There it is. Okay. Uh, welcome to the Lunenburgg Conservation Commission meeting of Wednesday, July 1st, 2026. In accordance with the requirements of the open meeting law, I'll be starting at 7:02 p.m. In accordance with the requirements
of the open meeting law, please be advised that this meeting is being audio video recorded. The agenda lists all the topics which may be discussed at the meeting and those reasonably anticipated by the chair. Votes may be taken from these discussions. Not all items may be discussed and other items may be raised to the extent permitted by open meeting
law. Please be advised that the town of Lindenburg utilizes Zoom platform is host to its hybrid and remote meetings. That the Zoom platform utilizes AI technology known as AI companion to create a audio transcriptions of meetings to aid in the subsequent preparation of meeting minutes. and that AI companion is activated immediately
upon launching the Zoom application. You are hereby notified that this AI technology may capture audio prior to the start of the meeting and or following the conclusion of the meeting. Okay, I'm going to start with a roll call. Mike Larouche >> here.
>> Uh Andrea Bernat >> here. >> Eddie Dette >> here. >> Mary Wilson >> here. And I am here. I do not I don't believe that Rich will be here tonight,
but we do have a corn without him. Can we just get everybody pinned here? Okay, that's everyone. Let me pin I'm going to pin you to Har. Okay. Um we do not have any appointments tonight. Uh 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 this specific agenda item. Please address all comments to the chair. Do we have any public comment? It does not seem that we do.
Uh the pollinator habitat update. Mike, I'm going to pull up some pictures. you. I know that. Should I start with the award? >> Sure. >> Okay. All right. I'll start pulling that up and you can go over that
while I get my pictures up. Where are my pictures? There they are. Okay. Can everybody see my screen? Can you see the pictures? No, it stops from file explorer. Hold on. Let me get it to the
pictures. Okay. Can we see the pictures now? >> Can people see the pictures? >> Yes. >> Okay. I'm going start here. Oh, wait. No. Where is it? There it is.
All right. So, the pollinator habitat received an official citation um from the Massachusetts Senate that is that they got the 2026 community greening award. Do you want to say anything about that, Mike? It was held
at the uh New England Botanical Garden uh in West Boilston and it was a great event. Uh there was a wonderful speaker who who was a plant person and he was very excited about
telling us about the plants that he has um um managed to to be part of his repertoire. written a lot of books. However, um we were celebrated because of our endeavor at the pollinator
habitat and uh they were very excited that they have such a habitat so nearby their botanical garden. So, um, so there's, uh, that was the citation and
we we all six of us went and and and really had a great time. Uh, had a little time to see the botanical garden, but it was, you know, like a photo op. We'll be in some publication um, uh, commemorating this great day.
So, it was a lot of fun and um I certainly am proud to be uh uh a volunteer for this uh great group. They are wonderful. They're very uh passionate about u um you know growing
pol uh native plants that attract pollinators and uh so it's uh pretty exciting that we are the stewards of this great place. So that's all I have to say, but uh please come and see uh
the habitat if you have time. It's a great place. You had a tough day, take a little walk, look at the flowers, look at the pollinators, and suddenly most of your cares go away. Um so that's my recommendation for the summer.
>> Awesome. Yeah, that's it's so great that they were recognized and that's really awesome that that's something that's associated with the conservation commission. >> Yes. >> And the pollander habitat is at 123 Hollis Street, right? >> Road.
>> Road. I can now that I have it wrong, I'm always going to have it wrong, I feel. Um, and it's open to the public. >> It is. >> Uhhuh. Okay. So, these are some pollinators and plants that are at showy
at the habitat right now. This is a western honeybee on a common milkweed it looks like. >> And um that's a really beautiful picture. And then she labeled them for me this time.
>> Is so great as a photographer. and she says, "Oh, yeah. I can add the uh cuz I was getting them wrong or I was guessing and she says, "Oh, you don't need to guess. I'll let you know." So, she nice enough to do that for us. >> Usually, I have time before the meeting to look them up and label them correctly
before I show them. Okay. >> But I didn't have it last meeting. I was just like, "What's this one?" >> Uh large milkweed bug, which I've never even heard of on a milkweed blossom. That's very pretty. And I know what this is. This is the
monarch caterpillar. >> Yep. >> Will become a monarch butterfly. And uh plume moth. What? She is such an incredible photographer. Look at that. >> It is.
>> And this looks like a butterfly milkweed. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Oh, it says uh and then these photos are all taken by Jennifer Belt. Is it Busous or Buskeet? Do you know how she pronounces that? >> Uh I think the first one >> Buske.
>> Yes. >> So, thank you to her for those beautiful pictures. And again, that's the pollinator habitat which is a beautiful place to visit and it's at 123 Hollis Road. >> Yep. >> In Lunenburgg and it is open to the
public. um all you know end of spring, summer, beginning of fall long. All different things happening at all different times of year. Actually, it's open in the winter, too, right? It's just not not a lot to see, >> right? Less to see.
>> Yeah. Okay. Do you have anything else you'd like to say about the pollinator habitat, Mike? Uh we uh just replaced the um the lawnmower blade cuz it was no longer cutting. So we got a new blade thanks to
Chris Ruth and >> it's working fine. And so so we can keep our paths nice and clear and uh so it's a good thing. Water's going to be an issue. So, if anyone has some
extra time and want to help uh water uh this weekend uh because I don't see any rain inside, although we do have our big water uh containers uh we just have to get it to the plant and >> yeah,
>> um so there is a schedule. I'm not aware of what needs watering, but they do. So, if you were to just come over in the morning, I'm sure they would give you um some direction on what needs watering.
>> Awesome. Thank you, Mike. >> You're welcome. >> All right. Um minutes to approve. Uh has everyone had a chance to look over the meetings from June 3rd? I mean the minutes from June
3rd. All right. I got Andrea saying yes. I'll make a motion to approve. >> Okay. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Okay. That was Teddy with the motion. Mary with the second. It sounded like
>> that works. Yes. >> All right. Um, roll call vote. Andrea Bernout >> I. >> Teddy Ducet. >> I. >> Mary Wilson. >> I. >> Mike Larouche. >> I. >> And I for myself. All right. We also
have minutes from the last meeting which was June 17th, 2026. Has everyone had a chance to look at those? >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> Second. >> Okay. Um, roll call vote. Andrea Bernap >> I.
>> Teddy Dat >> I. >> Mary Wilson. >> I. >> Mike Larouche. >> I. >> And I for myself. Okay. Um, Herllin, is Michael gone now? Today,
yesterday was his last day, correct? But Michael has been gone for almost two weeks because he had pre-planned vacation. Um, so his last day was Tuesday, June 12th, if I'm the day after our meeting.
The I'm sorry, Thursday, like the 16th. If we met the 15th, then he left the day after. So that means that you're doing the minutes now. >> Um, not necessarily, but yes. >> Okay. >> There's some reorganization in our office happening. >> Okay. Um, I meant to stop in and say bye
to Michael before he was gone and I did not. >> I hope that the town can keep him in some way, shape or form because he would be he is a true asset. >> Yes, definitely. um so organized, so great at organization and processes and
yeah, he will be very missed. I meant to say something at the last meeting. Um okay. Uh new public hearings pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40 is amended in the town of Lunenburgg wetlands protection and municipal
bylaws. We have a notice of intent at 101 Horizon Island Road by Robert Wright for the construction of a new addition to an existing dwelling. Do we have the applicant or their representative? >> Uh Ryan Proctor, Dillis and Roy representing the applicant.
>> Okay. Um do we have sharing on Carolyn? >> I just sent a request. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> I don't get the request for some reasons. I think only Harland gets it. >> Yeah, he should be all set. >> I got it.
All right. Uh, can everyone see the screen? >> Almost. It says you've started sharing. There it is. >> Excellent. Uh, so thank you for your time tonight. Uh, Ryan Proctor, Dillis, and Rory. I'm here tonight representing the applicant, Robert Wright, and the project, the notice of intent at 101
Horizon Island Road. The project itself is the addition in addition to the existing single family dwelling. So the uh entirety of the lot uh just given the the nature of the property and the size of the lot is nearly entirely located
within the 100 foot buffer zone which is this outer orange line. And a portion of the existing house is located within the 50ft no build zone which is this inner dashed orange line. And then we have the 30ft uh no disturb zone which is uh this upper one here. Um, the lake is on the
top of the plan here. The proposed addition that we're proposing is outlined in this red outline. It's about 15 1/2 ft by 20 1/2 ft. And a a portion of the addition that we're proposing uh does encroach into the 50ft no disturb.
I'll I'll talk about that in just a moment. The addition itself and the location is largely within an impisting improved area. So underneath where we're proposing this addition, there is an existing uh stone step patio that exists
along a majority of where the addition will be. There's also a concrete apron along the foundation of the existing dwelling as well as an existing elevated deck which I've outlined here in brown. So the location of the addition uh as I mentioned is is within an improved area
uh under existing conditions. The encroachment area uh that we have sort of squared off here within the 50ft uh no build zone is is 64 square ft. To offset that further, we are proposing to remove a portion of the existing deck
again which is outlined in brown. So we're proposing to remove this entire section here. And the portion of that that we're removing from within the 50ft no build zone is about 118 ft. So we're providing it's almost a 2 to1 uh removal of that structure within the 50 for what
we're proposing. So 64 is what we're proposing and then we're posing to remove 118 ft of structure. And then with that we do increase the setback uh from the lake shoreline. So the setback from the existing edge of the water to the deck itself uh is is currently about
31 ft and we're proposing to uh back that up to about 41 ft to our corner. Um so we do increase that set back there. The existing deck would be we'd install a railing um just to define that edge uh because it does drop off there. Um other than that the addition itself will be on
a slab. It's a singlestory addition with cathedral seal uh ceilings. It will match the siding and the roof area of the existing house. And uh we do have it just squared off within an existing corner of the dwelling itself. Uh we have an erosion control barrier shown between the work and the lake in
this dashed line here. uh that's just upgraded of the 30 uh foot no disturb zone. So we're not proposing any work within the no disturb zone and we did receive a file number last week for the project. There were no technical review comments. So I think that's generally
it. I'm happy to take any questions. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh do we have any questions for members of the commission? >> Madam Chair, I have a question. I'm struggling to find my hand to raise. Um, so Ryan, the uh I just wanted to clarify
the um the deck and stairs to be removed and the square footage because when you were talking >> you highlighted uh the portion that's outside of the 50 um and then you said all of that's going away and it's 118 square feet. So is 118 square feet just
the part that was within the 50? >> That's correct. Yeah. So it ends up being there's more total being removed but the 118 is just within the 50. >> Okay. Thank you for that. >> You're welcome. >> I don't have any further questions at this time, Madam Chair.
>> Okay. Thank you. Um, do we have any other questions for members of the commission? Does not seem that we do. Do we have a motion? U Madam Chair, do you have photos? I didn't have an opportunity to
go on site. >> One photo that I took. Um but I realized it doesn't have the part of the deck that's getting taken away. Let me I was just checking. Harling, did you take photos of this? >> Yeah, I can pull those up if you'd like
me to from uh >> Yeah, that would be great. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I only was able to take two photos because when I was on site, they were um installing some solar panels and there was like um stairs, ladders, and just a bunch of people there at the same time.
So, I was able to take two pictures, but you can see a little bit of the existing deck from the pictures that I show. And then also the area where the proposed addition is going to be. >> I don't know if Ryan wants to put those up. >> Uh can you see them right now or do I need to restart? Uh, >> restart.
>> Okay. Yep. Okay. So, uh this is sort of the corner where the addition will come out. This is that uh stone patio walkway I was I was explaining. And then you can just see in this top portion. This is a portion of the deck that will be removed. the addition will come out um just just to the right of this door and
then square off back into the existing house. And then the uh second picture, this is that existing deck. So these stairs, I can go back to the plan if that would be helpful, but these stairs will remain, but the remaining portion of the deck heading back towards the house underneath this window that will
be removed and then we'll install a railing on this high side. So the addition is is kitty cornered um essentially underneath this window. Okay. >> If if you don't mind going back to the um drawing um that would be helpful for me. Thank you.
>> Absolutely. Yep. >> Madam Chair, if I could ask uh yeah, Ryan to identify the stairs we were just looking at. >> Yeah. Are they included in the 118 ft? They they are I'm I'm sorry I misspoke in the pictures, but those those stairs um were sticking out right here and and
those will be removed and they are included in the 118. >> Okay. So, the ones that we were just looking at are actually not going to be staying. They're >> not going to be not going to be staying. Correct. They're Yeah, we're going to take those out.
>> Okay. Do you have any other questions, Mary? Well, I uh maybe So, I was trying to So, there's a concrete apron and so people would walk out uh off of the concrete apron
into the uh into the yard. Is that elevation not having been there? um which I apologize for not being available for but not having been there. I was kind of struggling there. Right. So the deck's going away. So the access
to where the yard where the deck had gone away would be through the addition or how would people get into the yard? Is it just going to be through the uh addition? >> Yeah, it'll be either through the house or through the yard. It's relatively
flat around this side of the house here. Um so you can either get around that way. There will be a door on the addition. Um I I believe against this patio here uh where the existing walkway is. We're proposing to retain the rest of um the existing stepping pathway.
>> And then what is that concrete apron? Is that like a concrete walkway? It says CO N C. I'm speculating that was >> I believe that is underneath uh it's underneath the deck. There is concrete there. This other >> Okay. So, there's a deck there, but that
deck won't have stairs to the backyard. >> It will not lead down anymore. Correct. Yeah, >> that seems like something um that they would that would be undesirable
>> to to not be able to access the backyard from the deck. >> Okay. Um >> I I I mean I'm just saying that that to my fellow commissioners and and maybe to you too just I like for the jobs to be like kind of
thought through and and uh you know complete and not have a lot of back and forth and and you know your firm and you particularly do a really good job with that. that that just seems to me like a an obvious kind of omission. Like really, they're going to have a deck
where they can see the backyard and maybe see kids or grandkids or whatever their situation is doing something while they're on the deck and not immediately want to go down and intervene. Oh, you're going in over your head or whatever is the circumstance. >> Yeah. No, I I understand that. Yes.
>> Um but it's not on the plan, so not permitted. It just seems like that might be something that might need to be um discussed because you know I would hate to like approve as one commissioner hate to approve uh you know um
you know a a variance to go into the buffer zone based on removal of uh you know getting getting to comp compensate back that removal of the deck and then to find out later oh well now we really need stairs and so that removal is not exactly as it was represent better.
>> Absolutely. Yeah, I understand that. Um and I I appreciate that the the layout was provided by the applicant. So I I understand I'm happy to discuss that with him. Um but we we did review this layout with him. It was provided by the owner. So >> Okay. >> Um no more comments from me, Madam Chair.
>> All right. Um Harlin, I see you have your hand up. I just wanted to say that when you walk through um there so there are little steps if I'm getting this correctly the concrete apron is like a connecting
path from the existing garage that's more like it looks like a second home honestly um because it is pretty significantly sized and then there's like an odd set of steps and then it
looks like in the main house, if I can remember correctly, there's like an exit that leads to this concrete pathway. >> Yeah. Let let me Yeah, if I can pull up one more picture, if you don't mind. Um I think it >> I >> And I have a picture that I took too that I can share.
>> I'll let you share first. So when we were there, Harlin, um when you are looking at the house from the street, it looks like there is two separate structures and then there's like a long there's a long like deck walkway in between them. It looked like the other
structure had some permit stuff stuck on it like it's under construction maybe being turned into an ad au possibly >> or something. Yeah. Um yeah. >> Yeah. So that's the the apron is at the bottom here at the bottom of that of
that wall. >> Yeah. And and there are stairs um forgive me for not uh bringing this up. There are stairs off the driveway that lead underneath the deck. So I if there was someone sitting up here, there is access to go back uh you go down and around and then you are able to access
this lower portion of the yard uh off off the driveway there. So the these are the stairs that are being removed and and the deck heading back towards the house. Um, this wall would be walled off there. Um, but there is still access to that lower portion of the yard through these.
>> Now I'm super confused because Okay, >> this is that the apron that you're talking about that's being removed. >> No, no, no. Uh, the aprons over where underneath where the addition is. There's another concrete. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> But those stairs are being the stairs that we're looking at right now are being removed.
>> These ones right here. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Teddy, you have your hand up. >> Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. So, um, Ryan, the plan is to remove these stairs and that area is going to become yard space. Is that correct?
>> That's correct. Yep. >> Okay. And that's just to compensate for the um construction that is extending into the no build zone. So, you're just trying to offset. >> Exactly. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yep. You're welcome.
Okay, I'm going to um share the photo that I took if it will. Okay, can everybody see that? >> Yes. So, this is a photo of where the
um addition would be. And this shows cuz I don't think we had a picture of from this view. Um so, this whole wood patio area is gone. And then so the area
with the stairs that are planned to be removed are like past these stairs that are going up and then over to the left. >> Correct. Yeah, exactly.
>> Okay. Toward >> Yeah. towards the lake from there. >> Can you actually bring up the um plan again? again. Let me stop my share. >> So, there's a it's not it doesn't show
the the steps up, but this is that flatter portion up against the house. It goes up elevationally to a platform here, and then there's the stairs down also. So all of that is getting removed and then the upper elevation deck that's where we're providing that
wall uh or extending the railing I should say. Okay. And so those stairs that we're seeing right now highlighted in yellow, the entire high area that's highlighted in
yellow is being removed. >> Removed. Yes. >> And then also over to the right, if we could follow that concrete apron apron down. And then there's these stairs
that we see further down. Those stairs are being removed. These are staying. We're We're not touching those. >> Oh, aren't those the stairs you were just looking at in the photo? >> No, these these are built into the stone wall underneath uh this deck, which is elevated.
>> Okay. But this is the that's the one the photo that we were just looking at of the stone wall with the stairs in it. >> Yes. >> That you said were going away. >> No, the No, this these stairs. Yeah, the wooden ones. Yeah, >> that's what I was confused when we were looking at the wall. I said those stairs
are going away. >> No. Yeah, we're not touch not touching that wall at all. >> I was like I was trying to figure out why that made sense. Okay. >> Yep. >> Got it. Do we have any other questions for members of the commission? >> You have your hand raised, Mary.
>> Yes, I found it. Um yeah, so I found a you know Google Street View of the property and it looks like uh with the the stairs that are going away uh you know which is the yellow highlighted part that
from the deck in order to get down to the beach area you would have to backtrack to the right all the way to in front of the existing garage. Uh, at the far lower right hand corner is where the only other stairs that I see on the deck
are. So, you'd have to go all the way back down there, then backtrack to the stairs in the stone wall to get to the uh beach area is what it looks like uh from this uh street view,
which is okay. But, you know, again, I think about, you know, a lot of times families have kids or grandkids or whatnot, right? Or or even see others out in the water, right, from a deck, an elevated deck, and would want to get
right down there um versus having to run 30 feet in the opposite direction, uh, and then backtrack to get down to the beach. Just something to think about. >> Yep. Understood. You have your hand up.
>> Thank you. >> I was just gonna say back to you. >> Oh, >> thank you, Madam Chair. >> Um, I was just going to say I I would be willing to approve this plan as as I understand Mary's point. Um, if we
approve, they can always come back to us if they want to make changes. Correct. >> Yeah. >> Yep. You can do a modification if they wanted to change something or feel change. >> I I would make a motion to approve this
as presented. >> All right, Teddy. >> Uh Mary, you have your hand up. >> Yeah, just just as we can approve it and adding other stairs is not really a jurisdictional thing for us. The reason why I brought it up is I would be
willing to approve it based on, you know, giving us back more than than what they're, you know, encroaching on the 50 foot. Is that I would really make me a little bit irritated if they came back later and said, "Oh, no. We're not really giving you all that back now. We
need stairs there." >> That that would bother me. So that's why I was asking about it now because it's a very important point to me that we're doing that tradeoff. >> Yeah. And I think that's reasonable. I completely understand that.
>> So >> thank you, Madam Chair. >> Thank you. I think they came back. More than likely the stairs would need to be over to the left outside of the 50 foot on the side of the addition. >> Yes. Yeah.
>> Yep. Caroline, you had your hand up. >> Yes. It was just hypothetically speaking, if they do come back or in the future would like to propose some steps, we can the alternative to the 50-foot encroachment would be um that small area
uh facing the left. >> Yep. Exactly. Yeah. >> Okay. So, do you want are you interested in checking with your client to see if they're interested in
doing anything with the stairs while the application is open? Not application is open, while the hearing hasn't been closed or would you like to >> I think we're comfortable moving forward with this. Um, like I said, it was provided by the applicant. I'm happy to discuss it with him. Um and and we
understand that if we do come back with any um any stairs, it would have to be outside of the 50 or or within the existing footprint of the deck or something, but I I will make that clear with him. >> Okay. With that, I'll second uh Teddy Ducet's motion.
>> Okay. All right. Roll call vote. Um Andrea Bernack, >> I Teddy Det. >> Mary Wilson. >> Mike Larouche. I >> and I for myself.
>> Right. Thank you, Ryan. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um, >> pursuant to MGL chapter 131, section 40 as amended in the town of Lindle's protection and municipal bylaws, a notice of intent by the Reservoir Recreational Trust for the construction of a new concrete boat ramp on Lake
Shirley at Shady Point at 701 Reservoir Road. Do we have the applicant or a representative? >> Yeah. Uh Ryan Proctor again representing the applicant. >> Okay. And I did see this one. I checked right before the meeting. There's no D. >> I saw that as well.
>> Yeah. >> Yep. >> Um yeah, actually there was a um there was a slight hiccup in the fee calculation on our end. So we did rectify that earlier um this week, but um that is in part uh one of the reasons that we don't have a file number yet, but we did address that um earlier this
week. So, um, I will share my screen again. And just for the record, I see Chris Coffin, uh, the owner and applicant and operator of the of the launch is on the call as well. >> Okay. >> Um, so the proposed project, uh, is
located at, uh, 701 Reservoir Road. And the primary portion of this project and and the reason we're here is to replace, stabilize, and construct a new and improved boat ramp that currently serves a Shady Point uh boat launch. So, under
existing conditions, there is an existing actually, let me go to the uh the zoom in here. Uh there is an existing gravel access that leads down. I've got it shown in uh dash green. And then just prior to entering the water,
there is an existing concrete apron uh that extends into the water as well as uh an existing dock on the left side of the ramp and an existing concrete slab on the right side. Um, so the problem that they are running into on an
operational standpoint is when Boers are loading their boats onto the trailer, they do what's called power loading where you get the boat a certain percentage onto the trailer and then you rev the engine um to get that last couple feet onto the trailer. And what that's doing is causing some disturbance
to the lake bottom um where you have a sudden burst of um propulsion coming out of the boat and pushing the sediment. And that just gets exacerbated when you have more and more boats using it. uh and causing some rivets and eventually um some ditches essentially underneath
the water. Um so what we're proposing is a concrete boat ramp. Um largely the we have sort of two portions of it. Um one we want to extend it within the existing gravel uh roadway to provide something that's more permanent and less prone to
wash out in an area that gets trafficked and has water drifting up of of the boats as they as they exit the facility. Um, so we have concrete there and then within the water itself, we're proposing again the the riveted concrete along the bottom so that it provides that
stabilization. We're not driving vehicles essentially on the bottom of the lake. And again, it it helps prevent that um power loading situation where you're actively disturbing the the bottom of the lake every time you load up the boat. So we it will pitch um the existing grade kind of comes out level
towards the launch uh towards the water and then dips down pretty sharply. We're proposing to remove some of that material, lower it down and then create a constant slope as we go from uh the the gravel area into the ramp itself and ultimately into the water. Uh we're
posing about 60 ft on the upland side and 50t uh from the edge into the water. Uh we think that'll give us enough length. Uh the trailer itself plus the vehicle is usually about 35 ft plus or minus. Um so that allows the full trailer to stay on the platform while
it's in the water and as well as a portion of the vehicle. And on the on the landward side, the reason we have um a 60 ft landing is here. It's it's very common uh for the boers to pull out and as as they have their boat uh and they're doing their final checks and and
strapping um the boat and trailer are both sitting on this platform here. Again, there's there's water from the lake dripping off. So, it just seems to make sense to us to have this riveted concrete um that's less prone to wash out than the current gravel configuration. Uh the width that we're proposing is 25 ft, which is generally
consistent with the existing uh it's about on average about 25 ft. The existing gravel um uh pathway leading down and we are proposing to remove uh for those commission members that were able to get out to the site, there's a concrete slab there that we are
proposing to remove. that's currently right up against the water and and that area would be restored in kind with uh with the surrounding area. That's the main portion of the project. We did include if you're standing on the dock looking back up to where um there's
a fe a stream feeding into Lake Shirley. There's quite a bit of undercutting on the existing vegetation and a lot of the trees are starting to get undercut and leaning towards the lake. So, we did include a shoreline replacement wall. This would match uh it would be a block wall that would match some of the
existing wall that's on other portions of the of the peninsula, but essentially we'd fill in sort of that undercut area um with crush stone and then install the wall to hold back that slope, protect the vegetation that's right there along the shoreline. Um I don't think there
are any large mature trees, but there are a handful of trees probably from the 6 to 12 in range um that we just want to kind of stabilize that shoreline and prevent them from from leaning getting further undercut. Um, so that that's sort of the second portion of the project. Um, as as we mentioned, there's
no D file number or recomments at this time. Um, however, if there's if there's any questions from the commission, we'd be happy to take them. >> Okay. Thank you, Ryan. Um, do you know when they plan to do this work if it's approved? >> Oh, yeah. Abs. Absolutely. During a
period of draw down. Um, it's it's relatively shallow in front. So, the the water recedes significantly when they do draw down. Um, so our intention would certainly be to do it during that period. >> Okay. Do we have any questions for members of the commission?
We don't do we have any Oh. Um, I see a member of the public as I was just about to ask. Uh, Carluck, you have your hand raised? >> Yes. Uh, can you hear me? >> I can. Oh, excellent. Thank you. Um,
yeah, Carl, 50 Sunset Lane. Um, yeah, pretty familiar with that area. Have a couple questions. One is the plan doesn't show I believe there's a boat wash area. Um, is that on the plan? I'm just missing it.
>> Uh, there is a chance that that's not on the plan. I would defer to I'd have to defer to the the owner um for where that is located exactly. I'm not certain. Hi, this is Chris Coffin. So that station is right there where it says existing building.
>> Okay. >> Okay. That So that little square there, it's got like a little star or something next to it. >> Yeah, that's a a light pole right there. >> Okay. That's the boat wash area. >> Um and it looks like the grade generally slopes down as you would imagine towards
the lake from the the gravel driveway and parking area. Is that correct? Or is there some uh some rate that prevents runoff from going down the ramp? Uh generally speaking, that's correct. There's somewhat of a high point and
it's somewhat super elevated. So, a portion of the runoff from the driveway is is going straight uh I'll call it I'll call it north um and not necessarily straight down the ramp. So, there is some uh pitch that leads away from the ramp itself, >> but in general, the pitch is is towards
the ramp. Yeah. Uh yeah, portions of it certainly. Yes. >> Yeah. >> So my so clearly in um those those two things are contributing to to to runoff storm water
or or you mentioned a couple times and I appreciate it. um you know boats you know being pulled out of the lake and and dripping and then I think you indicated that the the length of the ramp was then extended so that the boats will actually be sitting on the ramp um
dripping and and I and I know I trailer boats, you know, that's that's that's when you uh you know, you go around and you you check it out and um you can you pull the you pull the plug and drain the BGE and you perhaps get rid of the wet well water. Um, so there's a lot of
water that is now on a hard surface that's going to just go right directly into the lake. And I'm very concerned about that. Uh, and I'm wondering why the surface is a solid concrete slab and not a not a permeable surface,
you know, with a a porous paper. Uh, I'm sure you're aware they're they're concrete, you know, prefabed things that um are very good and and and used for for ramps. There's several around the lake. Um, I happen to have one and they they work great. They just there's no
runoff makes it to the lake. And so you say why if you considered that or or if you could because we we have enough nutrients going into the lake now. Um, we don't really need more and it is a pretty busy ramp. >> Yep.
Uh, yeah, we we we can certainly look at that. Um, like I said, we we were looking for an option that's less prone to run out runoff. So, some water is going back to the lake regardless. So, if it didn't have to be gravel or anything else that could potentially wash out. That was that was our thought process there. But we I can discuss that with the owner and we can take a look at
that. >> Yeah. If you could you you're familiar with with kind of things I'm talking about. buy them and get prefab on pre things and they they kind of look like a lattice only. >> Very familiar. >> You're very familiar. Great. Thank you. Good. All right. So, you would consider
that. Thank you. >> That's that's my only comments. Thank you very much for uh letting me participate. >> Thank you. Um I have a question about the boat wash. Is that for before the boats go in to wash off any residue from
where the boat may have been or any invasives or is that for when the boats come out? >> This is correct. >> Um, that's for when the boats come out. We don't allow boats to go in with anything. So that's for when they come out. They like to make sure, especially the fisherman, they like to make sure their boats are totally clean so they're
not taking any of the stuff from my anywhere else. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yep. Do we have any other questions or comments from members of the commission? Um, Carl, you have your hand up again.
>> Uh, well, you just the the the boat wash, where does that water go? Is is there is there is that on some sort of a draining pad that goes back into this to the earth or where does that water go to? currently.
>> Do you want to take that question, Chris? >> Yeah, just they wash it off right there at the ramp or right on the ground and there's gravel, there's all sorts of things and that's where it goes.
Okay. So, um, as we don't have a D number, we could not we can't close this out tonight, but is there anything that the commission would like to see happen before the next meeting or any
interest in looking at a permeable surface or Mary, you have your hand up? >> Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. Um, so, uh, Pearl made some some good points. Um, and so, you know, I'm always happy to hear from members of the public, u,
particularly those that are, you know, colllocated in the environment, right, that really understand the conditions a lot better than than we can from afar. Um, the boat ramp seems, in my opinion, to be in such close proximity to the lake that a lot of the current runoff is
probably going to go into the lake anyway. Um I I regardless of what you do whether it's you know concrete or or not um something that's permeable and even if it infiltrates into the ground it's just going into the water
table that's essentially the lake. Um and I am glad the applicant is considerate of you know Easterbrook and Easterbrook you know outflow right there and wanting to stabilize the bank and taking measures to do that. I appreciate
that and I also am appreciative that they have come with a you know a observing that the current practice is eroding you know and and deteriorating the lake bottom and coming with a a solution and a proposal for that. So,
I'm uh I'm glad to see the project, right? Um, now that the permeable, you know, boat ramp option has been brought up, it would probably be good to see that, see what that would look like and look also at the um, you know,
maintenance uh, kind of uh, you know, what the difference in maintenance would be between uh, something that's kind of that uh, uh, corrugated structure that, at least the ones that I've seen are a corrugated
structure that has an infill of gravel or something. I've also seen um permeable surfaces that are more like a mat. Uh but you know, whatever you come up with, I'd be interested in seeing it and seeing what the you know, kind of the ongoing maintenance activities, you
know, might be and how they may or may not also uh add some concern for the lake as well. So, thank you. >> Great. Thank you, Mary. Those are all great comments. Okay.
Um, so Ryan, is that >> a possibility to see what the difference is at the next meeting? >> Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, we'll we'll look into that and explore some other options or at least talk talk about them. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> All right. Is there anything else that
we want to bring up while we have Ryan here on this application? Okay. Well, where we have to continue, are you looking to continue to the next meeting on 7:15, Ryan? >> That would be great. Please.
>> Okay. I guess I'm looking for a motion to continue to July 15th, 2026. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right. Roll call vote. Andrea Bernap, >> I >> Teddy Ducet, >> I >> Mary Wilson, >> I >> Mike Larouche,
>> I >> and I for myself. >> All right. Continue to July 15th. >> Thank you, Ryan. All right. Um, pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40 as amended and the town of Lunberg wetlands protection and municipal bylaws, we have a notice of
intent by Benjamin Builders at 10 Parmentor Road. Do we have the applicant or the representative on the call? >> We do. Uh, Ryan Proctor Dillisroy representing the applicant. >> Okay. >> Like to go over the application?
>> I would be happy to. I I was checking earlier. I don't think we have a file number for this one either at this point. Um, but I'll have happy to go over the plan. Um, >> this one I can't Is it still is it under 91 Round Road now?
>> Uh, I didn't see one when I was looking earlier. >> Or is it still 10 Parmentor? >> This is a new application for 10 Parmentor. >> Yeah. >> Okay. But the address at this one is 91 Round Road, right? >> I believe that is right. I can verify
that. Uh yes, 91 Round Road is the is the address it's been given. >> Okay. Because um I don't see anything in EA for that address, but the last thing I see for permanent road is the filing
date of 318 and I believe or is this this is lot 24, right? Or is it >> uh lot 24 is the RDA? That is next on your agenda. Okay. So, this one is lot 23. >> Uh 18. >> 18. Okay. Not even close.
>> Okay. Yeah. So, I don't see >> Okay. >> I'm not seeing anything for this. >> I'm actually not seeing anything for this. >> Yeah. We'll follow up with D. That's That's interesting. Um Yeah, we'll follow up with them tomorrow and make sure that they received everything. I know we submitted online. Um
so, yeah, we'll follow up with them to make sure they have everything they need. Cool. Um so as the commission is uh hopefully well familiar with this project now this is uh one of the lots uh on on Parmentor road and Ruth and Ruth Street. Uh we we've permented a couple of these lots
with you at this point. Um the this notice of intent is specifically for lot 18 which is now identified as uh 90 excuse me Round Road uh 91 Round Road. Um and it consists of a single family dwelling uh which is going to be serviced by a private septic system.
both of which are located outside of the 100 foot buffer zone which I will highlight in orange. That is the 100. The uh wetland resource area is uh located on the opposite side of the street. Uh we have that shown uh
here. The 30 foot no disturb zone is entirely within the limits of the roadway. And the 50 foot no build, I will highlight that as well. Uh extends uh in portion onto our site. Um barely clips some of the grading we're doing and a portion of the
proposed driveway. Um so this is again just a single family house lot. Uh we do have storm water improvements and we are currently working through the planning board process uh for this portion of the project. I believe we have the opening hearing on the on the 13th of this month for this portion of the project. Um, but
from a conservation standpoint, the work within the buffer zone includes uh simply the driveway construction. Uh, we have super elevated the driveway such that all storm water runoff, the exception of a small portion right at the roundway, similar to the previous projects we've permitted uh, for this
site. um super elevates it into a stone recharge trench with a pipe in the bottom that will ultimately discharge into a rain garden along the street frontage and that has been designed to attenuate the storm water runoff associated with the 100-year storm event. Um so this project um we've incorporated some peerreview comments
that we've gotten for other portions of the project uh through the planning board's peerreview consultant. So we've tried to address those upfront with this application. Um but that those are the impacts. Uh we do have uh proposed erosion control barriers around the limit of work and the water main portion
of the project that we had previously permitted with your commission runs along this property frontage. Um so that is covered uh will be covered underneath that separate order of conditions and and that disturbance is along the frontage of our site um and would
ultimately get um sort of tied in tied into this project um to service the house. Um earlier today, uh the commission may have seen I uploaded the storm water management plans for this cluster of houses which includes lot 18. It just has a little more detail. Um I
apologize it was not uploaded with the initial filing, but it has additional details on the rain garden, uh the rain garden planting, some additional storm water details specific to storm water and that storm water management permit. Um so that that is available. Again, we're going to be continuing this hearing, so the commission will have an
opportunity to review that plan as well. Um, but I think I will probably leave it there. Uh, if there's any questions, I'm happy to take them. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Do we have any questions from members of the commission?
Madam chair, I don't have any. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um, do we have any questions or comments from members of the public? It does not seem that we do. Okay. Um,
we cannot vote on this tonight. So, I think we'll be looking to continue obviously. Um, would you want to continue until the 15th, Ryan, and then check with D, figure out what's going on with the
>> Yeah, we'll follow up with them tomorrow. Um, if we could continue to the 15th, that would be terrific. >> Okay. I have a motion to uh Is there a motion to continue to July 15th? >> So, moved. >> Second. >> Second. >> All right. I'm going to give Mike the
motion. Mary the second. Roll call vote. Andrea Bernout >> I. >> Eddie Ducet >> I. >> Mary Wilson >> I. >> Mike Larouche >> I. >> And I for myself. Okay. Continue to 7:15.
>> Thank you. >> All right. Up next. Pursuant to chap chap MGL chapter 131 section 40 as amended and the town of Lindenburgg wetlands protection and municipal bylaws. A request for determination of applicability by Benjamin Builders at 10 Parameter Road for the construction of a
common driveway entrance with site grading. Do I have the representative? >> We do. Uh once again, Ryan Proctor, Ryan. >> All right. >> Um so >> yeah, I know it feels like it every time. Um >> let me share my screen once more,
please. >> Okay. Um so this is a very similar to the previous um the previous presentation that I and overview I just gave. Uh this one is actually for a common driveway. Um similar to the previous application, I uploaded the storm water management
plans. Um so the commission has the opportunity to view it. This will be going through planning board process for storm water management permit as well as a special management per special permit excuse me for the common driveway. But the portion of the project um that is within the buffer zone is uh the
entrance to the common driveway and a portion of the burm and breakout grading for the proposed rain garden that will service and and attenuate storm water runoff associated with the common driveway. Uh so upgrading of the buffer zone. We're proposing very similar storm water management measures where we have
uh a a stone trench along the driveway um with super elevated grades to route storm water into that trench ultimately into the rain garden again which has been designed to accommodate and attenuate storm water flows associated with the 100red-year storm event. And the proposed disturbance for this site
is again upgradient of the previously proposed work and approved work uh for the installation of the water mane. Uh with the exception of the uh sort of the throat of the driveway uh we are not proposing any structures or any other impervious area within the buffer. It's really grading associated with the
buffer um with the rain garden uh and and the grading associated with the driveway. And uh again we're on the opposite side of the street as the wetland area. And uh we will have um erosion control barriers installed. Those are shown on the storm water management plans um that were
specifically prepared for this this cluster of the development. So I will be brief for that one. This one this one we just filed an RDA. Again we're we're upgrading of the work that was previously approved for the water man and uh a relatively limited impact uh for this project this portion of the
project. So I'm happy to take any questions. >> Thank you. Do we have any questions from members of the commission? Harlen, I was actually going to say if you wanted to go over what you had. Um I see Herin, you have your hand up.
>> Um not necessarily my notes. The uh resource area is across the street from this, but mostly um is there an address for this? >> This one is 115 Round Road. 115. Y
>> I'm sorry. Like I was I kept looking through the site plan and I couldn't 115 around. >> I just need to change these on open gov so that we can kind of not keep using the same address for everything else. But >> yep.
>> Um and then I'm not sure if uh anybody needs me to go over my notes, but they're pretty self-explanatory. >> Yeah, I'll give them a quick read. Um the proposed work will occur within the 100 foot buffer zone but is located on the opposite side of Round Road from the
bordering vegetated wetland with the work confined to a previously disturbed roadside area and existing cart path. Based on site observations, the separation provided by the roadway, the use of existing disturbed areas in the proposed storm water management measures are expected to minimize the potential for adverse impacts to the adjacent
resource area. You still have your hand up, Pllyn, did you? Okay. Not anymore. Okay. So, do we have any questions or comments from members of the public? >> Okay. Um, have a motion for a negative
determination. >> So, moved. Second. >> Okay. Roll call vote. Andrea Bernap >> I. >> Teddy Det >> I. >> Mary Wilson >> I. >> Mike Larouche
>> I. >> And I for myself. All right. >> Thank you Ryan. >> Thank you very much. >> Madam chair. Uh may I ask a question? Um, so early on when these were submitted, I I had asked if like the the entire
parcel sub uh subdivision uh could be could be added to each of these files so that it was easier for us to kind of keep track over time uh where they were and how they were subdivided out of the overall, you know, the context of the
area. And I I thought we had a commitment for that to happen, but I'm not finding it in open gov, >> which I I could just be overlooking it, too. >> Ryan, does that ring a bell at all with you? >> That does ring a bell. Um if I will make sure it gets uploaded to that notice of
intent that we continued. I I apologize, Mary. Um there's quite a few hand hands working on this one, so if that slipped through the cracks, that's um I'll take the blame for that. So, >> it would Yeah, I appreciate it. Um yeah, if you could just keep that um alive and and active. Um, and for each one of the
ones that's that's coming up out of this parcel, if it could just be uploaded as a record, that'd be really helpful for us. >> Yep. Absolutely. Yeah, I'll take care of that. You're welcome. >> Thank you, Mary. >> All right. Um, pursuant to
MGL chapter 131 section 40 as amended and the town of Lunenburgg's protection of municipal bylaws, we have a request for determination of applicability by Brian Pard at 100 Laurel Lane for the decommissioning of a septic system and installment of a grinder pump. Do we
have the applicant or the representative? >> Madam Chair, this matter needs to be continued. >> Oh, okay. Oh. Um. Okay. And they are not here. It looks like >> correct. Yep.
>> Okay. Uh the motion to continue to is it 7:15 that it should be continued to? >> Yes. >> Okay. A motion to to continue to 7:15 2026. Anyone? >> So moved. >> Second.
>> Okay. Roll call vote. Andrea Bernap I. >> Teddy Det. I. >> Mary Wilson. I >> Mike Larouche >> I >> and I for myself. All right, that is all we have for new
hearings. Um moving on to continued public hearings 1625 mass is continued to 7:15. So, first we have pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40 as amended in the town of Lindenberg Wellness Protection and
Municipal bylaws, a notice of intent by Daniel and Rachel Bracket for a common driveway to provide access to four residential lots at 816 New Towns and Road. Do we have the applicant or a representative? >> We do. Uh Ryan, Proctor, Dillis, Roy representing the applicant. Um I will be
very brief with this one. uh we have not finished the planning board process uh at this point which is the last item that the commission was waiting to see happen. We are scheduled to appear before them on the 13th of this month and I I believe knock on wood that we're in a good spot to hopefully close that one. So if the commission is willing uh
we like to request a continuence to your July 15th meeting. >> Okay, perfect. >> Do I have a um motion to continue to July 15th, 2026? >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right, roll call vote. Andrea Bernup. Hi >> Teddy Dat.
>> I >> Mary Wilson. >> Hi >> Mike Larish. >> I >> and I for myself. >> Thank you. Have a good holiday weekend everybody. >> Thanks. You too. Ryan, are you leaving now? >> I'm leaving now. Yes. >> Okay. Have a good weekend. >> You too. Thank you.
>> Um pursuant to MGL chapter 131 section 40 as amended in the town of Lunberg wetland protection and municipal bylaws. We have notice of intent by Unatil for the construction of a new substation and replacement of utility poles at 934 Mass A. Oh,
>> the applicant has requested a continuence. They have yet to answer the question the comments from D. >> Okay. >> All right. So, um, do I have a motion to continue to do they ask for 7:15? >> Okay. Motion to continue at 7:15 2026.
Is that you Mike with the motion? >> So move. Yes. >> Second. >> All right. Roll call vote. Andrea Bernah. >> I. >> Teddy Det. >> I. >> Mary Wilson. >> I. >> Mike Larouche. >> I. >> And I for myself. Okay. Continue to 7:15
2026. Pursuant to chapter 131 section 40 as amended in the town of Luna Riverlands Protection and Municipal bylaws. Uh, a notice of intent by is it Jenke Construction for the construction of a single family home with a wetland
crossing at 507 West Townsend Road. Do we have the applicant or their representative on the call? >> Yes. Hello. Uh, Zach Man here from New England Environmental Design representing the applicant.
>> Okay, great. Welcome. Um, would you like to share your screen? I do I did see that you uploaded >> I actually I don't have the I don't have the ability to share my screen. If if um if you had the plan that would be awesome.
>> Yeah, let me um grab that. >> And um is everybody I I know I went over the project last time so we're familiar with it somewhat. So I don't I don't believe I need to give a
whole on it again, but we'll go over the comments that we had last time if that's all right. >> Yeah. So, um I do I think we have one person who may not have been here last time to give like a quick overview of what the project is and then just like a quick one and then what we asked for and
what you're showing. Let me get this >> up on the screen. Yes. So, the project is uh new construction. Uh we're doing a single family home at the rear of the lot and uh there's a fair amount of work uh
that's required in the buffer zone, mostly the driveway. We have we've moved we had the house uh further in the buffer zone, but we have moved that out uh as much as we could. And um there is a stream crossing at the at the very
front of the property at the narrowest point possible. We are proposing a crossing and uh there will be a septic system serving the home behind the home completely outside of the buffer. Uh and the proposed well which was
initially proposed uh within the 50ft buffer zone has has been moved. It is now uh I just it's 90 ft away from the buffer zone now along the driveway by the neighbor's existing barn. There you see it. Yep. Right there.
And um and that is the project in a nutshell. And so the first comment that we had last time, well, I don't know if it was the first, but I've got a list here. There was the house was shown
uh quite a bit into the 100 ft buffer zone and so it was requested that we move that out as much as possible and and so that is the location that you have on screen now. Um
also requested was uh marking the 30-foot buffer zone. Um yeah, the 30- foot buffer zone, the no disturbance zone with uh plantings, facultative or facultative wet native to the site. And uh that's represented with those little
gray blips you can see there strung all the way down along the entire along the entirety of the buffer zone. Those are shown 15 to 20 feet apart. They vary. I wasn't sure what the commission typically
has done as far as spacing and and whatnot. So that that can be amended if if the commission wants. And then we were requested a detail of the of the temporary disturbance down by the
crossing itself. Um now I I took it upon myself when I I did the drawing. I I was under the assumption that a machine may requ may be needed to go on that downs slope side in order to complete the work. But I I have been informed that
that is not the case. And so I have pulled the erosion control right up to the limit of where the uh permanent fill will take place. and and so there will be no uh temporary fill uh temporary
disturbed area. It will just be that 268 square ft of proposed wetland fill that you see there. And the last thing was um construction sequence staging shown on on the plan. And so we have that uh centrally located
right there in the center and it just goes through the general steps that will be undertaken to uh start the project and bring it to completion. And not a comment but uh last time we presented we did not yet have the D
number and comments and we have since received those. Um and they I I do I do respect and I don't disagree with um the DP's comments. Um
however, I I I do have to put they they're requesting that we um follow the stream crossing standards to their maximum extent possible. And um I I that does sound good
uh on paper, but in practice for this specific situation, uh the abuing driveway, as you as as I mentioned last time, has an existing 12-in uh covert pipe running under it, which has which
the stream runs through. And uh prior to entering our site, it the stream enters two uh 12-in pipes, I believe, through and it runs under the yard some some 90 ft or so, if I remember correctly.
Yes, 90 ft. Um, and so while while the commission could request that we we do adhere to those stream standards, stream crossing standards, I I must plea that um it it there really
isn't much benefit to following them in this particular case other than other than costing our client um you know more engineering fees and and the construction of uh over overdesigned crossing. if if I'm being frank, uh we
the location of our proposed driveway is very close to the existing driveway right to the left on the abuing property and to to adhere to the stream crossing standards to which I'm envisioning they probably want some sort of open bottom
culvert. Um it would it would really raise our uh driveway grade right there. there would we would have to make a huge bump in order to fit in order to fit whatever crossing would need to be there. I don't know what size it would have to be. Uh the engineers would have
to do the calculations on that, but it uh it just doesn't make sense to have a a stream crossing there for say wildlife to pass through. I believe that's a major purpose of the crossing and um
to to to have a major a major culvert there leading right into the 12-in culvert that is exists under the neighbor's driveway. It it just doesn't make sense to me. Um, and I'm not saying ignore it completely,
but I I adhering to it to a tea doesn't seem practical or reasonable in in this case. And um, so if there was some other way that we could um, you know, compensate for for any lack of that that the commission
thinks is is reasonable for all parties, then then I would request that we go that route. Um, and then additionally, um, she does mention, oh, I'm sorry, he, I think it was Thomas
Rebula. It, uh, a onetoone replication of the, um, wetland that we're proposing to fill. Um, I don't know Lunenburgg's bylaws off the top of my head exactly. I I don't know if you guys have a a a
replication requirement under 500 square ft, but it but it was my understanding that in the Wetland Protection Act that anything under 500 square ft isn't actually required to be replicated. Um and so
we were not looking to replicate that 268 square ft. However, I'm sure maybe maybe that could be uh maybe we could replicate that in compensation for perhaps not adhering to
the stream standards um fully. And and that is um that is all I have to to add to that. And if you have any questions, um,
shoot. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh, >> sorry longwinded. Yeah. >> No, that's fine. Uh, we like a lot of information. So, um, do we have any questions or comments from members of the commission?
Mary, you have your hand up. >> Yeah. Um, while I'm digesting all of that, uh, a quick question. At one point, uh, the applicant's representative was talking about 90 ft
of covert or pipe, and I'm not I and we were still had the DP >> um, >> you know, file shown. Where's the 90? >> Yeah, the 90 over to the right uh, far over to the right of where you're showing at the moment. It's on the neighbors. It's actually on the
neighbors property. Um, if you go to the top right. Yeah, there you go. And then up a little that that dashed gray line, those are the two two culverts that run side by side. >> Ah, okay. >> And they're and they're completely buried and it and it brings to daylight over there where you see it points to
>> in. Okay. And what were D's comments about that? >> Um I don't think about the 90 foot existing pipe. Oh, they did uh they did mention that those uh >> they did say those appear as though they were installed prior to the uh adoption
ratification of the Massachusetts stream crossing standards. >> Mhm. >> Which which is fair. I'm sure they were. >> Okay. >> Okay. That that answers that answers one question. Um, and then the other
question I had is it seems like this is um basically uh a limited um project uh because we're doing a stream crossing. Was it filed as a limited project? >> Uh no, I don't believe so.
Um and Madame Chair and Hurland, should it be filed as a limited project because of the stream crossing? >> You have your hand up. >> Yeah. So, the language for limited projects is
very vague and because this is a single family home. Um usually when a project is proposed as a limited project, there is literally no alternative, but it it is a necessity. Um,
single family homes aren't necessarily a necessity. If you buy a parcel with a stream crossing and you can't cross it, that means it's undevelopable. Like, you can't develop the law. And that happens all the time. So, I wouldn't consider this a limited project. >> Okay. Thank you for that. >> You're welcome.
>> Definitely a tough project, but definitely a tough one. But I do think it looks much nicer in the back now with with the way we have moved the drive the driveway. I didn't mention it, but the driveway obviously went into the buffer zone much further
uh when the house was located there. So, we do have I don't have numbers on that, but the much of the driveway is located further outside of the buffer zone, which is nice. and and I would have slid and we would have slid the house out further, but the
the grading getting further to the left. Uh it did it didn't fit with our setbacks. We're trying to keep this our storm water our storm water infiltration system. Uh I believe it's 50 ft away minimum from any leech area. So that
neighbor approximate leech area you see there at the bottom left right now. We had to I had to squeeze it up in there. because we can't we can't pump uh we can't pump that. It has to be gravity. >> Mike, you have your hand up.
>> Uh yes, Madam Chair. Uh did you mention what those those uh plantings are going to be that those little dots? >> I did not uh call out a species. You must you must have been the one that requested that if I remember correctly.
Uh, and I I I think I noted facultative uh or facultative wet native currently native to the site. I I wasn't sure if the commission had were going to have any preferences. I off the top of my I don't have the BBW forms I did, but I know there were yellow birch out there,
uh, maple, so we can we can come up with and I wasn't sure if we I know we want woody. I didn't know if the commission wanted say shrubs and trees or or just trees. Um so so anyway I I did not call out species specifically not yet.
>> Okay. Will we get um a schedule of what those species of plantings will be? >> Abs. Absolutely. If if you do if you want them specifically called out, we can get those to you or or you can and you can also request if I don't know. I
know you have uh the pollinator thing. I don't know if there are some some goody good plants that you'd like to see in there. So, but yeah, we can get you a uh a schedule. Absolutely. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yep. You're welcome. >> Thanks, Mike.
>> Yep. We have any other questions from the Conservation Commission? >> Mary, you have your hand up. >> Uh yes, Madam Chair. So, yeah, I've had a minute to digest this. I I as one
commissioner right in one vote I would be looking for a replication area um to uh accommodate for the road crossing and I would be looking for at least a one to one uh type of uh square footage replication area. I also I understand
the applicants uh you know kind of rebuttal to DP's recommendation for the stream uh crossing standard. Um and you know if you look at something just in a snapshot of time maybe it doesn't make sense to
um force the stream crossing standard on this but you know we don't look at things just an uh you know snapshot a time uh the thing that I would think about and encourage my fellow commissioners to think about is
you know once you put in a property it's got to be maintained uh driveways have to be maint maintained, stream crossings have to be maintained, driveways have to be resurfaced, yada yada yada, right? And so, uh, if we, uh, you know, through
through our our quorum elected to keep this stream crossing standard met, uh, for this parcel, should the next parcel in, you know, the butter come in in five or 10 years and need to upgrade their uh, driveway
because the pipe is caved in or something, we would have an opportunity to uh, ask them to also abide by the stream um crossing standard. And that would allow over time uh to have, you
know, uh an animal and amphibian um or reptile uh kind of uh uh movement through those through those culverts. So that's something to bear in mind. Uh and because of that uh thinking forward and
thinking about how we you know either improve or degradate the wetlands um and the wildlife uh crossings over time, I would be in favor as one vote only of um of adhering to D's comments.
>> That's uh that's me. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, Mary. Um Teddy, you have your hand up. >> Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to echo uh Mary Wilson's comments um as we continue to like approve like single family homes and like our town where we
are developing land that was previously undeveloped. um you know with like the ravages of climate change over time um I I just worry that if we don't abide by DP's
comments that uh our town that has a lot of um floor and fauna will degrade over time. So I would just like to abide by their comments as much as possible.
Awesome. Thank you, Teddy. >> Do we have any other comments members of the commission? Do we have any Oh, Mike, you have your hand up. >> Yes, madam chair. um you know instead of um saying that gee I don't really want
to go along with the D comments uh it would be nice if you had a perhaps a solution to uh go halfway with what the DP is trying to do and and so far we haven't heard that. So unless you have
some solution for the DP comments, I think I'm going to side also with Mary and with Teddy. Uh you know what I'm saying? >> Thank you, Mike. >> Okay. Um,
again, I I it's it's hard to disagree, but I I know only um I know only I think Herurland was able to make it out to the site. And I' I'd hate to I know scheduling is tough. I I I think if you saw I think if you saw where we're proposing to cross,
I I I want I want to say you might you might reconsider and be a little more lenient. and and I don't think I don't think it would show as uh I really don't think it's it's not going against the D comments. I I do hear all of them. I I just think that in this
particular case that with with the above with both abuing um culverts that that are and one being in very close proximity I I I just I I just don't think it's uh super applicable in in this application.
But but uh that that's all I have to add to that. >> Okay. So I'm just going to take a quick poll from the commission. So the suggestions are to have a
onetoone replication area um and also to size the wetland crossing according to the stream the Massachusetts standards. Andrea, would you like to see that on a follow-up plan?
>> Um I would I would definitely like to have a replication area at the very least. Um, but also I I would like to adhere with the the mass mass um standards. >> Great. Thank you,
Teddy. I think you've made it pretty clear you would like to see both of those things. >> I would. >> Okay. Thank you. And Mary, as they were your suggestions, and and did I miss anything? >> Uh, just the species list. I will I will get a species schedule for the plantings
along the 30 foot. >> Okay. So Mary, I'm guessing you're in agree you're in agreement with those suggestions since you made them. >> I I am, Madam Chair, and I just wanted to throw something else out there uh at the same time is uh
>> in the in the area uh definitely with all areas that are within 50 ft of the uh wetland area, I don't think that uh deicing agent should be able to be used. I think that should be a permanent limitation
um for the property on that driveway. >> I'm sorry, what did Oh, the icing deicing. >> Yeah. No, no deicing uh for the driveway uh anywhere where it's uh touches or is within the 50ft buffer zone,
which also includes that entire crossing area, right? Um because that's all within a 50 foot buffer zone. It's not uh it won't be a very steep a very uh steep driveway. So, I don't see why that would be an issue myself. >> Yeah.
>> And were they was it going to be a paved driveway or was it going to be gravel? >> Uh I believe that to the best of my knowledge it's they're they are wanting a paved driveway. They may um knowing that there may be, you know,
knowing that deicing may not be an option, they may want to look gravel driveway. >> I Yeah. I mean, if the if the commission's very opposed to a an asphalt driveway, impermeable, I I'm I'm sure the the clients if it means being
able to build the property, I'm sure they would be uh open to that. >> Okay. But I can't I can't say I can't say for certain, but you know, chances are good. >> Madam Chair, I just wanted to also point out, you know, over the the history of time that I've been on the commission,
um gravel is sometimes uh considered sensitive because the findings off of the gravel run into the wetland. Um and so that's sometimes been a point of contention uh with the commission and >> often uh it seems like uh asphalt and
paving is preferred to manage keep that finding out of the wet wetlands. Anyway, but I do I do agree uh with um both of those proposals as I was you know one of the first commissioners to articulate it and I I think the deicing also is consideration.
>> Okay. Uh Mike Um, I want to just maintain that, uh, you know, we're the voice of the wetlands and, you know, we can't not, um, take the advice from the Department
of Environmental Protection. And just kind of said, gee, I don't like this particular rule in this case, but, you know, you're putting us in a position where we're choosing. And I guess I just
uh would maintain that we we need to stay on the side of the uh what the Department of Environmental Protection is trying to tell us here. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Mike.
>> I I hear you. And likewise, I I was on I was actually on the concom for my town for a few years. It was it was awesome. Unfortunately, I had to step down for medical reasons, but uh I I hear you and and likewise, I'm the I'm the voice of the client, so I'm just trying to, you
know, I'm trying to make it as as buildable for them as possible and and try to make both sides happy, you know, but I I hear you. Respect. >> Okay. Yep. And that's like the best you can do, right? Try to make your client happy, but also
>> do what you do. >> Um Okay. So, it sounds like we would be looking uh for >> we will uh do our best to get you some stream crossing a stream crossing
version of the plan uh for the did you say the 15th was the next meeting? >> Yes. >> Okay. I we will do our best if if if it looks like we we can't make that deadline then I will let you know but but we will do our absolute best on that. And then also the um wetland
replication. >> Yeah. Yep. All all the things on the list. Yep. >> Okay. All right. So, um >> and the uh I'm sorry. And the deicing that that that'll probably I mean we can put a note on the plan uh if you'd like, but that could probably just be thrown
into an order as well eventually. >> Yes. >> Whatever is preferred. >> Okay. All right. With that, um, I think I'd be looking for a motion to continue to our July 15th, 2026 meeting. >> So moved.
>> Second. >> All right. Uh, roll call vote. Andrea Bernat, >> I. >> Petty Dat >> I. >> Mary Wilson, >> I. >> Mike Larouche, >> I. >> And I for myself. All right. Thank you so much. And we'll see you again.
>> Okay. Thank you. And yep, everybody. Have a good Fourth of July. And I hope our AC's all keep working. >> Thank you so much. >> All right. Bye. Have a good one. >> You too. >> Okay, that is it for hearings. So, we'll be moving on to administrators
determinations. Uh the first guest we have is uh 56 Laurel Wayne. And Herlin, would you like to go over this at all? Sure. Um, it was just a
tree removal from an applicant um who has a tree adjacent to his property. In the notes, I said the tree was observed to be substantial size with portions of the upper canopy um exhibiting significant dieback and dead
limbs. The applicant had measured the tree and said that it was 62 feet, but when I went out there and measured it, it was 72 feet from the um waterway. >> Okay. >> And um I agreed that the tree needs to
be removed. So my recommendation would be to remove the tree um leaving the stump behind and minimizing all the work to that area. if they're going to use M. I think they're going to use a crane which they're going to park in a driveway to remove the tree and then
raise it over the house. >> Okay. Um Oh, do we have the applicant on the call? Did they want they want to say anything? Should have asked that first. >> Um I don't know. >> Doesn't look like it. >> Um
let's see. No, I don't see them on the call. Okay. >> So, Mike, give your hand up. >> Yeah. Do you know what kind of tree it is? And are they going to be replacing it? >> Um, it was Let me see what I what I have
as a picture. Was some sort of maple tree. Um, I can't tell what type of maple it was, but it was some sort of maple tree. And um so I I was looking at having them replace
it in kind, but it's outside of the 30 foot, which is really where we do the one one replacement, even though trees in the 100 foot buffer are jurisdictional. Um it's very tight in that area. I don't think it would be wise to have the tree replace. And it's there's dense canopy.
There's other trees. I don't know if anybody got to see some of the pictures that I posted, but there's a small little pine uh directly adjacent to this tree that's probably very immature, like um maybe five or six years old, that
will grow in replacement of this tree. So, I didn't recommend I wouldn't recommend a replacement in kind for this one. >> Oh, >> do you see the picture? >> Yes, >> I have them up. Okay.
>> And here we go with my I have all of the Zoom stuff on my screen trying to navigate around that. And also, where did I go? Here. And then all of the tabs that open with pictures, >> right? So, do you see the little pine
growing directly adjacent to it? >> This one right here. >> Yes. >> Oh, yeah. Got some invasive stuff happening here, too. Right. Yep. >> Is that an invasive?
>> It looks like >> poison ivy. >> Bittersweet. >> Poison ivy or some Yeah, bittersweet. >> I think it's bittersweet. >> Oh, those are the biggest bittersweet leaves I've ever seen. >> Yeah, there's some poison ivy on the other side though. Like directly at the bottom of the tree, there was some
poison ivy. And Hurling, is that a pine? I mean, the picture almost makes it look like it's a a hemlock right beside >> right beside it. >> So, in the other in the Oh, in the other picture, it looks like a pine. I can't
remember off the top of my head, but I remember that there was a little pine tree growing adjacent to it. Um, let me see. Is Nope, that's not it. >> And and I'll just say that I'm just I trust your judgment, right? if it's tight and there are other, you know,
succession trees uh coming up there, I I trust your judgment. But >> yes, >> my husband and I always fight over conifers. I'm like, "That's that's not a pine. That's something else." And he's like, "No, they're all pine trees." And and so it just was reflexive for me to
go, "Oh, is that a pine?" >> It looked like a pine from the picture. I can't remember off the top of my head, but it if you look at the like the walkway, it's very tight there. So, I am hoping that with this tree and the dieback from it that the other trees in
the area can actually thrive. >> You're right, Mary. That is poison ivy. >> Looks like it from this picture. >> On one side, it's poison ivy, but the other side is definitely something else. And >> this looks like poison ivy. >> Yes.
starting to feel itchy already. Okay. Um, yes, it looks like there's probably not a lot of space there for replication plantings. Okay. So, looking for a motion to approve the
administrator's determination. So moved. Second roll call vote. Mike Larouche >> I. >> Andrea Bernett. >> I >> uh Tate Det
>> I. >> Mary Wilson >> I. >> And I for myself. Okay. Um next administrator's determination. We have a 82 Peninsula Drive. Do we have
the applicant on the call? We do not. Um, do you want to go over this at all, Harlin? >> Uh, it was the same for this one. Um, >> pulling up application. >> This tree actually um
they there was some concerns because it's really really close to the house, but hold on. Just pulling up some pictures. Oops. Are you going to share your screen? >> Yeah. Can you see it? >> Yes. >> All right.
>> Also, go ahead. >> I just want to do close tabs to the right. There we go. Right back. >> So, same for this one. At the time of their inspection, the tree was observed to be mature pine exhibiting significant decline including excessive loss of needles branches throughout the upper canopy with only limited live growth
remaining. Um the tree appears to be structurally compromised and presents a potential for safety concern due to the presence of dead limbs and approximity. the So, this was I got this call um
we had like some wind like really bad nights where there was it was really windy. I don't know if you guys remember a couple weeks ago or a week or two ago >> and the tree was actually swaying when I got there and um I think the tree should
come down. You can see it's kind of tilting to one side. But I think this one would be an ink kind replication because there is enough space for them to plant something else in that area and it would provide canopy because there is that hollowess. You can see it in that
picture for the upper canopy. Excuse me. >> So I would recommend a replica a replanting for this one. >> Okay. Would we want to see another pine or something else?
>> Um, I would be open to anything that's already in the area. Um, >> so either a pine and I think there were some maple trees to hemlock. >> Okay. Um, do you have any comments or
questions for members of the commission? Madam Chair, I' I'd just be hesitant about hemlocks just because we have that woolly uh aphalg good infestation that >> Yes. >> you know. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. But other than that, you know,
pines or native uh hardwoods I' I'd be happy with. >> Okay. >> I can definitely recommend some. Okay. >> Okay. So, um, what was the caliber on that? Do you know? >> Uh, it was above 18 in.
>> Okay. So, that's a two to one. >> A two to one. Yep. Oh, it could be three. >> Do you think there's space for three? >> I don't think there is space for three. So, >> you think there's space for two? >> I think so.
>> Okay. So, um, looking for a motion. Does anyone have any any opinions on the think two would fit there? That works
based on those pictures. So, we'd be recommending two based on our rules. Okay. Do I have a motion to approve the administrator or an agent I think we
should be calling at this point determination with a 2:1 replacement with her can work with the applicant to figure out what would be best there. >> So move second.
>> All right. Roll call vote. Andrea Bernout >> I. >> Teddy Ducet >> I. Mary Wilson >> I >> Mike Larouche >> I >> and I for myself. All right. Um
okay. Up next, we have a extension request at 757 Chase Road and that is the what is the um verbage we're using here?
That's an extension request permit at 757 Chase Road. And there is an NOI for this from 2021, right? And it's going to expire in August.
Um, Herland, do you wanna or like do we have an applicant on the call? >> Yes. Uh, it's Jim Elanti from Land Design Collaborative. We're the um civil engineers, landscape architects on the project. >> Okay.
to go over and >> the project is a little bit since I don't think were any of us on the commission in 2021, Mary. No, I don't think any of us were on. >> No, not I. >> Okay. >> Uh would you like me to do a quick
presentation of the project or >> Yeah, that would be great. Just to give us a quick overview of >> what the project is. All right, share my screen. Uh, let's see. Can you everyone see the screen? >> Yep.
>> Okay. So, this is a um an existing conditions aerial photo of the project. Chase Road is at the bottom of the screen here. Uh, this is the existing Mazda dealership and this is the existing Subaru dealership located here.
Um the yellow line is uh the property that is uh entirely owned by Empire Management Corporation or Colonial Automotive Group. Um it can it it's comprised of about four lots I believe. Um there's one vacant lot here. There's
one lot for the Mazda dealership. There's one for the Subaru. And there's an existing house located um uh at the bottom corner of the page here as well. but they're all owned by Empire Management. So, there are uh two wetlands on the property. There's one
off to the left here. Um and you can see the 30 foot and the 50 foot uh buffer zones as well as the 100 foot here. There's also a wetland located along uh the this is northerly proper line north is to the right. So there's a uh
existing wellon shown in blue here and then again the the 30 and the 50 and the 100 foot buffer zones. So that's the existing conditions. Um as part of the proposed project and again this was all approved um back in 2001 uh we went
through site plan approval with the planning board uh storm water with the planning board. We had a special permit with the ZBA and then then again order of conditions with um conservation. Um all the all of the permits with the
planning board and the um ZBA have have expired and we just recently filed a new stormwater um permit, new site plan um application as well as a special permit application. And those were all again
peer-reviewed by Graves as they did the the initial peer review 5 years ago. Um, but they peer-reviewed our work again and um, those were just recently approved. So, not nothing has really changed from what was previously
approved. Um, the only reason why the project never went to construction was because Subaru had updated their uh, construction or branding standards. So, u there's there's a new new building design uh that Subaru had just released.
So, um the footprint changed very minor. Um but all of that is outside the buffer zone. Um all of the work within the buffer zone hasn't changed from what was previously approved in 2001. Um there's there's no work in the 30ft no disturb. There's a little bit of
grading in the 50 foot and then within the 100 foot there's uh the driveway that goes around the the side of the building with some um with some associated grading and then there's a uh a basin located just uh to the north of the building or to the northwest of the
building. Um so basically it's a redevelopment of the existing Subaru dealership. Um, I don't know if anyone's been out there, but the the existing building, um, it's just inefficient. Uh, there's, you know,
there's been several additions over the years. There's several, uh, finished floor elevations. Um, it's just an inefficient building. So, this is a, um, a well-needed upgrade to that facility. So, that's basically the project. If
anyone has any questions, I'm happy to answer. Okay. Um, Teddy, you have your hand up. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, do you have a species list of what's being planted here?
>> Yes. Uh, let's see. There's there's no proposed plantings in the buffer zone. Um, there's just basically vegetation around around the building. Um, but there is a planting plan.
Uh, see if I can follow that up. My only request would be that they would be native species. Oops. Yeah, there's um this maple. There's a magnolia that's uh ornamental along the side of the building.
oak, uh, juniper, and some ornamental grasses along the front along the front along Chase Road, which would be salt salt tolerant. So, I don't know if if anyone's familiar with the site, but right now there's just a basically a wide open curb cut across
the front of the site. So, we are adding this large landscape island across the front to basically control uh vehicular circulation around the building. Can you go back to the species list? >> Can you make it a little bit bigger? >> Yeah.
>> Okay. And I think for me, I'd definitely like to update some of these species to native. Some of these definitely aren't. >> Um, >> yeah. And like I said, there's nothing none of these are in the buffer zone.
These are all outside the buffer zone. >> Okay. Um, >> well outside the buffer zone. >> Do we have any other questions from members of the commission? As as I understand it, this is just an
extension for the existing uh order of conditions. Is that right? >> That's correct. Yes. >> Okay. And uh Madam Chair, I thought I saw something six, eight weeks ago saying that the governor had uh issued default extensions. Um Hurlin will
probably remember that better than me, but I thought I'd seen default extensions to maybe 2028. I have not seen I have not seen the default extensions to 2028, but at the beginning of 2025 legislation passed um
where there was verbiage stating that permits that were in Q approved or pending during COVID um starting from 2021 to 2025 were granted an automatic extension of
uh two extra years. So if a permit was uh gr if a if an order of conditions was granted between that time frame then they were granted an extra two years from their expiration date. So if it expired in 3 years it would now expire in 5 years. I haven't heard about the 2028 extension but that could be
possibly part of what's floating around. Um and we just haven't heard of it yet. >> Yeah. Um, so I know this one was originally 3 years. So that would have been August of 2024. So now it's coming
up for August 2026 would be the lapse or the expiration, >> right, >> of the permit. Is that right? >> That's that's what my understanding would be. Yes. >> Um, I haven't heard anything about that,
Mary. I was trying to look it up. I'm probably misremembering it. >> So, um, >> so Herllin, do you have uh any you'd like to add?
Yes, mad manager. I would like to note that um though not relevant to the specific project while I was on site and I'm going to read my report. I observed vehicles being washed on the property to the um right side behind the current structure that is designated
as some sort of garage or um maybe like an outhouse. I I don't know what it's on the site plan what it is specifically. the wash of the water appearing to flow towards the adjacent wetland resource area. And um while
there I also met with the uh chair from the board of health who had presented on site regarding the same concern. Staff indicated that this had been their practice for many years even though there was a violation that was issued by the board of health last year and a
season's assist. um there were detergents, oils, grease, and other pollutants that could potentially impact the adjacent resource area and it was completely disregarded. And I want to preface this by saying that this should be into consideration when an extension
is given to a current order of conditions. If the property owner cannot abide by current standards of the wetlands protection act, it makes me believe that they are not um they are not in their right to receive
an extension until they sort of remediate these issues that are ongoing. >> Okay. Thank you, Helen. And if I can address that um madam chair. So uh I was made
aware of that um site inspection uh was believe it was yesterday and the day before. So um the general manager did uh did disconnect um any any water supply to that building and has stopped uh any car washing on
site. Um, I guess what they have been doing over the years was any vehicle that came into the site um for repairs uh was being detailed or washed before it went back to the customer. They stopped that several years ago. Um or
and possibly even last year, I'm not sure. Um so they were only washing the new vehicles um that were that were being purchased at the dealership. So that's what they were doing recently and they have stopped that. Um they removed the hose
from the building and they are now bringing those vehicles that are purchased on site um to uh the local car car wash down the street. I believe it's within a mile or two of the site. So they have stopped um any of those car
washing uh operations on this on this site. And again, this that's part of why we want to uh we're proposing this new building. We want to kind of get rid of all of that stuff and and make this building more efficient and and um you know cease all those operations. So
that's part of the proposal here. >> Okay. Mary, you have your hand up. >> Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. Um that's uh that's really concerning to hear that this has been going on and that the uh uh current management thought that that
was okay to just let happen. Um I want to make certain that um the applicants represented it is clear uh that our expectation is that no no washing water, no chemicals, no anything is going into the wetland no
matter how it's happening. Just saying that you're disconnecting water from a building, you know, doesn't necessarily mean that somebody's not walking around with a power washer doing the exact same thing in a different manner. So,
>> and I I believe the um I I did see the the um email that was issued last year in 2025 regarding uh the car washing and I believe believe the way there's probably some confusion confusion with the general manager and and um you know
what was written by the the board of health agent. I guess the concern was or the way the the email was written that there was concern that the the car washing fluids were being discharged into the storm drain that went out onto Chase Road. Um so they they moved the
operations to a different location so it wouldn't drain to those storm drains and they thought that replicated the problem but obviously it didn't. Um and they weren't aware that they were still violating until the recent visit this week. So they have stopped those
operations at this point. >> Okay. And you're you're clear regardless of how it's happening, >> right? >> It cannot be going into the wetland. >> I we Yes, we are not. Yes, we are well aware of that. >> Okay. Okay. Because I I do >> everybody on board everybody on board is
is is well aware of that at this point. >> All right. Good. Uh thank you, Madam Chair. >> Thank you, Mary. Um, do we have any other questions from members of the commission?
>> Okay. >> I have a question, Madam Chair, about um about u process, right? Uh since there had been an interaction, you know, within the past couple of years and there's been a recent, you know, misunderstanding, uh do we need to do something more
formal than telling the applicant um representative that we really intend that there not be anything going into the wetland or uh is saying it in this meeting and recording as meeting minutes considered enough due diligence? And you
know, I don't know if Herurland has advice for us there or what. >> I'd be more than happy to send out a you know, a pre-warning of potential violation and enforcement if activities do continue.
>> Okay. I mean, it sounds like that might be the thing to do just to kind of emphasize that we are serious about this and to also make certain that they aren't misunderstanding any of the words about, oh yeah, well, we disconnected the hose here, we disconnected the hose there, that that's talking about, you
know, secondary things and we really are serious about nothing getting into the wetland there. I I would be in favor of that personally. Um I I would also like to give them a chance to do the right thing, right? Um and to give them a little bit of the benefit of the doubt,
although it is troubling that they've, you know, had some interactions with board of health that it seems like they've not heated. Um, but you know, I do like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but I am I am interested uh, you know, in in maybe pursuing a direct
correspondence between Herurlin and uh, and the applicant to minimize any opportunities for how serious we consider this. >> Can I address this, please? >> Yes. >> This is u, sorry, that's the chair's
responsibility to grant, not mine. I used to be the chair and sometimes I just >> it just comes out. >> I didn't even notice. Okay. Yes, you you may address that. >> I'm Brian Laughy from Empire Management. We're the owners of the property. Um
North End Subaru and Mazda are tenants at the property. I was made aware of the situation on Monday and I visited the site today just to find out what the circumstances are. And the circumstances are I mean
not exactly as I'm hearing them presented today. So, the our tenant Luna uh North End Subaru got I believe it was an email that discussed water that was running into a catch basin at
the edge of Chase Road. They had nothing to do with the wetland. They were asked not to discharge water that ran into the catch basin because apparently that catch basin, I'm assuming, has a culvert under Chase Road and probably is a point source discharge
into the wetlands on the other side. So what the management of Subaru did was discontinued doing what they were told not to do any longer, which was they discontinued discharging into the catch basin, which meant that the discharge
went somewhere else. And the discharge was up by the building where they washed cars, which is about 85 ft from the BVW. And I believe there's some bank out there, too. So it's not like nobody ignored the original order. They did exactly what they were told to do and there was no
direct discharge into a wetland. But what further complicates it is I'm the one that's responsible for the real estate and to my knowledge we never got any not we're the owners. We never got any sort of notification. Only the staff
at tenants got the notification. So, I can assure you as the owner of that property, I was there today and that won't happen again. I mean, that's just not the way we do business. If there's a We've been doing this for a very long
time. We own properties all over the Commonwealth and we deal with conservation commissions, planning boards, board of health every day. And I understand what we can do and what we can't do. And I understand that we can't be discharging even into the buffer zone without
uh dealing with the conservation aspects of that. So I just want to assure you that there's no more car washing going to go on at that facility um until the new facility is built and we make sure that it's designed properly designed to accommodate the car washing
that we need. So, I just want to make it clear it was there was a a miscommunication and a misunderstanding apparently in that the original email and notification from the town only involved water going into the catch basin which we immediately stopped and
again there won't be any more washing of vehicles there. That's stopped too. >> Okay. Thank you. Um Caroline, you have your hand up. Yeah, I just want to respectfully say
that I was on site and I saw the person literally washing the cars in the 100 foot buffer and the way topography works is the highest point of of elevation leads to the lowest point which is the resource area. I don't want to keep this
discussion ongoing about whether the cars were being washed in the buffer zone or where the water was leading. This is what I witnessed with my very own eyes when I was on the property. And if there's a miscommunication between the tenant and the property owner, it has absolutely nothing to do with conservation.
>> It does because unless the property owner knows what the concern is, and I really I admitted in the very beginning that the car washing was taking place 85 ft from the wetland. It was in the buffer zone. There's no question about it. It was in the buffer zone. whether
it was anything was getting into the buffer zone. I don't have the I didn't look close enough to find out and that would take a lot more investigation. But again, if the owner isn't aware of it, it's very difficult for us to control. We are aware of it now and it's been
ended. So, it's not occurring again. >> Okay. And um so Herlin I know I think you are still going to the plan would be to still um send something to the
the company that it has the the building on the property. But if you were to do that also CC the property owner >> correct >> and then if we have anything moving forward we can always in hopefully we
don't but if we were we would definitely include the property owner on any further correspondence or issues. >> If you have any problems with the property whatsoever, you're more than welcome to call me 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and we will get out there
and solve it immediately. That's that's how we handle our business. That's how we'll handle construction. You're welcome to my private cell phone number and anything will get taken care of immediately. >> Okay.
>> The I think that the issue with this is that on the property card for this property, the owner address is 757 Chase Road. So, we are mailing it to the property owner on the property card. Oh, so maybe that should be updated.
Um, so what she's saying is that typically, you know, if if we're mailing a violation out, the violation would go to whomever is listed as the property owner in our GIS or in our town records. >> Tax records. Yeah.
>> Yeah. And um it sounds like the property owner here is listed as 757 Chase Road. So it shows Empire Management Company, Carob Colonial Import, Inc. and that's at 7057 Chase
Road. So you may want to talk to I guess would that be the town clerk, assess tax, no assessors, someone in town. Does anyone have a recommendation there? Just to get that address updated
so that if there is ever correspondence, it would go to you as the property owner. >> In this in this particular instance, the only notification was an email to the dealership. There was no letter and it
did not involve discharge to a wetland. It involved discharge to a catch basin. There was never any letter or any official communication from the town of Lunenburgg regarding the any discharge into the buffer zone.
>> Mayor, you have your hand up. >> Yeah. Um I I just wanted to say that um I think we're all talking around each other, right? And and the important thing is how do we manage moving forward with clear expectations? And it sounds like, you know, the I appreciate um
Brian from Empire Management showing up and saying that he's committed to doing the right thing and ensuring his tenant does the right thing. Um, and it does sound like the official tax uh address is is the physical address of the
dealership, but I'm wondering if Brian couldn't reach out to Herland um after the fact and ensure that that she has uh for an informal basis at least his um his contact information. Um, and then Brian of course could then in parallel go and update anything in the tax
records and and then Hurlin would be then able to do the notification both to uh both to the tenant and to Empire management. Um, you know, just to kind of put the stake in the ground of what
we're saying now. And I and I think we all kind of agree that in the past it was board of health. It sounds like that was the record was it was board of health. that was discharged into a um into a storm drain. Um and so the whole issue about the wetland either wasn't
acknowledged then or misunderstood and and that stuff happens. But moving forward, I think it's important that we're all clear. Um Erlin, would it be okay uh to uh just get Brian's information offline and copy him on that
uh on that notification? Yeah, he can email the LCC email and I can definitely grab his information. >> Mr. Romani will email staff tomorrow and make sure that you have my direct contact information. And if there's if
there's any issues that arise between now and and whenever, just pick up the phone and call me. You can send the official letter, but if you pick up the phone and call me, it'll be addressed immediately. That's awesome to hear, >> Madam Chair. I think back to you. Um,
and thanks for letting me um me speak. >> No, thank you, Mary. >> Okay, so I guess where do we want to go from here? I know we have a extension requests before us
and we have some outstanding issues uh that as of so you know as of right now we don't know for sure are resolved. We're being told that the water source was disconnected. There is no more possibility of them washing on site but
it sounds like we've also been told that in the past. So, um, >> oh, excuse me. The the notification only involved the catch basin. It didn't involve the wetland.
So, the it did not it specifically involved drainage from the washing going into the catch basin and the board of health said you can't do that. So, we stopped doing it as we were told as the dealership was told. They stopped doing anything that
discharged into the catch basin. Unfortunately, it discharged somewhere else that it shouldn't have been, but they they were not aware of. I mean, how many people out there that aren't in our business dealing with this regulatory stuff all the time know that you can't
wash your car within, you know, 100 ft of a wetland without a permit? I mean, that's I I can't expect we can't expect the the guys up there selling in cars to know all the environmental regulations. They just did what they were told to do. Stop discharging into the
catch basin. >> Okay. Um Herllin, do you have a recommendation on how you'd like to see this move forward? I think we can issue I think I would advise the commission to issue the extension and you know this is
just a a prephase to we will be on site making sure that the tenants are abiding by the wetlands protection act. >> Okay. And then you still will be sending just an official letter. >> Correct.
>> Okay. Um Okay. So, as far as the extension request goes, is there like a statutory time frame that we normally do? I can't This is my first extension request, I think. Is it a year
or do you have a certain time frame? >> The extension is given for the I believe it's two years. >> Okay. >> Well, we're it's three. We're actually requesting three. You can request up to three years. Okay. So, you're requesting three.
>> Yeah. I mean, you know, >> just so just so you understand how the time frame works before we can start, we've already uh we've had we've um received our permits from the ZBA and the planning board, but we probably have
another six to nine months um worth of architectural and design work because that all has to be approved by Subaru. So the construction under the best of circumstances wouldn't even start until next spring.
It's more likely closer to the summer. So that's why the three and it's probably and just probably more than you need to know but just so you understand the way we're going to do it is it's going to be done in two phases. We are going to um demo uh de demo the building
in the rear this back rear of the service department build the new service department. When that's complete then we'll demo the showroom and then build the showroom to add on to the ex building we just built. So our construction period is going to be a
little bit longer than it would nor normally be a construction period of you know 9 to 13 months and it's probably going to be closer to a 18 to 24month construction projects because it's in two phases. So that's why the three years is necessary.
>> Okay. All right. Um, do we have any questions or comments from members of the commission on a three-year extension? Do I have a motion to approve the three-year extension?
So moved. >> Second. >> Okay. Roll call vote. Andrea Bernout. I >> Petty Ducet. >> I >> Mary Wilson. >> I >> Mike Larouche. >> Hi. >> And I for myself.
>> Great. Thank you so much. And uh >> Herland, I just um I sent you an email with Brian's contact information and CCD him on the email. So, you should have that. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you and have a great fourth. >> You too. Thanks so much. Have a good night.
really I'm happy to hear from if you you go over there and inspection even during construction whatever you have an issue just pick up the phone and call I I you know like to hear about as soon as something happens and we'll try to get it addressed. So thank you.
>> All right. Thank you. >> Okay. Um up next we have enforcements. We have 1168 Massa Breer on the agenda. Harland, do you have an update that
you'd like to go over on that? >> Yeah, sorry, my unmute button was not working. happens. >> So, uh, we received a notice from Mass recently, and I'm just going to read
um what they're advising the commission. Um, sorry, I'm just trying to find uh so basically based on the observations from the site visit, a review of aerial imagery, permitting records, and order
of ord um D is recommending that the commission move forward with an enforcement order from the commission as a as the best preliminary step to address the situation. and they would like the enforcement
order to require the following. An evaluation of the property for all the wetland resource area and reviews that quantifies all altered wetland resource areas. The elevation should be conducted by a qualified wetland professional and the
evaluation should include um subsurface soil analysis of sufficient depth throughout the site including areas along the stream and areas that were confirmed through the ORAD. DP recommends that this del this deliverable is due no later than 30 days
of the issuance of the order. They're also asking for a res a submission of a restoration plan which includes surveyed too plans and a description of the unpermitted work in the areas to be restored. They want written confirmation
of intent to comply to the order in five business days after the enforcement order is issued. Um and that they recommend that the commissioner review the BBW delineations associated with the ORAD so that we can and so that we can
confirm the bank resource area associated with the intermittent streams and that it is still present on the property and should be included in the evaluation. That was a mouthful. I'm sorry. >> Yes. >> Okay. So basically DP would like for us
to move forward with a enforcement order tomorrow. They are through file research. The first mention of this potential violation on the commission or something of their us was 2023. We have a three-year time frame from when the
property transfers two years from when the property transfers ownership that we can still hold a violation in place and that is coming to an end soon. Um, and I think that I agree with the commission. We have reached out to the
property owner multiple times. It took us a very long time for us to get D out there only because we would never hear back from the property owner. We have sent multiple certified letters, uh, phone calls. I have had conversations with their engineer who came before us
and presented us, um, some sort of plan that they had in place, timeline, and they, you know, they seem to be wanting to work, but I think that they're not being pushed a little bit or enough so so that they're actually presenting the
work to us or presenting a plan or putting something in place for remediation of this property. So, I would also advise the commission to move forward with the enforcement order. >> Okay. Um, thank you, Herin. Thank you for getting some movement on
this, too. Um, okay. So, do we have any questions for members of the commission about what Herllin just went over from the DP? Mary, you have your hand up. >> Uh, yeah. I I
I don't have any issue with anything that the DP wrote. Um, and it's uh, you know, makes makes a lot of sense for me, but I I have more my questions are more about, you know, kind of tactical execution. Like, you know, we're in a we're in a
statewide drought, so delineation. Will the soil still be reflective of, you know, we were in a drought last year. Will the soil still be reflective of a historical wetland? >> That's a good question. Um, I think
because we have that ORAD that they had filed a very long time ago that shows where the BBW was on both ends of that property, they can use that as a guidance. But we can um issue an enforcement order and elongate that time
frame of presenting us some sort of plan. It doesn't have to be in five days. they they have they can have five days to comply with a written notice back saying hey we are going to do this and then when they come forth in front of the commission the commission can
give them a time frame um let's wait to get this stuff uh this the parcel redelineated at the end of this year or in next spring or whenever you guys feel feasible because of the drought. Um, but I think that we need to move forward
with the enforcement order in order for to get them to comp actually comply with actually putting something together. But I agree. Um, we have been in a drought. I think I think we should be moving up to level three. I honestly thought we were going to move up to level three next last week and they didn't. Um, but
I think it's around the corner which makes things kind of worse for delineations. Um, I know that when DP was out there, they did a little bit of auguring and they were able to pull up some
subsurface material that looked a little strange. Um, according to the some of the conversation we we have with DP, I think there an alleged assumption that something was paved and then Phil was
brought in over it. So, um, yeah, I think I think you're right about possibly waiting on the delineation until out of the stout,
>> but filing the enforcement or doing the enforcement order at least gets the ball rolling and has us in the right time frame, >> I believe. So I think if we can do the enforcement order with a comp with with
a an like an order to comply in five days. So they have to respond to us within like 5 days of receiving the order whether it's via email or mail, right? And then once we get them to respond to us, the commission can decide
we want this done in 6 months, 8 months, 10 months, 30 days, 45 days, 90 days. Okay. Okay. So, >> okay. So, I mean it sounds like the best
path forward is to issue an enforcement order immediately. >> I think I think it would be an issuance of an enforcement order with the recommendations made by D. I think that that would be the best. And then I can type it up, call their engineer tomorrow
and mail it out via certified mail. >> Okay. Does anyone have any comments? >> Should we vote? >> Yes. >> Okay. Um, do I have a motion to approve
our agent? um issuing an enforcement order with the DP's recommendations to the property at 1186 Massavier. >> So moved. >> Second.
Roll call vote. Andrea Bernap >> I. >> Teddy Det. >> I. >> Mary Wilson. >> Madam Chair, I recuse myself from the vote. >> Okay. Uh Mike Larouche >> I >> and I for myself.
Okay. So that's still four. So we still have a quorum. Um okay. So it sounds like we will be you'll be issuing an enforcement order tomorrow. >> Yes. >> Okay. Great.
Um, up next we have the no updates that I know of commission open. Oh, commission open discussion. I like that. Do we have
anything that I guess that would be like kind of topics unknown but not? >> Uh, Madam Chair, do we want to socialize um the outcome of the grants? Uh oh. >> Oh yeah, >> it's a bummer. >> It is. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. So, um I'm happy to give a summary if you want. >> Yeah. No, please do. >> So, the uh mass uh recreational trails uh grant program, which has, you know, historically been a a really good um source of uh funding for us doing uh
conservation land improvements. Um, you know, this year, uh, Jenny and I, uh, applied for separate grants on behalf of the commission. Uh, Jenny applied for partial grant on the Table Rock, um,
parking area. Uh, and, you know, of course, the, uh, the permitting work had been also funded by, uh, Mass Recreational Trails Program. I applied for um the uh installation of the Raino
property park and area and again with the um engineering and uh permitting work done uh by um you know funded by recreational trails grant um you know the permitting work was phase one and that's that was
funded Jenny and I follow uh did the follow-on grants for installation and unfortunately we were noticed ified last week that we were not recipients of um grant awards. Um but it seems like this year that um overall grant funding uh is
is way way down. I think Jenny, you actually kind of looked at that. Um I do you remember what percentage um the grant funding was down from from the feds? So, I didn't see how many grants were
funded versus not funded for the previous years. This year though, they had 121 applications and they they accepted 50. Um, a lot of the ones that I saw that were accepted were, you know, rail
trails and like big it seemed like there's more big ticket stuff. >> Yeah. >> Or they had a higher matching percentage than we were looking >> those are actually more heavily funded
from the state than from the federal government. The ones that are below a h 100,000 are more heavily underwritten by the federal government. And I think that's the place where they're more cash strapped because um the federal funding has uh gone away
anyway. So, bad news, but uh you know certainly we can apply again you know next year and and I I do know the Snow Rider or has been uh really uh bugging me about opportunities for them to get
in and and sponsor a um sponsor a grant application. So, Reo Property might actually be a good one for them to take on and do a submittal next year, you know, if if the commission is willing. But um you know there's certainly no reason why we can't just go back and
apply you know again and again until we get the funding. >> Yep. Um Teddy, you have your hand up. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to say thank you guys for um submitting those proposals or for those grants. I appreciate it regardless of
not receiving them. Um, I also wanted to note that the library trustees are um applying for a grant to install a 4,000 foot food forest at the library. So, that's um an exciting prospect.
>> Yeah, very cool. I hope they get it. Um, and I want to say thank you to Mary because although it sounds like I submitted a grant, so much of what I sense came from all of
this like work that Mary had done. Um, and it was like an incredible amount of work and she really guided me through 95% of it. So, it's a bummer I didn't get to get my first grant, but um Mary
really did most of the leg work there. So, >> well, we've uh we've got it to Thank you, Jenny. We've The good news is we have them practically written uh for the next application. So, >> we'll be in good shape
>> next time. >> Yep. Okay. So, uh, I think that's all we have to say about that, right, Mary? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um, topics unknown.
Anything more uplifting the no grants bylaw discussion? Do we want to talk about that at all tonight? Take that as a no or not tonight. >> Okay. Um, all right. Conservation budget mass
tract. We do have a lot of notes about this. Uh, Harlin, do you want to do a quick? >> Yeah. >> So, this is part of that forest legacy program that North County Land Trust is helping a property owner in the town of Lunerberg with. Um, there was a little
bit back a little bit a little back and forth, excuse me. It was a little back and forth between uh Anna Wilkins and town council in regards to what is required from the town. We had a little Zoom meeting and
um we received a message from uh council saying that they had a conversation with our town manager and she's referring to the commission for a question as part of the deed. So Anna Wilkins from North County Land Trust had requested that um
we have town council review the deed of the property. Um I if you guys remember correctly she came forth in front of the commission and explains how the forest legacy program works and in part of the deed it says to aid the project cost share it is it is a town willing to
cover 25% of the cost for a 75 reimbursement rate. The question relates specifically to the p purchase of title insurance and um our town council recommended that title insurance with any municipality lands the recommended that title insurance with any municipal lands
acquisition and the town manager concurred but the 25% contribution would be from conservation funds not the general funds. So this is something that the conservation commission needs to decide on. Um we asked what would cuz
25% of you know that could be as little as a dollar you know or millions of dollars. So basically Anna Wilkins replied stating that it's difficult with forest legy leg legacy projects to kind of get um title reports done before the
yellow book appraisals that takes really long. So council suggested that instead of waiting for the 6 to 8 weeks that um another person in their firm was going to send us like potential insurance prices
and that commission discussed these estimates at this upcoming meeting on Wednesday. The agenda can Yeah. So basically according to what council sent to us if I can find my third page um let's see
the cost of the title exam is $750 give or take a few dollars and then the cost of title insurance which would we need to the the commission would need to absorb 25% of um if the property is
assessed at $250,000 then it's like $1,000 and so on and so forth. I think I sent you guys this in the um meeting materials. So basically what they want the commission to do is decide whether the commission wants to
absorb the cost of the 25% for this project and if so from what account? >> Okay, so that would be 25% of anywhere between 1,62 or 4250. So, anywhere
between like $260 to $1,63, >> correct? >> Um, >> oh, hang on. Can you say that again? >> So, we'd have to absorb, you'd have to be looking at 25% of the cost of the
title insurance. So, the title insurance at 250,000K would be 1,62. So you'd be looking at what somewhere around like 250 260 something there. >> Oh okay. That's all right. So the net cost of the of the title insurance for
250,000 assessed the net cost of title insurance is 162. We would be obligated to 25% of that net of that. Well I'm saying net should have been gross of that gross. >> Yeah. And then also 25% of the title
exam I would assume. Right, Harland? >> Correct. >> So I mean I think I to me I think this makes sense. Uh >> I think it makes sense. >> Yeah. This is a a project that we would like to
have happen. Um, do we have any comments for members of the commission? Okay. If we were to approve funds, where would we approve them from? Mary,
do you have any suggestions? Well, I mean, we have the timber rights fund, right? >> Okay. >> We do have timber rights fund. >> Yeah. Uh and we generally do allocations out of the timber rights fund. And right now, we don't have I mean, we were reserving money for
uh you know, our 25% uh matching should we get those um grants, but we didn't get those grants. >> Yeah, that's true. Sadly. Okay. Well, good. Maybe we can go to something else. Okay. So, if we were
to move forward and approve this, we would need to set a budget, right? So, we're looking at the top of the title insurance. That would be and these numbers are rough numbers, >> right? So, I don't think we would need
to vote on an actual account and number right now. I think that you would need to vote on the approval of Yes. And then once they put this through, I can come back to the commission and say this is how much the actual, you know,
monies to cents is going to be. Can we make a motion to, you know, draw it from this account? >> Okay. All right. So, right now, all we need is an approval. >> Correct. Approval and from the timber rights account it would come from. So,
that way they have some sort of knowledge of where it's coming from. >> Yeah. Okay. Do I have a motion to approve using the temporary fund to cover 25% of
the cost of the title exam and the title insurance for the uh guess the purchase of the Massie tract uh with the forest legacy program hoard but not the actual purchase of
But for that reason, >> don't all raise your hand at once. >> You're asking for a motion to approve? >> Yes. >> So moved. >> Sorry. >> I feel like we're like off tonight. >> Yep.
>> Do we have a second? Do I have a second? Anyone? >> Second. Okay. Can I go with Mike for the second? Um, roll call vote. Andrea Bernap, >> I. >> Teddy Det. >> I. >> Mary Wilson.
>> I. >> Mike Larish. >> I. >> And I for myself. >> Okay. Um, man, we weren't as excited about that as I thought we would be because this is, you know, this is a I think a
very cool opportunity. Um, okay. Up next, we encouragement issues. Are we still working on figuring out that list with Bob? >> Yes. Uh, I think Bob is still away. I
sent him a message uh today, actually, but I didn't hear back. So, >> okay. >> As soon as he gets back, I know he will make it into my office. >> Okay. >> All right. Um, Hollis Road residents. Mike,
do you have anything you'd like to go over? >> Yeah. >> Were you able to put the wood stove on Facebook? >> Oh, wait. I was not. I thought that you ended up messaging somebody who said they would put it up. Did I read that wrong?
>> I may have read that wrong. Uh, >> okay. >> Uh, Chris said he does not. Chris Ruth, the facilities director, says he doesn't have a Facebook account. Um, and but I sent you a text saying,
"Could you do it?" And you said you don't have a Facebook account. >> Do I have a Facebook account? I don't >> really. >> Um, I thought everybody had one except me, but apparently I'm not alone. cut.
And then he said the town um the town manager has an account and so would you forward that information over to her so she >> Oh, okay. So, Jen Warren.
>> Yes. >> Madam Chair, I have a Facebook account. I can I can post it on my Facebook account. Um, >> we're just looking >> better better for the noise to hit me than to hit her, I think. >> Okay, sure. Um, essentially I sent a
photo uh to both Chris and to Jen uh just to post it that it's what they call an allnighter wood stove. It's vintage. >> Wondered where you were going for a
minute there, Mike. like kind of paused. It's an allnighter. >> It's an allnighter, you know, which means you put wood in it and it'll last all night. So, uh, but it's heavy. I mean, the thing weighs like 500 lb.
That's why I didn't decide on my own to put it on the um, you know, on the side of the road. It's like something someone would love to have this for a camp and
in the wintertime in New England and um Yes. >> Okay. Send me the details. I'll post it. >> Okay. >> I just forwarded it to you, Mary. >> Getting rid of other people's stuff. >> Dropping the ball. How heavy is that?
It's 500 lb because it's it's lined with uh fireproof brick >> along with the um cast iron um that surrounds that brick. So, it's it's pretty substantial.
And uh given our cleaning that's going to happen on the 6th and 7th of July, they're just going to have to clean it round it until someone comes in and says, "Oh, we'd love to have this. We'll take it out for you." That's what we're hoping uh to have done. Given it's
probably worth a couple of hundred, I don't think it's worth that much to us to try to sell it. if someone were to come and just say, "Yeah, we'll we'd love to take it out and uh off your
hands and we'll use it in uh in our camp or wherever." Uh I'm not sure if it's you want something like that in your house, but who knows? Um >> Um >> Now, does that need to be cut out? Is it
like attached to a chimney? It's just like a >> Well, the the the fluid just all detaches. Yeah, it's >> Okay. >> Yeah. It's easily detachable. And um then I wanted to find out given we
talked about the cleaning, there's still a few items left in the entryway. Um do we have any issues tossing or because there looks like there's might be some personal
information there. Have you had any recent discussions with the former custodian or are we done? >> I was going to meet her two weekends ago
and then we didn't. Um I'll message her tomorrow >> and see if we can get her. They're coming the 6th, you said. >> Pardon? >> They're coming the sixth, right? Yes, the sixth and the seventh. It's a two day.
>> So, um, let me I'll I'll message her first thing tomorrow and see if I can meet her there or if she just wants us to get rid of that stuff. I think she does want it. Um, but I'll I'll talk to her. I see. Worst
case, I can at least put it in the garage. The garage isn't being cleaned, right? >> Correct. >> Yeah. So, I can even go over there and just throw it in the garage. Okay. And the last thing is, do we have a deed to the Hollis Road property? Now, not
the agreement. This is the deed that um good question. >> Is it that filed with the tax? >> Yeah. >> The deed of assessors, >> the registry of deeds, right? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I believe we do. I think it's we
can look it up right now at the registry of deeds. Well done. >> Let's take a look. This is my favorite place to look at. I love looking at the registry of deeds. >> One, two, three, Hollis Road. >> Yes.
>> So, apparently so does her. >> It's Hollis Road, right? Not Holl Street. >> Yes. I'm always on the registry website. >> Yeah. Um, it looks like pause.
Give to the town of 2008. Guarantor mass commonwealth environmental protection. Yeah. Was it conveyed to us in 2008? Looks like
>> uh I have one from 1996. >> That one looks like the guarantor though is Martha Haw who's the person that conveyed the property to us. >> Or is that the certificate of
maybe I'm looking at it on my phone? Yeah, this says deed and it says grant to the town of Lunenburgg through the conservation commission uh a certain parcel of land situated at easterly side of Hollis Road as executed in sealed instrument on the
29th day of October 1996. >> So we do have the deed. >> Okay. Does it have any stipulation of how we use uh the building? you know how we got into the custodial
agreement in the first place. Is there something in the deed that says we need to maintain that? >> Um, no, >> not at all.
>> This has the third page. No. >> Okay. as I was having discussion discussion with a former um conservation commissioner and he
recollects that if we somehow change that or we don't want to continue a custodial arrangement with the house that we somehow have to uh
give a first rights of refusal to the Haw family. That's not in there. >> I don't see anything about right of first refusal to them. Um,
but I can ask council again, >> okay, >> to see if there's anything we can do. Is it that you would like to change the custodial agreement as to the way it's phrased currently? >> Uh, no. I'm just wondering is that
information that we should be aware of? I >> So I don't I don't think it's on the deed itself. >> Okay. >> But there's a covenant for it from um >> maybe it's in the covenant. >> Yeah, it's on the grant rest. It's on the restriction that was issued.
I believe this is the restriction. Um let's see if I am not. Yeah. So I believe it's on the restriction to enter purpose conservation restriction is to protect the present uh binding effect and
prohibited activities. The granter covenants or the estate of this and herself run with the property. um it should remain as predominantly undeveloped and natural natural
conditions. I think it's this I think it's the restriction. Um if if the commission is looking to modify the constitraints, the restriction can always be revised um
if that's the if that's what we're looking for. And I mean we as in the commission as a whole if that's what you're looking for um I think the restrictions are sorry the the restrictions are on the conservation restriction for the property not the
actual deed. >> Can you circulate that to us? Um sure. Yeah that would be useful. And I think if I understood you right correctly Mike you weren't so much advocating to change something. It was more to just understand if there are any restrictions
there and what those might be. Correct. >> Yeah. I And I would be very interested in understanding that u as well. >> You know, if they said if you don't do what the covenant says, then
you know, you got to give it back to us. And I'm assuming is that the building or is that the entire two acres that were that was donated to the town? Um, so as like Mary, I'm curious if there's
something like that in the covenant that um that guides us of what we what we need to be doing there or you know are we restricted to doing only one
thing there. So that's all I just wanted. Uh so it's a good idea to have that and to try to understand it. Maybe uh legal could help us understand that better. Um
but anyways, that's one of the things. And um I did have an opportunity to um tour the building with a plumber uh this past week and I just wanted to update
because I know I got we got a list from Chris Ruth. Uh does everyone has everyone gone through that list? Did that go to everybody? >> I think it did. >> I think it did. I got it.
>> Yep. I know. I got it. I wasn't sure if it went to everybody. It did. Yep. >> Okay. Uh I know you wanted you had alluded that you wanted to talk about that in a meeting and I wasn't prepared to um you know I had seen it but I
wasn't I haven't had not had a chance to go through the list. So, I'm not sure if um you know, some of the things that my plumber saw was different than what Chris had seen in the building. And I
just wanted to either clear some of those things up if you wanted to hear that or uh whether or not you wanted to just, you know, what are we doing with this list,
I guess, is my question. Um, I'm curious what your plumber saw that was was Did your plumber see more? >> Well, he had issues with, you know, we went, you know, uh, looked at the
corrosion on the bill, the boiler that was noted by Chris's inspection. uh you know I found out that the boiler was installed in 2005 which pulls makes the boiler you know 21
years old um most you know that's about average to 30 years boilers will last I just wanted to give you an idea about life expectancy but we did not note any leaks you know
if if a boiler is leaking then that's something to that you need to uh address and be worried about. But we noted no leaks. Um the other item on the plumbing sinks were missing P traps.
That was noted. Well, P traps are those little underneath the sink. There's usually a little curved pipe that prevents sore gases from going in. And uh Chris was correct. They were
not on underneath the sink, but we went in the basement and all of the sinks either have a P trap or a drum trap, which is perfectly acceptable. They don't always have them
right immediately underneath the sink. I just wanted to make sure that people knew that those were all to code. Um, he also mentioned the kitchen faucet that needs to be replaced. Um the plumber says I think it's just
the screen, you know, it runs when a stream goes, but the little sprayer uh which is part of the same thing. That little screen that's attached to the faucet only needs to be um
cleaned. Um, and once again, the shower valves were noted that they needed to be replaced. The plumber said they're working. They're not leaking. So, you know, once again, I just wanted
to throw that out there. Um the other piece um even though my plumber is not an electrician um there was a notation about um
on the electrical side um that our building needs an upgraded 100 amp service to something greater than that. And in Massachusetts, you don't need to upgrade
um your capacity um unless you're intending to purchase an electric car or if you're going to be selling the building. Uh most people, including myself, I have a 100s in my
house and it's perfectly acceptable. So, you know, the list, um, I wanted to just get the blatant things that just were not evident and, uh, I just wanted to pass that by, uh, the commission. You
know, I appreciate, um, you know, the list that was done, uh, but I don't want anyone to be frightened by something that doesn't exist either. So, um, that's all.
>> Okay, great. Um, I'm g to get your plumber's name after this because like a plumber, he's not trying to replace everything, >> right? >> Well, he's retired, so he's not. >> Yes. But he >> um
most of the people I hang with are retired so but they have a lot of knowledge and uh they're willing to help. >> Yeah. I appreciate you, Mike. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, yeah. Um I will admit that I
looked at this list and definitely found it very daunting. >> Right. And that's, you know, that's just the tip of the iceberg. is many of the things in there that you know I had a short discussion with Chris saying you
know 24 of those items could do not need someone with a license to repair it there. Yeah, they probably should be addressed but they don't need to be addressed by um a professional per se,
you know, whether you know a plumber, an electrician. Uh some some things do or would if you were going to replace them, but um I just wanted to make sure that even though there's an electrical issue,
putting a cover on top of an an outlet doesn't require an electrician to do that. Anybody can do that. Uh uh if you're a maintenance person, you could do it. >> Okay.
All right. So, I think um it's getting cleaned on the sixth and seventh. >> Yeah. >> And then hopefully that's a significant improvement. >> Did you get uh I sent you a prospective person who was interested?
>> Yes. >> Okay. >> I think I responded to them. >> Oh, good. >> I think so. >> Thank you. Um because people see me and they say, "What are you doing?" You know, I'm mowing the lawn or I'm um they just
think that um I guess I must have something to do with this property. So people talk to me. >> I think when people see you mowing a yard, >> right? They say, "What's this guy doing?" >> Random person going and mowing yards.
So, yeah, >> we did we did replace uh one of the mower blades because it wasn't cutting. >> And also, you may have gotten pictures of the shed roof that we got new
shingles for. So, we had to take uh script those old shingles off, which happened today, believe it or not. It was pretty hot, but um >> you didn't today. did that today. >> I guess you're just used to Florida now.
So, this is nothing. >> So, this is nothing, right? Start at 8:00 and uh you know, by 11 it was getting hot, so I stopped. >> Yeah. Well, thank you, Mike. >> Okay.
>> Okay. Yeah. So, um, cuz guess we'll see what it looks like after the cleaning and start figuring out what the the next steps are and some of the things that are on that list. I doesn't Are they going to clean the stove and the cleaning?
>> Um, I asked them to do that. >> Okay. >> So, we'll and and also the refrigerator. Um, >> okay. You know, sometimes a good cleaning can make a refrigerator like new and sometimes it can't.
>> Yeah. Um Okay. >> You know, the all the appliances uh even though they're there according to our the custodial agreement, all the appliances um are really from the custodian. You
know, we didn't supply those initially. Uh I can't I can't imagine that. I used to be a landlord and we all you had to supply the appliances but in our agreement uh they were the responsibility of the custodial
person. Now, do we know if the most recent custo custodian actually brought those in or were they rem? >> Yeah, I wouldn't. >> Okay. >> That that person >> seems interested in
bringing them somewhere. So, okay. All right. I think do we have anything else on the Hollis Road residence? uh just you know more things on the list, but you know I think I brought up
just the you know the important ones that that had some thing that was not uh any discrepancies that I noted were you know I wanted to make sure I checked it out um with you know
a professional. >> Well thank you for doing that. >> Okay. >> All right. So, I think we're going to move on to committee reports. Um, master plan steering committee not really doing anything right now, right, Debbie?
>> All right. Um, last I heard from Kim Duffy earlier this month. Um, the planning board still hasn't approved the master plan. It's been on their agenda for discussion and approval for a while, but it seems like the most recent version was approved by OverU under in April. Overunder is the consulting
company that helped us develop the master plan. Um but yeah, no new updates. >> Okay. Open Space Andrea, have they had a meeting since your last? >> No, we'll be meeting next week.
>> Okay. And then storm water. We met last week and um you know just discussed the utility more kind of fleshed out how it would look for
commercial properties and went through some of the commercial properties and figured out what their um if they were correct. Actually, we're really just looking to make sure that the commercial property list that we were provided made sense to what's
actually in town. Um, do we have any communications or public comment? I do see that we have quite a few people from the pollinator habitat here who seem to have stuck with us
through most of the meeting. So acknowledge that. Um does not seem like we have any communications or public comment though. Um next meeting is Wednesday, July 15th at 7:00 p.m.
And if we don't have anything else, I think I would accept a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. Second. >> Okay. Roll call vote. Andrea Bernap. I >> det. >> Hi >> Mary Wilson.
>> Hi >> Mike Laruth. >> Hi. >> And I for myself. All right. Have a great night everybody and happy fourth. >> Happy fourth everybody. >> Good night. >> Good night. Night night.