what I understand the implications of reclassifying uh near the headarters can be
um I guess more severe than if it were somewhere else in the stream. But also you know with the D recommending what they're recommending and you know saying that we're in a drought right now. I would not feel comfortable, you know, making a decision on this tonight. Um,
and I think that maybe the peer review may be a good idea or I'm curious what other do we have any other opinions from members of the commission. Eddie, I just want to say that I agree with
you, uh, Madam Chair. I don't think this is, uh, prudent to vote on this in the middle of the drought. Thank you, Teddy Mary. Yeah, I would be aligned with D. I mean, I I don't we don't often go against
them. I mean, I don't recall us going against their advice, so I would be inclined to um align with D. Okay. So, um we have a couple of options. Oh, was
that had my hand raised? Yeah. Um Miranda PTO again. Uh I agree at this point. What I'm We need four photographs within a year, 365 days. So between now
and July 3rd, all we need is one more photo and then we'll get that next May. Uh at that point, we can refile. So if it's up, it's up to Tanner whether or not he wants to withdraw at this point to avoid having to have a vote at this
point. Let's get a fourth picture. That's my recommendation. Thank you, Maryanne. You're welcome. Um Mike, you have your hand up. Uh yes, Madam Chair. I was just going to concur with my other colleagues. Sounds
like uh it might be prudent to wait um and go along with the D recommendations. Thank you, Mike. Um Mr. poll. How are you do you feel like you may want to
withdraw your application or would you prefer that we um either I mean I think that are most likely we would be looking at either recommending a peer review or a negative determination. Oh, Jenny positive.
I think you mean a positive determination. A positive determination. Yes. Sorry. Thank you. A is the peer review going to make any meaningful difference? I mean, I'm not
opposed to doing peer review, but if the peer review is going to end up at the same determination, then I don't see much value in that. I I think everybody's
looking at D's comments and saying we were 12 hours behind schedule and we're we're cooked either way. You know, regardless, even if peer review came back and agreed with the information that's presented, I think the default
will be, well, pictures on a August 1st don't count, so you're done. And if that's the case, then I guess we just withdraw and we'll all go through this all over again next year. Okay. So, are you are you saying that
you'd like to withdraw the application? No, I'm asking to get the commission's opinion on what peer review looks like. If if somebody could say, geez, if we do the peer review and it comes back that it's aligns with everything you've said,
then we would be more support or to say the peer review will look at what we submitted which is one of the photographs is not valid. Therefore, we need a fourth photograph. They will come
up with the same determination that D has said as so your best bet would be. Thank you, Maryanne. You're welcome. Mary, you had your hand up. Well, I was going to kind of say the same thing. Um, and I, you know, even if
they went out on site during a drought, I'm not certain what different conclusion they could come back with. And I, you know, um, would want Tanner to have the opportunity of investing his money, um, you know, if he's going to do it, uh, for peer review with some chance
of getting some type of, um, you know, uh, benefit out of it. Thank you, Mary. Agree. So with that information, Tanner, um, what are you thinking?
Oh, are you you're muted. Are you saying anything? Maybe accidentally hit it. I'd like to withdraw. Okay. All right. Um, thank you so much and we will I'm sure we'll see you again soon
or in a couple months. Thank you all. Appreciate your time. Good night. Thank you, Maryanne. Have a good night both of you. Okay, let me just make a couple notes. So we are going to only one new hearing tonight and move on to continued public
hearings. Um we pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40 in the town of Lunenburgg wetlands protection and municipal bylaws. We have a public hearing on a notice of intent by Hanner Cole for construction of a common driveway to service four single family dwellings to
be served by private wells and an on-site sew and on-site sewage disposal systems involving the crossing of a bordering vegetated wetland in two locations with all proposed dwellings and private driveways outside the 100 foot buffer zone.
Uh I see Greg Roy is on the call. Yes, Madam Chair. I'm Greg Roy with Dillson Roy. I'm representing uh the applicant which is also Tener Cole this evening. So, I I'm not even sure I need to share
my screen here. I think we have a fairly straightforward um process here. Um, two weeks ago we presented revised plans based on um the comments that we received from Art uh
with Ecotech and he essentially agreed with all of our um changes except for three comments and I'll just I'll just highlight those and we we did issue a revised letter with a revised plan but it really was
just a note. It was sort of a scribner's error, if you will. Um, so there were three comments. One was we needed to revise a note on the plan. We showed three culverts like he asked, but the note only called for two. So, we updated
the plan to make sure that we uh we we we were um calling for the three culverts that are proposed as he requested. Um and then he also asked that um oversight of the wetland replacement
area construction with seasonal monitoring for a minimum of two years be provided uh by a qualified wetland scientist. We we have no um dispute with that. So we we uh we agree with that uh as a condition. Uh
so that's more um for the commission's use in if you were to approve uh you could issue that as a condition. And then um he asked that the notice of intent form be up updated to reflect the updated impacts and we have done that and we and
we uh forward that to the commission. Um so that's it. Um, no real significant plan changes um, between now and uh, between two weeks ago and and now. Just an essentially a note on the plan. Um,
that was sort of a scrier's error. We forgot to update a note. We we put the three culverts in, but we forgot to change the note that said two to three. So that that sort of all that that changed on the plan. Okay. Thank you. And that's it.
Do you have a note here? I I did get sorry I ju just to follow up Art I think we uploaded it to the portal but Art did uh review a revised submitt and he did say that there was no further comments. U so I think we're in good shape at this point.
So um the message from him says all the outstanding comments from my 918 2025 peer reviewview findings and recommendations letter have now been adequately addressed and I have no further comments and that's from Art Allen. Yeah, thank you.
That's it. Thank you, Greg. Um, okay. Do we have any questions from members of the commission? Mary, oh, you're muted. That means uh you couldn't hear me.
Yeah. So, I don't have any questions. I just wanted to make a comment that I I think um we do have uh replication areas um on this plan. So, I think as a special condition, we want to make certain we have the two-year monitoring um added. Yes,
absolutely. You know, I I should have asked before I start I meant to do this. I think I know the answer to this question, but I want to make sure there's four members that are uh that are available to vote for this.
I think I think that Mike, Jenny, Mary, and Rich can all vote on this, but I just want to make sure that's the case. Okay, I think I can. I definitely can. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. I'm sorry. I meant to say that before I started.
Well, it's a fair it's a fair question. Uh Greg, thanks for keeping us honest there. Well, and but yeah, it's keeping you honest, but it's also keeping the applicant honest. We don't want to uh submit testimony if we don't have um you know a quorum a voting quorum. So
thank you. Sorry. And I just want to um do we have any other questions from members of the commission? Does not appear. So, I'm just pulling up the um the the recommendations for from
the DP and art just to make sure we have all the any conditions or That was from the last meeting. Okay. Okay. So,
um my notes are Mary asked for the replication ratio. So, that's 1 to six 1.6 to1. Yeah. And then since there's replication, it'll be two-year monitoring requirement, updated plan. Um,
okay. So, looks like the special condition that we would have is the two-year monitoring requirement. Okay. Um, I think I would be looking for a motion
to approve with a special condition of 2-year monitoring on the wetland application. So moved. Second. Mike. Okay, that's Mary with the motion and
Mike with the second. Roll call vote. Mike Larouche I. Mary Wilson I Richard Burch I and I for myself. That is a motion to pass. Um because Andrea and Teddy cannot
vote on this one. Great. Thank you very much. We appreciate it. Thanks, Greg. Hey, have a good night. Could I give the commission a quick update before I sign off? Sure. I promise it'll only be 60 seconds.
That's fine. I think your time. I wanted to say that I filed a notice of intent for chaplain. Okay. As I said, that's 199, right? No. Yes. 199 Massav as I said I would in my letter to you, which you may or may not have read already.
I did. Okay. Um and we had a little bit of a snafu here internally and I apologize. Um we haven't paid the uh local fee yet. So that's the only reason we're not on your agenda this evening. But the
application is in um and we're working to get that that the local application fee to move the open gov process forward. So I I wanted to just say that we're not ignoring you. We did file as we said we would. Um we're just we're
working through the open gov process and I apologize for the uh for the delay on that. So um I I just wanted to uh give you that update. Thank you. Um, and I appreciate that you had sent us a letter about it too and kept us. Yeah. And and I want to make sure that every that the commission knows that
this is not the fault of the applicant of the owners. Uh, they hired me very quickly after they got your first note. Okay. Uh, this is really a um uh the fact that it took so long to get here is really a uh um a product of the fact
that uh all of the consulting civil engineers are very busy. So, I really apologize. It's on me. It's not on, uh, Mark and Mike Chaplain. Okay. So, uh, I am working to resolve the issue to get on your agenda as soon as
possible. So, I just want to make sure you knew that. Okay. Thank you so much, Greg. You bet. Okay. So, um, we are going to move on to, um, where was I? Pursuant to MGL chapter 131
section 40 and the town of Lunenberg wetlands protection and municipal bylaws, a public hearing on a notice of intent by the town of Lunenburgg DPW for the replacement of a deteriorated culvert at the Northfields Road crossing over Mulpusbrook at 763 Northfield Road.
Do we have the applicant? Oh, actually, you know what? I have a note. I believe that they asked to continue. Let me just check and make sure I'm not. Yep, they requested to continue. Um, so I would be looking
for a motion to continue to our next meeting date which is October 15, 2025. Do I have a motion? So moved. Second. Is that Richard? Okay. I have Mary with
the motion and Richard with the second. Um, roll call vote. Mike LaRouche. I Mary Wilson. I Richard Burch. I Andrew Bernap. I Teddy Dette.
Hi. And I for myself um continued to October 15th, 2025 at 700 p.m. Okay. Um, up next we have administrative
determinations and we have 39 island road a request to remove one dead tree in the front yard. Do we have the resident with us tonight? I don't see them on. Okay,
Madam Chair. Okay. So I do have notes from the um from our administrator and this what her notes what Herllin's notes are the subject tree is a large conifer located in the front yard tree shows no
live foliage and appears dead with extensive loss of needles and branches. The proposed tree removal will not inflict impact wetland resource areas and her conditions are all work shall be conducted from the upland yard side with no equipment or debris allowed within 50
ft of wetlands. Stump may remain in place if ground chips must be removed from site and not placed near wetlands. Any change in scope, additional tree removal or land alteration requires further conservation review. Um, does anyone have any questions on that?
Madame Chair, I I noticed that um our administrator and andor the applicant had a diagram that showed the um tree 65 ft from the wetland. Uh it was uploaded into open go. Would you like me to share my screen and show that or would you like to share
your screen? Uh no, I I looked at it earlier. I don't have it up right now, but I just wanted to say that for the benefit of the commission. Okay. Would anyone on the commission like to see that? doesn't appear. So, Madam Chair, if you're ready to accept
motions, I would be inclined to move to accept the administrator's uh recommendation to permit the um proposed tree removal with the conditions as uh you read to us and proposed by the administrator.
I would accept that motion. Do I have a second? Second. Is that Richard? Mike. Oh, Mike. Okay. All right. Mary with the motion and Mike with the second. Um, roll call vote. Mike Rouche. I. Mary Wilson. I.
Richard Bers. I. Andrea Bernett. I. Petty Det. I. And I for myself. Um, so that is a motion to approve.
Up. Next we have with the conditions as stated by the administrator. Up next we have 19 Cliff View Road Paris. Um do we have the applicant on the call
tonight? Does not appear that we do. Um our administrator notes are several midsized trees were observed in close proximity to the residents. These trees lean over the house and are in direct conflict with the stone retaining wall and entry steps. The roots of the tree if
displaced to damage the stone retaining wall, compromising its structural integrity interference with the entry steps was also observed. The applicant confirmed that the stumps will be left in place after removal thereby minimizing ground disturbance. Um recommended conditions are all stumps
are to remain in place. No stump grinding or excavation is per permitted. Equipment shall remain on upland disturbed areas to avoid additional impacts within buffer zone. All debris shall be properly removed from the site and not deposited in any wetland or
buffer zone. Any additional tree removals not marked or proposed must be submitted separately for review. Do we have any questions notes? And then also um let me just open
up open to see if there's anything interesting in there. Madam Chair, I noted from the uh administrators uh diagram that the uh trees were 75 to 100 ft from the
wetland. Okay, great. Thank you, Mary. Okay, so um are we looking for a motion to approve? I would uh make a motion to accept the uh administrator's
recommendation to allow the uh tree removal uh with all the conditions as uh recommended by the administrator that you read to us here. Okay. Thank you, Mary. Do I have a second? Second, Mike. All right. Uh Mary with the motion. Mike
with the second. Roll call vote. Mike Larouche. I. Mary Wilson. I. Richard Burch I Andrea Bernap I Eddie Duset I and I for myself. Okay. Um approved with
accepted with the uh conditions as the administrator recommended. Next we have 135 Glen Road. And do we have the applicant on the call? Uh yes you do.
Okay. Uh can you say your name and your address, please? Um Louise Tat, 135 Flynn Road with Thank you. And we have a request to replace a deteriorating deck. Deteriorating deck and using same footprint. I am having struggling
reading tonight. Okay. So, um, is there anything that you would like to share with us? I don't believe so. I mean, I think the administrators has been out here and her recommendations,
you know, are all acceptable to us. No problem. Okay. So from our administrator um we have the existing structure consists of a raised deck attached to the dwelling supported by timber framing and posts. The framing and stairway show signs of deterioration consistent with long-term
use and exposure. The project area is within a previously disturbed footprint immediately adjacent to the dwelling. No new expansion of the deck footprint or increase in impervious area is proposed. No excavation, grading or filling beyond the removal, replacement of existing footings and deck elements is planned.
The work will not encroach further into resource areas beyond the existing conditions and her recommended condition is replacement in kind with no expansion of footprint or additional alteration of resource areas. Um do we have any questions
from members of the commission? Oh Mary is your hand raised. Um, so I I just threw you wanted to ask if the um applicants understand what the resource area is. Oh,
that's a good question. And if you don't, that's okay. Yeah, we would want to explain it to you so you walk out with clear understanding. You mean how close the water it is to the water? Yeah. Yeah, we're aware. Okay. And and so then you're aware of
the 30-foot do not disturb uh zone, correct? Okay. Okay. That answers my question. Madam Chair, we don't have a choice. I mean, it's it's there already. So, no, it wasn't a push back on the um on
your application or anything. I just sometimes, you know, here at the commission, we talk in terminology that we're familiar with and um and residents aren't familiar with it. And so I would hate for you to walk out not understanding what we had, you know, had said about, you know, you're not allowed
to encroach in the resource area. That's all. Okay. Thank you, Mary. That was a a good question. Thank you. Um, yeah. And I can just for good measure, I'm going to just gonna
pop up. Why is my Zoom being crazy tonight? Zoom has ghosts tonight. It's being like it's out of its mind tonight. It's just popping over. I think I heard a a question, Madam Chair, from uh Commissioner Burch.
Oh, yeah. Madam Chair, do you are we using the existing footings or are we digging in and putting new footings in? So there was um let me check the notes and
then I will also if the applicant would like to answer that question while I look at the so no excavation grading or filling beyond the replacement removal replacement of existing footings. So they that they do plan to replace the
footings. I got I got it's Louise. I got an additional um email. I questioned whether or not they were going to use the existing ones or just for clarification and they said that if they can they will use them.
Um but if for some reason they can't then they will have to replace them with new sonnet tubes. So, I do have a picture of the existing structure up on the screen right now for a visual reference.
And then let me see if there are any. We get one of the end. Yeah, because technically if there's any excavation, uh, they should be filing an RDA at the minimum.
I'm sorry. What was that? If we have to replace I think I'm not sure. What um what I had understood Commissioner Bur to say is that technically if there's any excavation at all like um new footings um that would uh drive a different application than an
administrative uh application. It would drive um what we call u an RDA or request for determination. Okay. Well, I'll have to have the um the contractor looked at it then. And um Madame Chair, if that's the
direction that we go in, uh is there a way to um eliminate the um applicants having to pay twice or at least credit uh what they've already paid for? Yeah, I think that would be a reasonable request.
So, okay, I'm confused now. So, that means this application does that mean that this application is just not what we needed? Um, possibly. So, uh, what Commissioner
Bur is stating is that because if there is a possibility, if you are definitely going to excavate for new footings, this should have come in as a request for a determination of applicability and it came in as a conservation
administrative determination. Um, so if you were, so say we were to continue and you were to talk to your um, contractor and they were to say, "No, we definitely don't need to redo the footings," then you would come back and it would still be an administrative
determination. If you were to talk to your contractor and he were to say, you know what, we definitely need to excavate out these footings, then we would ask that it come back as an RDA, which is the request for determination of applicability. Okay.
Because of the way that it would impact do we just continue this then until I get Yes, I think that's going to be our best bet. And then as Mary requests, as Mary um brought up, we can take your your fee that you paid for this application and
put it toward the next application so you don't have to pay a second fee. I appreciate that. Oh, thank you for that um statement, Mary, or that request. Yeah. I'm not Madam Chair, I just want to say
I'm not so familiar with the fee structure. I'm just not actively involved in that end of it. I I don't know if it's more expensive for an RDA and it might be. So the you know the uh request for administrative determination
even if we credit it it might not fully cover the cost. I just want to say that out loud. Yeah. And that's why we say we credit it. So it would go toward whatever the the correct fee is. So my next question is do I do an RDA before I do a building permit?
Well, I think that your best bet would be to speak to your contractor and see if you can figure out if you if if you definitely don't need new footings, come back, continue the application as is. Okay? And if there if you do need new footings
and there will be excavation, then do the RDA. Come back and would the recommendation be to just file the RDA at that point rather than come back? I think that would be your best bet. Um, you know, let our administrator
know that you would like to refile as an RDA. Okay. Um, and then our office can Okay. Did you file this yourself in open gov? Yes, I did. Okay. So then it would be a very similar
process. Um, Mary, you have your I know what the RDA is. Yeah, I I walked through it and it's not hard until you get to the last page. Okay. So, you looked at the because it's asking for 8 million other kinds of forms. So, um that's true. Let
me call my contractor first before I I get all upset. I'm gonna ask. Okay, Mary, you have your hand raised. I think the applicant may have had another question. Uh I'm I have a question. And yeah,
can we can we basically ask to uh revisit this issue rather than having a refile it? Can we say either we want to withdraw it or we want to continue it at a later date? Yes. So what we'll do now um as you know
this would be my recommendation we'll start with to the commission is I would say we would continue to our next meeting. Yep. Um, and then that would give you some time to figure out what your next steps are. Okay? That way you don't you still your application is still here. It's still in
process. And then maybe you come back at the next meeting and say, "We're not going to excavate." And then we just continue down the path that we're on right now. Okay. Very good. We can do that. I appreciate the uh the direction. Thank you for being understanding.
I'm just trying to do it right the same way you are. Yes. I appreciate that. Thank you. Um Mary, Madam Chair, yeah, I I if you would consider a recommendation, it might be useful to find out if the um ad um the commissioners would be inclined to
approve the the administrative determination. If uh you know, the contractor is able to confirm the um footings uh you know, won't have to be replaced. uh it just just to know if there's any any other opposition or
questions or concerns about this application like a straw poll or something like that. Okay. Yeah, good idea. Thank you, Mary. Um All right. So, if the for my fellow commissioners, if the contractor comes back and says we do not need to do any
excavation, um the structure will go in place in the exact footprint that it is now, uh using the same footings. Um, what would you think about that, Mike Larouche? I would approve that. Thank you, Mary. I would approve that,
Richard. Uh, you know, I would ask for some um either erosion protection or a silk fence at the edge of construction just to keep construction materials out of the lake.
That's what I've seen with the diagrams. It looks like it's fairly close within 20 feet or so from the edge of the water. Is that correct? I think it's 22 feet. Yeah. So, I mean it it proximity to the the lake should uh warrant some
protection to keep the construction materials out of the lake. I think that was also part of the uh considerations from the administrator that we have the uh the round bales
are those on any of the attachments that were um submitted to open gov I didn't happen to see any silk fence call outs in any of the diagrams yeah and I'm not seeing it in her notes but It's a great recommendation though.
That is a very good recommendation. Thank you, Rich. Madame Chair. Yes, Mike. Um, I guess I've always made the assumption that that uh that's should always be a
given when a project is being considered. Uh, I guess there it isn't and I wish it were. um because it seems as if we seem to always remind the
applicant that um that we'd like to add that to the project. Uh but yeah, this is something I would like to kind of work through in our workflow process where as before it even gets to
the meeting that stuff is sorted out. Um, so you know, erosion controls are on the plans, stockpiles are on the plans, all of that stuff. So that will be part of our administrative process before it even before a hearing is even on an
agenda because technically the packets the the meeting packet is not really complete until all of that stuff is done. So, but we are, you know, we're I think we're doing pretty well considering what we have in our office right now, which is very part-time. So, those are things that I'm hoping to get
done in the future and I know they are working on it and trying to get those things in place. Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, thank you. That is a good um observation, Mike. Thank you. Okay, Rich, do you have any other recommendations
that you would make for this? That's the biggest one that I see at least at this stage. Um, if like I said, if they're going to be doing any sort of excavation, it certainly should be an RDA. And okay,
and honestly, any construction in the 30 foot no touch zone should always be at least um submitted as an RDA. Okay. Yeah, I think thank you for that, Rich. Okay, Andrea. Um, is there anything that
you would like to see or add if they were to come back or would this be I would agree with um Rich's comments. I would like to see the addition of the um the silt barrier and I don't know if that's is that
something that can be requested on a CA cad? Yep. So, in the diagram that they give us, they can put it on a diagram. Yeah, I would approve in that case and put it in writing or something. Okay. Awesome. Thank you, Andrea.
And Teddy, would you like to add anything or um I concur with my fellow commissioners? Okay. Okay. So, um Louise, yes.
Well, what we would do is I think I'm going to look for a motion to continue to the next meeting. You can check with your contractor. Yes. And if when you come back um we would be looking for erosion controls on a diagram also. Okay.
Okay. So, gotcha. We are I mean we actually discussed that with um with the administrator and she even told me where to you know where to make sure they went. So, yeah. Okay. Yeah. So, we just like to see it in writing too because that keeps
everybody honest. No problem. No problem. Okay. So, at this point, I'd be looking for a motion to continue to our October 15th meeting. So, moved. Second. That is Mary with the motion and Mike
with the second and a roll call vote. Mike LaRouche. I. Mary Wilson. I. Richard Bers. I. Andrea Bernett. I. Eddie Ducet. I. and I for myself. So, um so we
continue to October 15th and if anything changes in between now and then if you find out that you're going to have to excavate, then um you know, withdraw this application and refile it. Can I just Can I just Can I just call Michael to do that?
Yep. You can call him or send him an email. Okay. All right. I appreciate the help. Thank you very much. All right. Thank you so much. Have a good night. You too. Bye. Bye. Bye. Okay, up next we have 77 Peninsula Road
or Drive request for a removable dock on Hickory Hills Lake with no permanent not permanent not permanent footings. That threw me off a little bit. Okay. Um, do we have the applicant on the Yes,
okay. Can you just state your name and your address for me? Bob Nlli, 77 Peninsula Drive in Lunberg. Okay. Um, do you have anything you'd like to share with us about? No. Um, nothing special. I know there's
a bunch of these removable docks on the lake. I was told I needed to go through this even though it wasn't a permanent structure. So, that's why I'm submitted the application. Okay, great. Well, we appreciate that you were doing it the right way. Let's
see. I'm going to pull up um see what we have in here for attachments. Did you attach any pictures of the dock that you're throwing to put in or um I did not cuz I haven't bought the dock yet with pending approval.
Okay. So, I do see I have a picture of your boat sitting here with what it looks like. Um, so let me just share this so we can get a a little picture of where this dock will be going. So,
um, this I'm guessing is your backyard or front yard depending on how you refer to it. And, um, so this is your boat. And then would the dock be going somewhere where this boat is now? almost exactly where that boat is now.
Going straight out. Okay. And it is um let me pull up my notes. So, does anybody have any questions on this while I have this picture up?
Uh why is this not an IDA application? Um, when I called the when I called city hall and I spoke with Hold on, Mike. Michael Michael Gail, he said that this one is the one I needed to submit.
I believe he was mistaken docs or RDAs where it's an intrusion into the actual wetlands. Let me let me go. U Madam Chair, let me go quickly look up in the um in the bylaws about that because there there is some uh
there is some language about what's allowed in a um Yeah. So this wouldn't be like a minor Yeah. What's allowed under administrative determination and I have that page get there quickly of this but I don't
Yeah. This is clearly a decision of the conservation commission and it has to be done with an official application of of determination by the um administrator is not a formal
request for the conservation commission. I I skew toward what Richard is saying because he is the most seasoned of us. Well, then he tends to be very spot on about the regulations. He does tend to be very spot on about these things. Yeah. Yeah. Um,
so I'm not looking it up because I doubt him more. I'm looking it up because I if I read it, I'll remember it better. Yeah. Well, I'll remember it after this. Okay. So, um what uh an agent may make a decision on
the following types of projects. And this is section 4.2.1 in our uh in our uh local um town wetland protection regulation. And so the list um the list of projects is uh top dressing
plantings, fence fence repair only, so not insulation, new wells over 50 ft, septic test holes, removal of dead trees and limming of trees to ensure crown remains. And that is the end of the list. Okay. So
So once again, we have proven rich correct. Yeah, which we do a lot. Um, okay. So, thank you very much for that, Rich. So, um, our administrator is from another town which has, uh, she's our interim
administrator and she's fantastic. She's from another town. So, I think our in our office person is very new. So, they are learning. So, I will make sure that they know that moving forward that these types of requests and actually just know that what the list that Mary just read
off is what they should be looking at for administrative determinations and anything over that should be an RDA. So, thank you for both of these, Richard. Um, so Mr. Nolli,
uh, we're going to have to ask you to, uh, refile this as an RDA. And I think that we could, um, do the same thing that we did for the last applicant, which would be credit that application fee from the administrative
determination to the RDA fee. Okay. The RDA, is that the one that's like eight, nine pages long online? Yeah, unfortunately. Yes. Okay, because I I started with that one only because I was searching around on
the website and it was asking me, you know, items like, you know, page number on um your book and your book and all that stuff. And that's when I when I spoke with Michael, I guess because he's new, he says, "No, that's for like developers and stuff like this."
So where where would like a regular person get all this information? Is that available on the town of Lindberg website in order to fill in the app the already? Yeah, the well the book number and all of that is it's available on the registry of deeds website. I
don't I mean is the I guess would we consider the application complete if those things aren't there or would we be hoping that the admin the administrators can help people with that or because that I think it's I think it's actually on
the form as something you can't get past to the next page until you fill it in. Okay. Yeah, I believe you can get that on the assessor's page as well because it's just the um where the registry of deeds
holds the deed to your property. So verify that you are the owner. We would need to verify the deed. So possibly um I'd have to look at the application. I have only looked at the NOI application, but maybe we could
throw a link in there to where people could find that information. or put it in the instructions. Um, and make that a little bit more user friendly because we, you know, we don't want you to have to be an engineer in order to fill out an application,
but we also want all of the information that we need in order to process an application. So, okay. Um, the only thing I'll ask then is is is there a anything you're aware of I need to do a little different on this form so that the administrator doesn't have to recome out to my place
to look at the same thing or is it just going to trigger her lean to come back out again when I submit the the new RDA form? Um, I don't think so. She'll she'll remember that she was at your property. She'll probably put notes in open gov for you to read and it will say um you
know she's already been out there. We may come out there as a commission to look at it. We may not. It would depend on um what our schedules look like. Sometimes we do go out and look at RDAs. But yeah, there's nothing there's she'll
she'll decide if she I I'm guessing that she probably won't want to go back out there because she's been out there and she already has notes. All righty. I'll um I'll start the RDA process tomorrow. Okay. Thank you so much and thank you for understanding.
Okay. All right, have a good night. Take care. Thank you. Okay. Um, we do have um I did receive some extra notes from Herin. Let me um
I have Dustin Powell on the call and I just want to check in with you and see what property you're here for or if you're just listening in. I'm on for uh 41 and 47 Reservoir Road in the whole auditor request.
Yeah. So, you were left off of the agenda by accident, but Herlin did message me and let me know that she put her notes in open gov and where it's not a hearing. Um we can take a look at this. Okay. So, um, let me just pull up the
Are these in here as This is two separate applications, correct? Even though it's two different addresses. That's correct. All right. Oh, so we have Powstone and Gravel. Um, property owner Powstone and Gravel 133.
Okay. But it's at 41 Reservoir Road. Okay. That's the street next to it. Okay. Yeah. 40 41 and 40 47. Yep. Okay. So, so let's um let me find her notes.
All right. So, this is her certificate of compliance. I am going to Do you have anything that you'd like to share or would you prefer that I share my screen and just share what we have from our administrator? Um nothing I that I have to share. Yeah, if you could share your screen. Um yeah, that that'd be awesome. So,
okay. Okay. So, um this is a certificate of compliance and the comment is all work observed is within the scope of the approved order of conditions. The replication area and associated erosion controls have been
installed and stabilized. No outstanding work remains that would prevent issuance of a certificate of compliance. And this is a picture. And then we're gonna go through and open one million tabs because that is how
the same picture. Um, Open Gov likes to make things work. Okay. Do we have any questions from members of the commission while I
go through This does not appear that we do. Do we have what a motion? Madam chair, so looking at the pictures you showed, it looked like we had grass area on the
right side, but nothing in the rear and nothing on or on the left side. Nothing in the rear, nothing on the right side. Is that out of the um work area or why is that area is not stabilized? Is it not? It looks like is that not
grass there? Show it to us again, Madam Chair. The first picture you showed looked like the right side of the house. I didn't see any green. And then the back looked like a depression. And again, nothing green, but I don't know if that's
outside of the work area or not. Um, Mr. Powell, do you Were you about to say something? Yeah. Um, so basically, if you're Yeah. If you're looking at the house, um, the left side has grass and that's the side,
um, basically with the, uh, the closest like wetland buffer. Um and then in the back they basically just haven't um spread lom yet cuz they're planning on doing um just like like pavers back there. Um but it is out of the wetland buffer zone. Um so they were just
leaving it out so they could get access without damaging grass to go back there. Okay. Um and it will be um that yeah it's outside of it but that will be stabilized shortly. any um any ways too
but it is outside of it and do we happen to have the asbel plan um I am looking for that right now typically it is here yeah it's an open go yeah usually makes them is very good about making people get them in for a
certificate of compliance Okay. So we are where am I? Let's see. This is Is this the drive? Is this a driveway or is this the street?
But I'm sure you're not sure. Oh, hold on. Okay. So, we have a Yeah. So, that's the common driveway coming up. Um, so this is the driveway. Yep. And then
this is the property. That's correct. Yep. Okay. And then we have a wetland replication area. Is that for 47? That's for both 47 and 41 for the
driveway. So 41 is this is 41 right here that we're looking at. Yep. The top left. Why is it not there? And then where is 40? Wait, so
this was 47. Where is 41? Uh 47 is the far left or the top left. This one, right? Yep. And then where is 41? Is that on here too? Sorry, I maybe I misspoke that. The top left is 41 and the uh far top right is
47. Okay, so this is 47 here. Yep. And this is 41. So on the next certificate of compliance, we'd be looking at this one. That's So we have So when we're looking at all the
pictures that we have are from near the house. Do we have any pictures of the replication area? Did I miss that? I don't know if any have been submitted, but I do know that uh Marian Depinto um
with Three Oaks went out and looked at it and certified it. I'm just saying that it was built to plan. Okay, here we go. So um Brian Marquetti and for oaks which is Maryanne Depintoed
a site inspection of the replication area pres to be just under 1,00 ft. vegetation within their application areas 100% wetland species predominantly sges and rushes.
They have just begun to leave out which is there are some bear sports standing water. Let me know if I'm going too fast if anybody wants me to slow down. U
Madam Chair, what was the date of this? um report May 2nd, 2025. Okay, thank you. It's early. I wish uh you don't have any pictures of it over
the spring and summer. Um I Let me see. I might just from walking through. Madam Chair, I note that Hurland notes Herurlland's notes say that she did go and inspect the replication area and uh
her notes do say the replication area appears stable and vegetated. Okay, she did say that. Okay. Do we have any other questions
for members of the commission? Okay, that appears. So, do we have any motion? Um, I I do have a question. So, it sounds like they're still going to be doing work on the site. Um and and so I just want to make certain that that the
applicant understands they still have an obligation to ensure no sedimentation is escaping down to the wetland or to the buffer zone uh particularly a 30-foot buffer zone. That that's correct. Y it's yeah it's basically just around the
house and uh all the grades pitch back towards the house. Um so they they shouldn't have any um but we'll be very cautious either way. Um just with the final just spreading lom and just the uh pavers behind the house which are all
out of the buffer zones. Thank you. Do we have any other questions members of the commission? Um, Madam Chair, just as a comment, um, just looking at the, you know, elevation, uh, topography that's on the
asbuilt, I looks I like we, you know, my takeaway is that, um, all that Dustin just said is represented on the on the asbuilt. Okay. Thank you, Mary. Does anybody want me to pop that up on
the screen or I'll pop it back up just because we're going to be This is also the next address. We do have Okay.
Okay. So, do I have a motion? I would move to recom uh to accept the uh administrator's recommendation and approve. Okay. Thank you, Mary. Do I have a second? Second, Mike. Okay. Mary with the motion. Mike with
the second. Roll call vote. Mike Larouche. I. Mary Wilson. I. Richard Burch. You're muted. Hi. Thank you. Andrea Bernup. Hi.
Eddie Dad. Hi. and I for myself. So that is um a motion to approve and that is for uh 41 reservoir road for the certificate of compliance.
Okay. So now we will have to do them separately. Uh I'm pretty sure we have to do them separately. So I'm going to we're going to do them separately uh just to make sure we're covering all of our bases. So, up next we have 47 Reservoir Road.
That's correct. And u let me just pull up this application. Okay. And then so this is the house on the left side of the asbuilts. And I'm going to first let me just read
our administrator comments. I'm just going to put share my screen. Okay. So the first thing is all work observed is within the scope of approved OC. The replication area and associated erosion controls have been installed and stabilized. No outstanding
work remains that would prevent issue of a certificate of compliance. It is all Oh, wait. I'm back in 40. one for some reason. Oh, those pictures look familiar.
Clicked on this. Okay, here we go. I must have clicked on somehow. And here we go. Both lots have been developed with single family homes and driveways consistent with the approved plans. Pair driveway is in place with gravel and paved sections and is consistent with
the approved asbuilt plan. No evidence of additional disturbance beyond approved work limits was observed. Lawn areas have been established around the homes and plantings adjacent to the structures are in place. Vegetative stabilization is sufficient with no signs of erosion or sediment transport. The approved limit of work adjacent to
wetland resource areas and the designated wetland replication area were inspected. Replication area appears stable and vegetated. No encroachment into wetland resource areas was noted. All work observed is within scope of the approved OC. So this is um
picture. We have another picture. Another picture. That was built. Do we have any questions from members of the commission? It's not appear that we do. Do we have any?
Yes. I would make a recommendation to approve uh consistent with the uh administrator's recommendation. Thank you, Mary. We have a second. Second, Mike. Thank you, Mike. Um, all right. Roll call vote. Mike LaRouche,
I. Mary Wilson, I. Richard Bers, I. Andrea Bernap, I det I. And I for myself. Um, so that is an
approved or certificate of compliance for 47 Reservoir Road. Awesome. Thank you. Have a good night. Good night. Thanks, too. All right. So, we don't have anyone else on the call, but we do have one other um
address that Herlin had sent me that she had not put on the meeting minutes, and that is 32 Pine Grove. And they have a also have a certificate of compliance that she has recommendations
in open gov. I'm going to pop that up on the screen. All right. So, we have Oh, we have messages from Sophie on here. And let me see. Maybe she didn't put her notes in open. Let me see what she sent
me. 72. Oh, this is 24-26. Not seeing any new movement on this one. Let me see if they refiled. 24-26. I don't know why some properties here we
go. Have two records and everything is kind of split up between a couple of records. We have to look at merging these. Okay, so site inspection for full compliance. Um the property at 32 Pine Grove Road is
well stabilized and landscaped. Lawns and perennial plantings are established around the residence with no evidence of exposed soils or erosion. Stonework and plantings appear stable and functioning as intended. The lakefront and patio areas are in accordance with the approved plans. No evidence of
unpermitted structures, spills, or alterations within resource areas was observed. No erosion, sedimentation, or drainage concerns were noted. site is stable and there's no indication of runoff toward the resource area beyond what was anticipated in the design.
So we have some pictures the right one. Nope, that's not it. Isn't it? [Music] Okay.
And this is the original plan as built. Okay. So, do we have any questions for members of the commission? Okay. Do we have any
motions, recommendations? Madam Chair, I would uh make a motion to approve consistent with the uh administrator's recommendation. Thank you, Mary. Is there a second? Second, Mike. Okay, that's Mary with the motion and
Mike with the second. Uh roll call vote. Mary Wilson, I. Mike Larouche, I. Richard Burch, I. Andrea Bernett, I det I.
I for myself that a motion to approve certificate of compliance for 32 Pine Grove. Okay. Um we also have certificate of compliance for 155 Reservoir Road.
We just close some of these tabs. Did we We didn't already hear Reservoir Road, right? I'm not losing. That was another Reservoir Road. That was a different one. Yeah, my brain is just a little
I guess tired today. Okay, so um 155 Reservoir Road. I do believe that there are notes on this one in the meeting. Sitewalk completed on Friday 9:12. No asbuilt submitted but was able to use plan approved under order of conditions.
No further encroachment or deviation from plan was noted. So let me open up this application. Oh, where did my go there? And my body feels like it's like 11:00 right now. This is I'm way too tired for
8:30. All right. Um looking for looks like those might be her only notes. and see if there's any
share my screen. I'm not really seeing anything exciting in here, though. Let's see. This is the requests to WPA to the DDP.
Madam chair, what was the project that's so this is the order of conditions. Um, this does not have text to it other than the order. I guess it might not be an open gov. We might need to go to because she said
that the asbuilt is not here. Let me see. Did I miss anything in attachments? Madam Chair, if I may, because I I still had the local uh municipal regulation up
um in my browser. Uh a certificate of compliance uh requires a uh asbuilt to be signed and stamped by professional land surveyor or engineer. Okay. So, and then this is I think
Herlin went and grabbed the asu from uh what she said was she was able to use the plan that was approved under the original OC. Okay. Yep. Okay. So, are you recommending that we
continue this and request an certificate of compliance? We're not allowed to continue it. Yeah. Um the process is that we would have to reject it and notify the uh applicant that they're required to provide an asbuilt drawing. Okay. So would you like to make a motion
to deny? I would make a I would make a motion to deny um and uh that uh Herurland notify the applicant uh that an asbuilt drawing is required. A stamped um asbuilt drawing is required. Um
okay. All right. Do we have a second? Second. Mike. Okay. Mary with the motion. Mike with the second uh or with a motion to deny with a and then for administrator to request an
asbuilt when they file. Um Mary Wilson I. Mike Larouche I. Richard Ferish. Hi, Andrea Bernard. Hi, Teddy Det. I
and I for myself. Okay, that um application had been denied. Okay. So, uh, up next, we do not have any updates on violations except for 199 Massab,
which Greg has already updated us on. Um, I need to check in with her, Lyn. I know she sent out letters. She had to resend them. I actually I just need to check in with her on that again.
Um, as far as Lena Greg is the only one who responded and and CCD me that I saw. Uh, new business. Do we have any conservation updates from anyone? Does not. Madam Chair, I have a I have a question.
It may be more appropriate for comments. I apologize if it is. Yeah. Um we've uh recently had a flurry of um volunteers working in our conservation areas. Yes. U which you know for which we are uh
tremendously uh grateful. Um, I I wondered if uh the commission may not, right, but the town might have some uh certificate of appreciation type of format that we could consider using and uh issuing to
some of these volunteers who have been working so hard. Yeah. Um yeah, that's a that's a great idea. I actually um and if you're talking specifically about Cowry, I I went out there this weekend because I wanted to take some pictures of the stuff that they did and I was going to
per your recommendation. Um submit to the select board that we, you know, appreciate them at a meeting and recognize um especially Josie and Chris for what they did at Cowry. Also, I
mean, Bob does so much work for And then we had uh rail systems. Yeah. Bob's been doing a tremendous amount of work in the uh conservation areas, multiple areas, right? And I I think he's probably racking up a number of, you know, hours uh a week, right?
And um and then we just had uh this year at least three different um boy scout eagle scout initiatives um that have uh made some uh improvements in in our conservation areas. So I think that's worthy of um acknowledging and um you
know when I was the chair uh it was kind of pulled in so many different directions that I wasn't as good as possibly I could have been in acknowledging all the volunteer efforts but I think it's an important thing to do and so if you know
the town has a um you know certificate uh of appreciation or something format we could use I'd be happy to you know ask Jen and and uh you know do some of the leg work to get those things um you
know in in front of you for approval or you know help iron out the workflow if it's helpful to you. Um anything is helpful to me, Mary. I appreciate that. Um yeah, let's um let's figure out how to move forward on that
because I do really want to do that. I think I I appreciate everything that volunteers do for us. named Bob. I mean, I I just I don't know what we do without Bob. And then I Bob's tremendous. Yeah. And Josie did a great, you know, just stepped right in uh when there were
those issues in the Calry and um and took on a lot and made it happen. Yeah. And it looks I went there this weekend and it's a huge difference um for the the trails are much clearer now. Um I saw some of the bridge that
they bid and uh yeah. It's really nice. So, I appreciate everything that everyone is doing to keep uh keep Lunenburgg having just a great great trail systems everywhere. We
have a very we're very lucky to have all the trail systems that we do. Coming from a town where I said we were out there this weekend and um I'm coming from Framingham was where I lived before I lived here. And if you went out to we had Callahan and Callahan was really it.
So it was everybody was there, you know, in Lunenburgg. I know we don't have as many people as Framingham, but there's so many trails to choose from in the area that they're just not as crowded because we just have a lot more open space. And that's because of you know what the conservation does commission
does to keep those trail systems um alive but also the volunteers that help with that stuff because without people like Bob we just wouldn't have the trail system and Mary and Chris and Josie we just wouldn't have and the Eagle Scouts
such vital trail systems like we do. So yeah, um, anything I can do to help you, Mary? Anything you need me to do? Um, anything I'll just put you on copy on the dialogue with Jen so she knows that it's something that's a result of, you know,
you and I talking and then, um, yeah, I'll I'll I'll reach out to you if there's anything that I need you to do, signatures or anything of the like. All right. Thank you. That's a great idea. I actually had that thought while I was
walking in some of our wonderful trails. We are It's amazing here. We really are so lucky to have one of the reasons we moved here and uh I still haven't even explored them all and I've lived here for two years now. Like exactly two years as of yesterday.
Um okay. So thank you so much for that Mary. Um, another conservation update which is I don't know if this belongs here. I was going to say I took 101 and 102 again
over the last two weeks for the math classes and I know Andrea and Teddy did too. We have um there's some more coming up. I know Michael sent out the signups for the MACC conference that's coming
up. So, if you didn't receive that or you missed it, there is a sheet that was sent out and you can choose what classes you want to take at the conference, which is all day on October 25th. Um, there are, uh, I know that I'm going to take the one about running meetings
effectively. Um, which I think will be very helpful. And then um there's there's one other I forget what it is, but definitely look for that. If you are interested in signing up and you missed that, let me know. I'll make sure you get that signup
sheet and let's get those in soon if you're planning on going. Um and that's all I have for conservation updates. Uh retaking 101 and 102 was really helpful for me. And then
um Andrea or Teddy, did you have anything you wanted to share that you learned in 101 or 102? And don't don't feel obligated to say anything. I'm not trying to call you out, but if you have anything that you'd like to share, I'd love to hear it.
Okay. Um All right. So moving on to old business conservation budget. Our budget is now intertwined with the land use department. Um so you know the things we have are the I still
need to figure out exactly how our budget works. I know we have our fee collection. Um this is you know kind of embarrassing that I'm not more up to date on this but I'm trying. Um we don't have any encroachment issues.
We don't do we have any grant updates? Um yeah, slight grant update. Uh the only active grant that we have right now is the one that was awarded uh in 2023. Um
uh it looks you know we the biggest part of the project we had three projects. The biggest part of the project was the Cry um you know trying to improve access uh off of uh Towns and Harbor Road. Uh and recall we have a if you can get to
it, we have a wonderful um you know uh accessible wheelchair accessible wildlife viewing platform back there. But the problem is nobody can get to it uh because the access road is in a state of such disrepair. And so the the grant
was uh going to allow us to do all the planning work to improve that um that roadway. And the uh the engineering firm that we hired has flagged, you know, a whole bunch of issues that are really going to take some time to try to
resolve. Um Bob was talking to the grant administrator uh Cynthia Nelson and she thought maybe we ought to try to um do a uh ask for an extension and uh uh Bob
was going to try to do that for us. I he sent sent me a note and he offered to do it because I've been really jammed up at at work. Um, and uh, yeah, so I I just sent him all the Well, I I resent him the the Dropbox
access where I have a lot of that documentation stored because he can't he he's not authorized to access stuff on uh, SharePoint. I probably ought to put it on SharePoint, too, just so we have it as part of our archive. Uh, so now that I've thought of it, I'll do that as
well. But anyway, that's that's what's going on. Um we're we're hopeful we'll get an extension granted because it's really going to take us um longer than through the end of the year. The grant is active through December 31st.
Um and the you know biggest portion of our um reimbursements would be with the second um or third and final um project. Okay. Yeah. Um, do is that do they
typically allow in extensions? Is that something that they have in the past very generously? Um, I uh had heard, you know, every time you apply for a grant and get actually approved for a grant, you have to go through a lot of grant administration
training. And in that training, they they over the past um four years that I've been managing grants, they've said that they've not been approving those as generously as they have in the past. Um but uh Cynthia Nelson, the grant
administrator, thought that there was decent chance we might get approved for an extension. Cross. Um thank you, Mary. um conservation land improvements. Do you have any
updates on that? I know we talked about the um work at Cry the last meeting. The uh Boy Scout uh the Eagle Scout uh
candidate that was doing the um Trail Head kiosk over at Reo uh sent a note this weekend saying that he had completed that. Oh, I don't think I got that. I haven't I haven't been by to see it. Well, you know, it's teenager. Um I was
going to go by and see it, right? And then forward the email to you, but I I haven't had a chance to go by and see it yet. Okay. Yeah. All right. Awesome. Um if I go by there, I'll try to go in and take a look, too.
I haven't I haven't really been to Raino. Um, it's not very very welldeveloped. We don't really have trails. The the uh candidate wanted to go and mark trails and whatnot for us and we don't really have any trails laid out in there. I did see that email.
Yeah. Okay. Thank you, Mary. Um Okay, so um up next we have Hollis Road. Um,
you think I'll skip over that one? Yes, I think I agree with that suggestion. And then committee reports. Um, master plan steering committee. Teddy, do you have anything you'd like to share? I know
um, our sheet is due. Is it the fourth that it's due? It was due on the first. I did submit it last week despite not being able to join the meeting. There there was an issue with the link and the zoom I I I don't know
that anybody who was trying to zoom in was able to get in. The the link was for like sometime in October, I think October 8th, but the meeting was last Wednesday. Um so I sent the the
chair our spreadsheet and I'm just glad we got it in on the deadline. Awesome. Okay. Yeah. Um I'm going to say that like things like that happening are things that happen. I'm sure that we've had that happen with our sometimes our
Zoom links are clickable, sometimes they're not. Um we're all just trying trying to do the best we can here. Um yeah, I think that we had that happen with Storm Water, too, because my husband likes to go in sometimes and watch the meetings because those are in
person and nobody lets him. sometimes. So, or he's in the wrong link or something from the agenda. So, it happens. Yeah. I'll be in person next week. So, hopefully I'll have more update for you the following week.
Oh, are you Does master plan meet twice a month? Yes. Okay. I thought it was once a month for some reason. Okay. That's a And um that's a lot of work. I really appreciate you, you know, stepping up and joining that committee also because I know, you know, between this and that
that's a lot and Yeah, happy to. Yeah, it's it's really it's great that you're doing that. Thank you. Um, open the space. Chris actually didn't make it. So, um I know he had said some interesting stuff last week
about uh how they're moving toward uh taking on some more stuff in open space. I'm curious to hear how that's going. Um storm water for myself. We have
um still been talking to another outside consultant about getting um a better road map for implementing a storm water utility um how to better socialize it to the town, some
messaging, and we are just kind of still working out the scope of that. And that's really the only update from storm water right now. Okay. Do we have any other communications
from members of the commission? We're all so quiet tonight. I feel like I don't know. I think I think it's just cuz it's October and it's cold out and I'm just tired. I think we're all tired. I'm just speaking for everybody. Okay.
Upcoming meeting is October 15, 2025 on Zoom. And with that, I think I would be looking for a motion to adjurnn, unless anybody has anything else they'd like to add.
Madam Chair, it's 8:56 p.m. and I make a motion to adjurnn. Okay. Motion accepted. Do I have a second? A second. Mike with a second. Okay. Roll call vote. Mike LaRouche. I.
Mary Wilson. Hi Richard Burch. Hi Andrea Bernout. Hi Eddie Dette. Hi. And I for myself. All right. Thank you so much everybody.
Have a great night. Good night. You too now. All right. Bye bye.