[Music] So this is the opening of the North Conservation Commission regular schedule meeting for Monday, August 25th. It is now 6:30. Uh
this is a hybrid meeting meaning we have uh some of us here in town hall on first floor when >> Could you speak up, sir? >> Uh yes. uh and some uh on Zoom. Um,
our first order of business, oh, we have uh the the members participating tonight are myself, Julian Kadesh, chair, uh we have Lisa Corrosa, the vice chair, Joe Carllo,
um Mark Fernandez, and Dan Pearson somewhere. Oh, there you are with Dan. Uh and we have both our director John Thomas and our assistant Megan Har, uh here tonight. Uh and we
have a few audience members. And uh so our next order of business is meeting minutes from 7 from July 28th. And uh I have no comments about them.
Anybody uh have any comments? Um, so we can entertain a motion to accept the meeting the minutes as submitted or if there any comments, questions, corrections, uh, we can entertain those.
>> I'll make a motion to accept the minutes for uh, Monday, July 28th as read. Second. >> Uh, so we have a motion made by Lisa, seconded by Mark. Uh, roll call vote. We have Joe and Lee. How do you vote?
>> Hi. >> And Mark and Dan. How do you vote? >> I. >> And I'll throw in an I. So, the motion carries. We have accepted our minutes of um July 28th. Next item of business is
uh violations. Uh so that we begin with 93 King Phillip Road and enforcement order. So, John uh take it away. is supposed to be on. >> You can Well, you can come to the the front there. >> Oh, I'm used to doing it just through Zoom.
>> I know. >> Trust me, we all we all are used to doing it over Zoom. So, >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Uh you apparently you'll have to you'll have to speak up because uh I don't know how hard it's going to be for it to get recorded.
>> Yeah, we have we have some technological difficulties today. Um, we were told this room was ready to go and then we found out today it's not ready to go. >> Yeah. >> So, unfortunately, I wasn't going to cancel the meeting. Um, but stuff happens and we life goes on and we make
things work. So, as a presenter, I would just like you to project yourself if you could. Um, but I did talk to your wetland consultant today. >> He's on it. >> Yeah. Oh, he is? >> Yeah. He's the one who's going to be presenting. >> That's why we like all the time. I thought he was taking care of this, but
whatever. That's cool. >> So, he's on? >> Yeah. Michael. >> Mike, you here? >> Yes, sir. >> All right. So, uh do you want to just give uh the commission an understanding of what you're going to do uh or what you basically put in your email to me today?
>> Sure. Uh this is Michael Cahill. I'm a professional engineer in Massachusetts. Uh my BE is environmental and I was referred to Zach, Mr. agreed to help out uh with their
uh restoration needs at the 93 King Phillip Road address. And I've uh coordinated with a couple of my supply chain partners uh including Brad Holmes
of ERC Wetlands and Roy Alcarowski, a fellow engineer who will help out with the surveying of the property. So uh to our objective is to again to restore uh the
site back to that which uh the conservation commission would be satisfied with. So we have our wetlands consultant identifying uh any species that were involved um that were removed andor need to be
replaced. Uh Roy, Mr. Alarowski was surveying the property and resources as that. >> Oh, someone was just sneezing. You're all right. >> Okay.
Uh so we create prepare a planting and permitting plan that would satisfy the conservation commission of mass D. Um and then final notice of intent with the commission and map D to move the project to the next phase. So all those four
items are in task one. Task two would be draft the final construction plan and uh specifications. Review uh shop drawings meaning to be built drawings. Put various phases of projects out for bid on the construction side. Review them with the owner of
course. uh conducting construction uh and planting inspections as needed. Make sure the permits are being followed. Uh do a subsequent asbuilt plan and you can get a sign off letter from the inspecting engineer if there is one and
then file or a certificate of uh compliance with conservation commission if necessary. >> All right. So, uh, it sounds like it's going to take a little bit of time. So, I guess the question is, um, do we
schedule him for a next meeting or have that arranged by you guys? >> I mean, that's the question. Is he going to have everything together and ready for the ETH or are we looking for the meeting after that, which would be the >> Oh,
>> the 22nd. >> 22nd. Yeah. >> Okay. So the next meeting for your all's uh commission is for well for the towns uh for this setting is September 8th. >> Yeah. If you were going to submit a notice of intent, it would be on the
8th. >> Okay. Um >> and the meeting after that is the 22nd. >> Would it be acceptable to push it up to the 22nd? In other words, would Zach
uh would he not incur any penalties penalties if we push it out? >> I mean, well, here's here's what I would think is that if you're going to push it out into October, we want basically to do you have to have it stabilized for the winter cuz nothing's going to grow in the winter time.
>> Okay? >> So, the sooner you get it done, the sooner this gets off the books, I guess, is kind of what I'm saying. So, it's probably in your best interest to get everything done on a fast track if you can. If not, you're going to have to do a little bit more effort with doing
stabilization and looking for spring and getting everything ready for spring and not getting this kind of basically signed off until then. >> Yeah. >> So, John Thomas, it sounds like they need to at least at a minimum put down some erosion prevention measures while
we're waiting for this to happen. Yeah, I would say that that's probably the the step. If that's what you're going to do and you're going to basically have this be a little bit longer in the process, then I would get it ready for stabilization practices and put together a stabilation stabilization plan for the
wintertime. Then we'll revisit this next year. >> Okay. I think that sounds fair. So, I could give you an update on the stabilization plan by September 8th. >> Okay. >> Okay. I guess with the intention of doing it
um this season before probably the middle of October. So you have to have line somebody up to do that work. >> Yeah, that would be our objective here. >> Okay. So we'll want to see that outlined in your stabilization plan. Um that
you've committed to at least, you know, finding a contractor to do it or someone to do it. >> Okay. >> Don, I have a quick question. Okay. >> Was Was this project done in conjunction with any other permits in town?
>> Uh, no. This is a a violation. Oh, >> well, I just I see a dumpster on site. I'm curious if this structure has a building permit open or anything like that. >> No, I'm just cleaning up the stuff. Uh, no, it there's no work being done on the
structure. It's just cleaning up. >> All right. Thank you. >> All right. So, uh, the plan is then you'll come before us on the 8th and give us an update as to progress and, um, perhaps,
um, a notice of intent on the 22nd or >> Okay. >> Whatever your plan is going to be. >> Yeah. Um, that sounds uh, that sounds good. I'll just go over with Zach the um, contractual ASAP.
>> All right. Very good. All right. Well, thank you. So, next next item on the agenda is uh >> Thank you. >> Thanks, Zach. >> 181 West Main Street. Uh also an issue of a violation and I'm not familiar with
the site. Um so, you'll have to fill me in on that. So, I was informed by the board of health agent and also the building commissioner of some activity happening at 181 uh West Main Street. Um, you
know, obviously they they had more they were actually on site to kind of inform me of the potential issues, but it it would appear that the uh owner of the facility uh it's a cigar shop uh put in a patio without a permit within
riverfront area and also has potentially done some clearing within riverfront area of uh vegetation. So um obviously you know the first thing I did was you know discuss it with the building commissioner and um you know board of
health agent as to what the next steps potentially could be for the applicant um before I issued a violation but sent a violation and um you know asked for permission to go on the property. I went on the property, took some photos, and um you know, obviously
there it seems that there was some issues that the uh I think their attorney is going to talk about this evening. So, >> John, can I just ask a question to clarify from what we see in the pictures? Uh when you say patio, there's like a concrete patio with a black metal
railing and then there's um what looks to be another kind of like crushed stone area surrounded by what looks like telephone poles. Is that which one you're talking about? >> So, I think they're both not in compliance, Mark. To be honest with you, I don't cuz I don't have any permits for
that property. Um, but the most recent incident was what occurred, I think, in the last year or so. They put in a concrete patio. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So, uh, do we have >> M Mr. Chair, my name is John Kelly. May
I? >> Uh, yeah. attorney. >> Are you uh >> Do you have a I see? Uh sure. Go ahead. Make your presentation. >> Thanks. Uh my name is John Kelky. I'm an attorney. I have offices at 40 Street
Pony, Mass. I'm hearing on behalf of uh uh Harry Patel uh Hatish Kumar Patel and uh I am uh I have been down to uh Norton uh approximately
January of uh 2024 and uh uh obtained a permit uh for all alcohol from the uh selectman. We um began uh moving forward with some uh
uh renovation plans for the interior of the premises. Along the way, uh my client uh decided to add a patio. The patio is within proximity. Uh it's within your jurisdiction. Uh and that is
the cement area that uh uh Commissioner uh Fernandez uh referenced in the pictures. Um the um the board of health uh has uh opened our eyes to uh a
question of u uh whether or not our septic system uh will uh when we originally applied uh for that uh liquor license. Uh we had revealed that uh there was approximately 40 uh uh people
that could be on the site. Uh uh the seating would be for forbody. Uh when I began to uh put together paperwork uh to amend our liquor license so as to uh include the patio um we learned that uh
that patio had been built without uh permission from the uh conservation commission. uh and as such uh it I believe it's within um uh about 80 ft 75
ft uh to the what I think might be referred to as the log river. Um in any event um we have um we began last week to uh seek the assistance of uh engineering firms and wetlands
specialist and it was pointed out to us by one of the parties that uh uh that u that we uh were hoping to engage that uh our uh septic system and this was also pointed out uh by uh board of health uh
uh Sonor uh and we are now um uh going to apply for a uh notice uh provide with uh to you notice of intent. Uh we hope to be able to be on your uh 9:22 agenda
with the notice of intent that would uh exhibit a redesign of the septic and uh location of the uh patio and uh as such the location of the patio will uh lead
us to um uh the the necessity to file uh this notice of intent. And uh I expect that we would be able to uh have that material to you uh in advance of your 9:22 meeting. It could uh be on your
agenda hopefully for 9:22. >> All right. Well, the the first step is for us to get the data to see where everything is in relationship to the resource areas and >> right >> uh and and then we can decide uh I mean
if this was activity that was done without a permit but in retrospect is completely permissible it may be fine. Uh it's just we have to have the information and it and to protect your client with regard to any
kind of problems in selling the property and so on. Uh to have it recorded as to exactly where the activity is and and go from there. And uh so we look forward to to seeing the
unambiguous data as to where things are on that site. So that would be a combination of our plans prepared for uh the uh what will be a notice of intent uh to re
>> Yeah. re revisit our subject on that. >> You you mentioned that you're working with an engineer. Is that correct? >> Yes. And the engineer would would between a surveyor and a and a a wetland specialist be able to identify
the resources on the on the site and give us a plan and we can look it over and decide if there's a problem or no problem. >> John Thomas, is there anything on the site stabilized or is it already constructed? >> Uh Lisa, it's it's been it is
stabilized. It has vegetative ground cover. So, it's it's been it's been an item that I didn't know about. So, now that it's been brought attention to me, it's been a while. I think it's been at least 6 months. Um I think they did it back in the I want to say aerial show
activity going on back there in the wintertime of uh 202, but you know, obviously I I'd have to look into it more. Um you know I just I think um you know from the standpoint of understanding the site limitations it's
a very small lot. So for instance the challenges are is that when you have riverfront area disturbance you're only given 10% of the um riverfront and being that this project site was you know pre-existed the rivers protection act it gets a little bit more dicey with what
you can do and you can't do. So, I think it's going to be a little bit more involved from the environmental mitigation side um for a new septic system cuz majority of the property is within Riverfront. So, that's where the challenges are going to be for the for the applicant and their consultant. >> Okay. I just wanted to make sure there
wasn't anything we had to do with um you know upcoming and beginning and end of the planting season. So, um, as long as they're not going to owe us any, um, thing on the ground, if you will, then we're good good to wait for the notice.
Thank you. And I had a question. The dumpsters, I noticed there's a photo of the dumpsters here. And it looks like there may be some type of inspection cover and they look like they're in a very wet area. Is this the case? >> Uh, that is probably one of the areas
that they cleared. Um, I don't know. Is that John? Is that something you can do in the interim is have those dumpsters move out of that area? >> Sure. >> Okay. If you can move them to the pavement, that would be helpful. >> We can do that. >> All right. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> All right. So, it sounds like we'll be looking forward to your notice of intent on the 22nd of September. So, uh, thank you. And, um, >> thank you very much. >> You bet.
All right. Our next item on the agenda is uh update on wershed analysis borrowsville area. I assume that is something you're going to talk about. >> Yeah. So the the town obviously for a good majority of the years has been
doing a lot of water body treatments to minimize the risk of invasive species. Um we've done it for the last few years. We're going to hold off for next year. Just so everybody knows, we have to give the the water bodies a break uh from the chemical treatments. So, we're going to
take a year uh break hiatus and see for 2026 and see how things work out for 2027. If we find out there's any sort of crucial areas that need to be treated, we'll take a look at those um when they do the the um site investigation surveys. Um but the they're going to
complete the remainder of the I guess treatment efforts. Um they actually just sent us a memo this morning uh putting a note for in for Chartley. So they completed that. So I think that was the last initiative that they were going to do. So hopefully by early September they'll be done with the whole entire
project for this year. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Yeah. Go ahead, >> John. When we reopen, will they give us a new list of chemicals they'll be trading with? >> Yes. So when um when we do for the next
for the next cycle, they're probably going to have new chemicals that they're going to be having to go through for treatment for because one of the ponds that we have in town is natural heritage habitat. So they have to get D requirements. So whatever treatments they're going to do, those chemicals
need to be approved. But they most certainly will be giving us a list of the chemicals they're proposing. >> All right. Thank you very much. >> Yep. >> All right. Next item on the agenda is conservation commission prospective new and it says members
members. I didn't want to limit it but we have we have a new um prospective member that's looking to join the commission. She's here this evening. Uh her name is Courtney Miller. And I don't know Courtney if you want to um get up
and speak or >> Sure. I could do a quick intro. I'm actually just Yeah, that works. >> Hi everybody. My name is Courtney Miller. Uh I recently moved to Norton, so I'm relatively new, but I'm looking to get involved. Interested in
conservation specifically. I do a lot of backyard gardening and I do a lot of foraging in the area. So conservation is near and dear to my heart. Uh and my day job is clinical trial management. So, um, project management, organization,
it's kind of what I do. But, uh, any specific questions for me? >> No. Well, I think we're glad to have another person join our join our wonderful crew. >> Honor Nort to welcome you to Norton, Massachusetts. >> 1711, right? >> 171. That's really
>> good to know. Yeah, I'm glad to be here. Um, and you have openings still. I I know a guy. >> We do. We have one more. You have one more. >> Yeah. Um well just be aware uh our main administrative task is to administer the
wetland the state wetland protection act at the local level. So that's that's what occupies most of our time. Uh we have other projects as well. Uh so you'll you'll be learning that on the
job and um it's not all that difficult but uh >> I have a lot of questions for you. >> Yeah. Well, the we we will welcome questions uh and and uh answer any we can and refer them all to John if we can.
>> All right. >> All right. Well, thank you. Thank you. >> Um then we uh next up is um some uh of the the hearings have requested uh continuations. So, just to let audience members know which ones we're not going to be
discussing tonight, um the first uh hearing that has requested a a continuation until September 8th is file number 250 1178. Uh that's 0 Leonard Street. Um and we can consider a motion
to Oh. Oh, I have to read something first. Uh so we're going to read a a letter to the commission from the um uh applicant uh which begins uh dear Norton Conservation Commission Goddard
Consulting is pleased to submit this update letter to the conservation commission on behalf of uh Harender uh Joe R. The applicant uh for the NOS tenant at zero Leonard Street Gddard
Consulting LLC has been engaged in discussion with the Norton Building Department regarding the proposed work within the notice of intent with several site plan changes occurring. As part of these discussions, Norton
Building Department has engaged the assistance of Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation, DCR, Flood Management Program. A meeting has been scheduled for Monday, August 25th.
Um, that happened to be today to discuss u FEMA regulations, mass building code, and technical development 10. Can't count comment on that. This discussion will ensure the proposed project meets
the proper requirements moving forward. Goddard will provide updated information to the commission after any additional site plan changes have been made. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact uh and there's a name for
contact. So that gives a brief summary of what the applicant is doing. Uh and um uh they request a continue a continuation of our hearing in order to get those things uh squared away. So
with that information, we can now con consider a motion to continue this hearing until September 8th. >> So move second. Uh motion by Dan, seconded by Lisa. Roll call vote
starting with Mark and Lisa. >> I I >> and Joe and Dan >> I. >> And I'll throw in an I. So the motion carries. Um our next
continuation is uh does not have a file number is 49 Island Road yet. We have not opened this hearing, but uh do we need to open it before we continue? So, so we're going to put off the continuation until we get to that hearing, which turns out to be the last
hearing of the day. >> Um uh we now have kind of an open part of our meeting with any questions from the public or any environmental updates. Do we have any questions from members of
the audience about uh any kind of uh projects or that they would like to see or any other items that they have burning questions about? If not, we can go on. >> Are you discussing the parcel on one across from 114 tonight?
>> Yeah. Aubber >> Pasqual. >> Oh, >> the you mean the property for Isis? Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> All right. That'll come up. Uh so any departmental inquiry I mean departmental updates?
>> Uh well we touched on the water body treatments. Um Dan Pearson uh had an idea for the repair fair. >> Um so he put together a started to put together a bunch of local businesses and things uh together to for
the select board to take a look at. And um I think Dan Dan and I are going to work together and see if any of those businesses would be interested in kind of having an event uh in the future um for the community because I think it would be good to give for people you
know that are that are very you know able to do things like that um to give back to the community. So um I'll be working with Dan on that and see where we can make progress where we kind of have a good kind of package of materials to put together to the select board and see if they're on board with the idea.
All right, sounds good. Um, so if you're all set with that, we're going to move on to our continued public hearings. And next up on the agenda is file number 250-118061 West Main Street, notice of intent. Uh,
and for those that don't know the address, that is the site of the Honeydew Donuts uh, business. And I'm presuming we have a representative of the applicant. >> Uh yes, Mr. Chairman, for the record, uh
Eric Das, registered professional engineer with Strong Point Engineering. >> And uh you probably can share your screen with regard to bringing up a plan. >> Yes. >> And I don't know if there's a way to make his Yes. There we go. Excellent.
>> Excellent. >> Well, thank you, Mr. chairman. Um, apologies. I was actually hoping to be there in person tonight, but I got bamboozled into a second meeting, so I had to do double duty and this was the only way to do it. >> Sounds good.
>> You recall, uh, as you mentioned, this is the site of the Honey Donuts. Um, we were before you on this particular site under the owner of the property, uh, for an after the fact notice of intent about a year ago. I think it was May to June
um maybe a little bit more than that last year. Um at the time the owner had made some improvements. Um they installed this landscape island here to reconfigure their um drive-thru fuel and a portion
of the work that they did it was all in disturbed areas but it was in the bumper zone. Uh, so we filed an after the fact notice of intent and I think you know to paraphrase it and kind of generally summarize I don't think the commission had an issue with the work that was done but one thing that came up was the
existing storm water management system on the site. Um the system is comprised of I believe it's five infiltrating test basins which seem to be a great doing a great job providing groundwater recharge but they're really not doing anything in
the way of providing water quality treatment. Uh so it was discussed at the time that the system really needs to be brought into compliance with current regulation and we have said you know look we have a a client who's working in an agreement to purchase the property
we're going to be coming to you with a full notice of intent with a brand new design uh for a storm water management system as far as the whole site as well. So the commission, you know, cooperatively agreed to
provide an order of conditions for the after the fact notice of intent, but it was conditioned that we would submit a new notice of intent within 12 months of that approval. Uh, which we did, and that's what's before you tonight. So the
just to recap sort of the site itself, I'm going to zoom out just a little bit. Um, this is like we said 61 West Main. is the site of the honeydew. The limits of disturbance on the site really follow the limit of the pavement edge where my
cursor is here. Um there is a quarterly vegetated wetland to the west and north and east. Actually, if you zoom out and look at this on mass mapper, these all converge into one wetland um off the site. These are just sort of the fingers of it. So, we were able to go out there.
We did some test pits in the disturbed non-disturbed areas of the site, excuse me. Um, we kept it to, you know, the edges of the tree line and within the tree line. What we found was very good sandy material, but a very high groundwater table, which you would
expect being around the same elevations as the wetlands are. Um, and then if you look at the existing plan, you'll see as we get to the disturbed area of the site, uh, the grade changes and increases significantly. So, it's evident that this area was filled um
from the original condition. So, we do expect there to be some fill material in the first couple of feet of that site, but then once we get through that, we'll be back into the nice sandy material. Um for the purposes of our current site design, we did not start blowing holes
in the pavement because it is a an active site. Um and what we found off the pavement was very consistent. So, we made some really good assumptions. we feel um and we have written into the
plans moving forward any additional test bids will need to be performed um confirmatorily first thing as soon as equipment mobilizes and the site is is shut down for demo. Um so just moving further than that into what the proposal is.
This is or a little bit more is the layout sheet. Um the this is proposed to be a combination of residential and commercial space ground floor commercial in the front um of the site in this
location about 4500 square ft. Uh on the same level of that, the interior to the building will be a drive up, a drive-in garage for additional parking. And then above that will be residential uh apartment buildings. Additionally, you'll see there's a second building
here. This is a proposed quick serve restaurant style. This is actually going to be a relocation of the existing Honeydew is the plan. So, the honeydew is planned to remain um and just be relocated on the site. Um
aside from that, we've got plenty of parking, read all the zoning code, etc., etc. Uh though, with regard to what this commission is is really interested in is the buffer zone areas. So, we are proposing to disturb additional buffer
zone area beyond what is disturbed now. Um approximately just under a half acre of additional buffer zone disturbance. All of that buffer zone disturbance, however, stays outside of the 25, which as obviously the commission does for the benefit of
the audience. Um, the town of a has a policy of no touch within the 25. Um, of that approximately 20,000 ft above his own disturbance. uh 4,000 roughly of that will be rooftop and about 7,600 of
that will be uh parking area with the remaining approximately 8,000 being landscaped areas. So moving on from there getting into the grading and storm water management you can see you know where the existing site
is raised through the developed portions we're going to have to be in order to maintain that provide separation of groundwater from storm water facilities we're going to have to raise those areas uh where we're adding and expanding uh the existing pavement as well. So where we can we've sloped back down to
existing at no greater than a 2 to1 slope and we provided um mechanisms to stabilize those slopes with J mesh and things of that nature. Um and we've employed retaining walls around the perimeter where we had to um to avoid
grading into the 25 ft buffer zone. Uh storm water management is completely subsurface on this site. We are proposing an infiltration basin in this location here that will handle the rooftop runoff from the main building.
Uh it will handle all of the rooftop runoff. Um nothing else going into that one. And then there are two additional infiltration basins that will are proposed to take run off of the parking areas and the smaller out building. um
storm water management calculations show that we are reducing flow and volume of runoff to all of the design points. Um we are far and away eclipsing what's required for the recharge volumes just by the nature of having to retain um on
site through uh subsurface infiltration. Um and we have provided um more than what is required in the way of water quality treatment. uh whereas we talked about the big issue with the current storm water system is there is none uh we have used proprietary um oil grid
separator storm separators to provide the water quality treatment that that's required um under the the state uh storm water standards. So outside of that um we have provided a full erosion control plan um to mitigate
any concerns during construction. We have provided an operations maintenance plan for the long-term um maintenance and operation of the storm water facilities and I can go through those in any any detail that you folks would like. Um and further this has been
reviewed by the town's peerreview agent uh Pat Brenage did provide some very minor comments uh to us um about I think mid July and those comments were really um about cover for the catch basins. So
we revised the catch bases to be a flat top structure rather than a conic structure uh to make those work and we defined some snow storage locations on site in the landscape areas that weren't previously shown on the plans. Um so that is the overview. We have not yet
committed to the planning board the site plan review. We wanted to come um to this commission before doing so. This is this site is I'll say you know sort of tight in regard to its its approaching of the 25 buffer zone. We felt that we wanted to have a conversation with the
commission before we went further in um in our permitting process. So that's where we are. That's the overview and I am glad to answer any questions. So, I see you're building up um
the added uh square foot area. Is the existing parking lot height also going to be raised or or not? >> Uh not by much. So, the existing parking
lot, if I zoom in here, let me just kind of catch a contour through here. This Bahar is at about you see running through here is at about elevation 114 and coming through the site in this location we're at about 115 through here
we're raising up to 116 back here. So it's coming up a floor or two maybe and a lot of that is to accommodate uh the separation uh between floors in the main building here where we have the drive-in uh so we can access that appropriately.
>> All right. So I think we can open it up to questions from commission members uh at this point. Um or John, do you want to make a comment first on this or? >> Um I guess from my standpoint, Eric, obviously my understanding is that you
know if the commission is amendable to what you're proposing, you probably want to keep this project open until you go through planning board. Is that correct? >> Um I I guess that might make sense. um you know if we close it obviously we would run the risk if we go to planning
and there's a change that warranted us to come back for an amendment so I I I don't think it would kill us to keep it open for a little while as if we at least get a level of comfort over the planning. >> Okay. I just wanted to make sure we're on the same page. >> Sure.
>> Uh commission members any questions? >> So Eric, I'm sorry. What did you say the use was going to be residential? Uh it's going to be a mixed use uh residential on the second and third floor of the main building and commercial on the
front and in the smaller building. So I'm just noticing that you don't have provisions for any open space if there are going to be people living there. So you're you're shoehorning this thing in. Um I don't see any provisions for open
space or anything. Um I don't even see walkways. Um, is there anything on the plan? That's plan north button on the north side of that building. That's the parking garage, right? >> Yeah, this is the parking garage. Uh, you know, there would be a buffer zone
back here that there is, you know, could possibly do something back there at some point and that's something that we can look into. Just one thing to note, obviously when we submitted this, it was for specifically notice of intent purposes. So, we didn't get crazy with amenities, things like that. I really want to show the limits of the
disturbance, the grading, those things. But what I will say as well is I've worked with this particular developer for quite some time. Um the very typical of of the program that he uses. Uh the his facilities don't have a ton of
common open space um included in them and they are all very successful, very well occupied, very wellmaintained, clean. Um, so I don't know that there's a lot of need to service in order for the services program to add
additional open space, but it certainly will just discuss with them as well. >> But >> um because if not, we would ask you to put up a barrier there so there's no grass clippings, nothing's put on that side of the um within the buffer zone.
>> Yeah. And then can you go over the wall heights? Uh what those walls are going to be constructed of? Do you have a detail? Is there enough space to construct the wall? Do you have a work zone there that intrudes into the 25 to build it? >> That's a that's a great question. So
the in fact that you have on this page, let me check this. So this table shows our maximum wall heights or our range of wall heights. Our maximum wall height in this case is 6 1/2 ft. And that is at A6 and A7. So let me shoot over to those so
we can see where those are. um A6 and A7 is this stretch right here along the 25 ft bumper zone. Uh so what the the final mechanism to build these walls hasn't been determined yet, but what I would
recommend is the large block uh retaining walls like the big block, the ready rock, the 2x4 blocks. Um and the reason for that is because they're structurally sound and approved up to exceeding those heights. The other thing is the low side of the wall is the
buffer zone side. So by using those, what we'd be able to do is trench the basin right along the buffer zone, rock that block without encroaching further than that. So that would be my recommendation in this case. >> Well, we can't prove this without a wall
detail. So um to show how the con that the contractor can build it and stay outside of that 25. So you'll need to show a detail for that. >> Okay. And can you go over the snow storage is proposed? >> Yes, I can. There's like another line
for that. Just let me find it. >> I think I need to stop this share and start another one to be able to do that. Oh, unless you can just point to wherever it is on the second plan, that's fine. >> Let me go to this. So, what we did is
obviously, you know, we tried to keep it as non-directing as we can. We got a pocket here. It's sort of outside of the bumper zone. Um, well, outside of 25 at least, I should say of area that's going to end up being disturbed. So, we stuck some here. Um, obviously this area in
the middle to whatever extent we can pile some up here. We did propose to pile some on the slope that's going to be back in this area. Um, and then the little, you know, intermittent islands in between. And we did show a small area here along the frontage, which we don't
want to get carried away with because we don't want to block line of sight. So, the other thing that we have in here is, you know, obviously a site that's tight like this does have some limited capacity. So we do have requirements both here and in the on andm that once it reaches capacity it's on the on the
applicant to get it out again. >> So what's that capacity? What what are we looking at? So if we do see a buildup of um uh uh snow piles there what's the magic number? >> I you know I haven't volume but I certainly can.
>> Well I would not think it would be a volume because I'm not going to ask John Thomas to go out there with a >> measure it. Can we go out there with a total station and and measure it with >> concerned about start filing it along a slope because you don't want to lead to continuous erosion of uh when that when
that snow pile is melting. I don't know what your uh ground cover is back there, but it's really not good practice to put it at the top of the slope. So is your what is your ground cover consist of? Um where are you thinking of stockpiling?
Uh so in the in the final area is just basic typical L seed. I don't think we spec much in the way of a ground cover on the slope back here but I can definitely do that and get us you know a ground cover that's going to take good a good firm root or deep root and help
with that concern. Certainly. >> Right. So every every square foot you impact here or you occupy you need to show us what you're going to do with the end states or is there a landscaping plan? Uh at this stage there is not. We were planning on
that being more in the uh site plan review stage, but we can add that here in especially if we're going to keep this open for a little bit. >> Yes, we will need to see that. We will need to see that all ground disturbance is covered by something in the end that's stable, completely stable. Um so
what is that proposed slope down there? Again, I just maybe just look at uh where you think you're going to start pilot versus that slope. Is it a 2:1? >> That is a 2:1. Yeah, >> I don't think that's conducive to pushing snow and having snow melt and
continuously eroding down that slope because that's what will happen. >> We can see I I understand the concern. I don't necessarily disagree. So, we can strike that area as far as snow is concerned. I don't have an issue with that. >> Okay. Um I mean obviously you don't need
any for the garage that's indoor, right? That's inside. >> That should cut down on some of it. >> Okay. And then uh last kind of not in jurisdiction of the car but it might be um you need a cur you need a curve cut from mas dot in the section of 123.
>> We do. >> All right. Uh do you trigger any anything with people? >> We do not trigger anything with um the mascot and I'm sure you are aware of this is tricky. uh used to be the mascot would have free vital meetings with you
and they've changed that since the mascot will not talk to you until you have local permits in hand. >> So I you know it's a risk. I I ran into it on a project in another town. We got through locals. We went to mass do we ended up back at locals through
modification. It's unfortunately just nothing we can do about that with the way that they run this town. >> Okay. Yeah. Just wondering about the nexus with um Meepa. So um so it doesn't trigger any trip generation. >> We're on the trip uh the transport day.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> All right. Uh any other questions from commission members? Uh and I think we can open this hearing up to any questions from any audience members. Does anyone have any uh
questions or anyone on the call have uh any on the Zoom call have any uh questions? Uh now I guess my only question is is this something that's going to go out for peer review with regard to the storm
water? >> It already did. >> Oh, it already did. Okay. >> Yeah, it's already been peer reviewed for storm water. >> Okay. So that's that's >> Yeah. The only action I have now is just to make sure it gets vetted through planning board for site plan review and any spe there's no special permit for
this. Is there? >> You know, I don't believe there is, but you know, don't quote me. I I reserve the right just to look back through my my notes on this one. I don't >> So, I'm just going to say it has to go through planning board. >> All right. >> Yeah.
>> But, uh, we we have to leave this open. So you're requesting a continuation and you have a continuation till the next meeting or beyond that or any preference? >> My thought would be so we don't come back with minor updates to the
commission. I I'd like to get this get some traction with planning board before we see you folks again. I think some of the the things that we talk about um having to add to these plans tonight are going to be kind of de facto part of what we do with planning anyway. Um, so
why don't we look? >> Well, the the options are the 8th of September, the 22nd of September, the 6th of October, or the 20th of October. >> I would be inclined to go as far as the
20th of October if if we feel that that's acceptable. >> That will give us time to submit planning. Once we submit that, we've still got an advertisement period. So, we probably only have one planning meeting under our belt by that point.
>> All right. So, um we can entertain a motion for continuation of this hearing until October 20. >> So, second. Uh, so I think Joe got the motion and
Mark got the second. Um, so Mark and Joe, how do you vote? >> I. >> And Dan and Lisa, how do you vote? >> I >> I don't know what Dan has.
>> Oh, Dan dropped off. Well, we still have a quorum, so I'll throw in an I as well. Um, all right. Uh, so thank you. >> Uh, next item on the agenda is 260 South
Washington Street, file number 250-1181. Um, we have had uh hearings on this planned facility which as I recall all the necessary information was gathered and we have
left this open only because it exceeded the 21day and we can now uh entertain a motion to close. So is that your impression as well, John? Yeah, I mean I have a draft order for the commission to review this evening and definitely do that.
>> All right, so we're looking for a motion to close file number the hearing for file number 250- 1181. >> So moved. >> Second. >> We have a motion by Lisa, seconded by
Mark. Uh so Lisa and Mark, how do you vote? I I >> Joe and I don't know if Dan has returned or >> so looks like not so I'll throw in an I. The motion carries. Um so we will take
up the orders of the order of condition uh later in the meeting for this hearing. Uh next item is file number 250-11 82 which is 0 East Hajes Street. It is a
uh request for an uh resource area delineation. And um do we have a representative of the applicant? I do not see Brian on the call this evening,
but I think there was a gentleman here in the audience that wanted to talk about zero East Hajes Street. >> I just wanted to listen to see what they were doing. >> Uh they're not doing anything as of right now. The the permit that they've
requested is to confirm the wetland resource areas on the property. So at this level and stage, what they're doing is they're assessing and evaluating the environmental constraints with properties, understanding what sort of setbacks and um buffers they may have on
their property which may limit or prohibit any sort of development for the property. Um and at this at this phase of it, we're just the commission is confirming those resource areas in those buffer zones. >> So what are you going to do tonight? Uh this tonight we are potentially the
commission is going to approve them for the resource areas that I went out to go field verify. >> Yeah. >> Well, uh can we bring up a plan on the on the monitor >> and then they'll come back at a further
time with whatever plans they have? >> Yes. So what they would do then is that if they were going to propose any potential work, they'd have to come in for a permit, whether it be a request for determination or a notice of intent filing, and then they would propose some
sort of development project, land use development project, and that would be >> Does that go out to as registered letters? >> You would get letters. Each resident that's within 100 ft of the property would get um a notice in the in in their
in their mailbox that says that there's a public hearing to discuss whatever project they're proposing on the property or properties. Go ahead. >> There's multiple properties. So, >> how do you define 100 ft from the boundary of the property?
>> So, the the limits of the property. So if you are horizontally outward with 100 100 ft of that property, you will get notified. >> I see. >> So since you're direct of butter for a brau lane, um you were notified.
>> Um so with regard to this here, this is zero east. Can can we bring up a plan? >> Yes. Bring in one second. So this is the property. So it's it's actually a collection of
collection four parcels. >> Um there is a perennial stream which runs through the uh northern portion of the property and there's also a certified vernal pool on the property and this main um stream is is perennial
like I said but it it's buffered by bordering vegetated wetland. So there's wetland on either side of that stream. Um access through here at this location would be very difficult uh because it's with an area of critical environmental concern. So any sort of proposed land
use development projects will probably not happen uh from this entry point access area here because it's not allowed. We don't have the ability to allow it because we can't allow for more than 5,000 square ft of wetlands to be disturbed. And there's definitely more
than 5,000 ft of wetlands to be disturbed. are right as of we sit here. There is no entrance off of East Hodgees Street >> through the wetlands. No. >> Between 113
Well, I know the people who live but not not their numbers. >> Mhm. So right along is all of East Haj Street on this initial first five acre is it all wetland?
>> Majority of this section of wetland of area here is all under conserv it's all within conservation jurisdiction. So it's all basically wetlands and resource areas. Yes. >> Okay. >> Yeah. But it's not it's not just uh wetland. I mean it has
>> Oh, I've been on the water. That street has been on the water. >> Perennial stream. So the the difficulty of going from Hajes Street to the upland portion is just an engineering
impossibility. I mean >> and I don't think she knows it either, you know. Well, and the question is whether there's an alternative access uh from some other approach, but that's not our issue. Our issue here tonight
>> is simply to certify that those are the wetland resources on the site. And so my question to John is, you've seen it, you've walked over it. Do you have any um
uh objection to anything on that plan or you you agree with that plan completely? >> No, I I think that the resource areas were mapped correctly and I have no nothing in my you know professional opinion would say that requires me to change any of the flags out there.
>> All right. So this, you know, just to emphasize this in no way allows or has anything to do with any proposed development on that site. This just talks about what's there and we agree with this plan. >> Okay.
>> So, uh we can potentially consider um the um delineation of those resource areas later in our in our meeting. So, I think that being the case, we can uh
consider a motion to close this hearing unless there are any further questions uh about it. >> I'll make a motion to close public hearing for file 250-1182. >> Second. So, we have a motion by Lisa,
seconded by Joe, uh and Mark and Lisa. How do you vote? >> I I >> And Dan, you are back. Uh >> hi. Yes. Sorry about that. >> Not a not a problem. >> And uh let's see. Did I miss you, Mark?
I can't remember. >> I missed Joe. >> I think I was first. >> Yeah. So, so Joe, we we skipped over you. >> All right. And I'll throw in. So the motion carries to close the uh hearing for file number 250-1182.
We now go into new uh public hearings and I would pronounce this Abrew Lane. I don't know how others. >> It's a brau. >> Breu. >> A brau. Okay. Got that wrong. >> Like the baseball player. >> Well, I I knew a physician by this name
and he called himself a so. >> Okay. Uh but anyway, we'll we'll still we'll say habrau. So file number 250- uh 1183. It is also a uh hearing to delineate the
wetland resource areas on the parcel. And do we have a representative of this effort? >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. I'm back from PMP Consulting. >> All right. So maybe you can share your screen and show us a plan. I would like
to. All righty. All right. Everybody can see that now. >> We can. Well, I can I guess. Yes. >> All right. So, uh, as noted, Pat Brown from BFP Consulting, uh, representing Maurice Legacy Real Estate for this
property at Brau Lane. Uh, so we're here for an Andrad, as noted. Um, on the plan, you'll see there are three wetland lines that were flagged and located. Um, off to the west of the property, we have the A series, which goes from A1 to A24,
I believe. 21. Uh off to the north of the existing house, we have a smaller wetland noted by the D series of flags. Uh and then off site to the east, we have a couple of flags, the C series uh which delineate a wetland that comes up in
between a couple of the existing houses. Um there is uh four more flags that were not in the report from uh ERC or B series. Uh but they were actually so far off site um they didn't make it on to the plan once the plan was done. Uh but
that's the reason for this little uh curve in the 100 foot buffer zone in these series flights. Uh so being an inter there's really not much else for me to say. Um I'll certainly be happy to try to answer any questions or take any comments from the
commission members. >> Well, I'm I'm curious. this uh this wetland up near Elm Street. Uh it has kind of a line uh going toward Elm Street right here.
>> And is that the that's where the water breaks out and potentially winds up in this other wetland across Elm Street? Is that correct? >> Yeah. So, correct. U the the grade in general, this is the highest point of the property here. Uh and there is a component that heads off to the
southeast to this wetland. Uh there is a ditch that traverses this property and goes into a pipe and a head wall right here. Uh and then continues on its way under the street. It actually does not connect to the C series. >> Okay.
>> So are you calling that BBW? >> Yeah, we're considering this BBW. You can see we're showing the 25T no touch and the 100 foot buffer zone associated with that as well. And um
so this this is a about a 7 acres site is that I mean that's not everybody may be able to read that in the in the center. So it says 7 it 42. So 7 and a half acres site and uh the
cleared area is indicated um it's relatively uh smaller cleared area and the rest of it is wooded and you have a shed outlined and then there's this this square which uh
>> it's like it's like a deck porch with chairs on it. It's very cool. >> It's definitely a hangout spot. It's it's so it's an an isolated structure but no facilities. Okay. It's just I couldn't make any any
sense out of that little square out there. But uh Okay. >> Uh and then you have a bunch of fences, but that's I don't know what to make of that either. But that's >> I assume that's from yester year. >> Yeah. I mean this is this again we we've
done an actual full existing conditions serving the property as well. Uh so that's why you get to see all this detail on the andrat plan. >> Uh so John you you've seen these wetland areas. Do you have any any discussion or complaint about
>> the onlyation? The only flag I could verify for the A series is one of the 24 flags, but the buffer zone obviously I would say is good cuz I don't go off site to go onto other people's property.
So, um I would say that the buffer zone appears to be good. And then the other resource area, I would call that a BBW as well. And the other one too, the C series is a BBW. So, I checked all those flags. So, I don't have any issues with the delineation.
All right. Any uh questions from uh commission members and any questions from members of the audience who might be concerned about this or have interest in this? I'm at 77 Elm and there's a stream right
across the way and people came by, people from the town saying that something should never have been allowed going through from the stream across to my property out and back. So, I'm just
concerned that they'll try to do that with this. >> All right. You have to give me more details. Um, so you're on Elm Street? >> Yes. >> And just for the record, your your name >> Debbie Winston. >> All right. And 77.
Uh, where is that in relation to >> I'm right across I'm diagonally across from Sunny. >> 76. Right from >> Are you north or south of Sunny? >> I'm >> She's north. I can see her.
>> Thank you. >> Google Earth. Yeah. >> Do do you have an image, Patrick, of a graphic or an aerial or something? >> Um, actually, I I do. Give me one second and I will grab it. >> Yep.
>> Yeah. There's an extensive wetland across the street because we permitted that house at the address. It's that one. Uh 75 Elm Street next door. So that wetland wraps uh it's almost the
entire lot across directly across and then it wraps around the back of 77 L from what I'm looking at. >> Okay. How's that? >> Yep. That's it. >> Yep. So this is number 77 right up here. >> Can I come closer?
>> Sure. Um, yeah, I I'm I'm a little bit lost when you say right up here. I didn't see any any indicator. >> I don't know if you can see my curves. Is that where you live? >> I can. >> Is that where you live? >> Yeah. >> Um,
>> I'm spatially geographically challenged. >> So, these gentlemen can tell me. >> Okay. >> Um, actually, can you blow this up a little bit in the area of interest >> or Yeah. I'm not even 100% sure what they did
wrong. Just when people see it, you know, this is >> you're at 77. I see right there. >> So, there's there's the drainage ditch that flows to the rear of Sunny's property, which then flows onto your part of your property. Is that correct? The southern extent of your property. And there's a drainage ditch that goes
out to the whole wetland system back that way. Um, for instance, for this property though, the buffer zone associated with this the the property itself, that stream where it basically e exits um I guess east of Elm Street is
more than 100 ft away from the project site. So, I'm not going to confirm or or worry about any sort of off-site resource areas. So there may be a stream on your property, but I'm not confirming the resource areas that are not on on
the project proponents um property. So if that makes sense. So I'm not going to verify off-site resource areas. And what you may be referring to is activities that occurred before the Wetland Protection Act took effect,
which was in 1964. >> What year? >> 1964. That was built in I forget 2004 2006. >> So 2004 2006. >> I always forget which. Yeah.
>> All right. But with regard to this site, uh that that activity doesn't refer to this site. So we're >> Yeah. I mean obviously there's a Norton has a lot of resource areas. I will I will preface that um and we have a lot
of streams and um streams and also wetlands that are not mapped on MassGis. So that's why it's important and critical that we do field assessments and field verifications through these processes to make sure that the resource areas for projects and also for
verification permits which this one is that we map the resource areas correctly. If for instance you as a land owner are interested in understanding where the resource areas are are on your property, you can contact me and I will come out there and I can basically you know show you um you know as you're
being a resident I can just basically show you where they are. Um but if you're looking to propose work then for instance you would probably want to hire a consultant and potentially uh file for a permit. Hopefully that helps. All right. So, uh, unless there are
further questions about this, um, uh, resource area delineation, we can consider a motion to close this hearing. >> So, moved. >> Second.
Uh, we have a motion made by Lisa and seconded by was it Mark or Joe? >> I think it was Mark. Okay. Uh, so uh Mark and Lisa, how do you vote? >> I I
>> and Dan and Joe, how do you >> I >> uh in Australia and I. So, the motion carries. Our next uh item on the agenda is >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
>> You bet. Uh is file number 250-1184 which concerns 0 and 77 West Main Street. Um do we have a U representative of the applicant? And uh
if so, you can start by sharing your screen and join us. You should be all set from field engineering on behalf of the applicant. I'm going to um
>> just give me one second. I'll get the uh >> this the clearing up on the screen. >> Can we see the Can you see this plan now? >> Uh yes. >> Okay, great. Um once again, Richardio uh from Field
Engineering on behalf of the applicant. This is um notice of intent application for the uh redevelopment of 77 West Main Street and also the adjacent um vacant lot known as Zero West Main. Uh this is
the the former uh bridge property. and and zero west mean that historically had had a hot tide stand and and parking and such associated with that on it. Um the site itself uh will be accessed
through an existing curve cut on the is a town owned strip of land between the two properties which the town uh from town meeting granted an access easement to the owners of this of these two properties um for for site access. um 77
West Main both house a 10,500 ft building. These stories um first story would be retail and office and common areas for the condos above uh or the um on the second two uh stories
which would be residential um condos. Um um the smaller building on the right hand side is a small 1,800 square ft one-story building that would be a um a commercial use um to be determined
retail or office type use. Um we're proposing a total of 75 parking spaces on the site to meet the the zoning requirements of the of the buildings. Um and like I said, there's one single curve cut off property.
uh onto the property. >> The storm water management facilities for the site will be hand switch to the grading plan real quick will be handled by a um a series of subsurface recharge systems and storm septer inlets. We're
proposing uh three recharge systems and five storm sector manholes would provide the uh necessary treatment and attenuation of the of the runoff from the property to the um to the wetland system that's located to the north. This
entire site basically flows from south to north to an extensive wetland system located on the town owned property that basically surrounds the site. Um the the recharge systems were sized to um retain and infiltrate up to the um the
100redyear storm event. Uh this we did test pits in each of those locations and um found very sandy soils similar to the site. Um down the street where the honeydew is with with higher water tables, but there was um they were very
conducive to to recharge. Um you'll see we are proposing an overflow on the the site uh the recharge system for the larger building um just as a relief to provide uh any if if there's any issues
with those systems. But once again the the calculations show they size for 100 storm event. um proposed grading plan as I've got shown here. We we we will have to bring in some fill on the property. Um we're
looking at 1 to 2 feet of fill um to to meet the the requirements of the separation of groundwater and also to provide the level parking areas for for this for the building that will sit um on this on the uh basically the southwest
developable area of the site. Um we're in order to make the the grading work in respect to 25 ft um no touch we're proposing to reuse a lot of the existing large stone that you'll see on the site. There's large stone walls and
foundations to provide um stone slopes around the perimeter of the property. Um those are roughly 1 to 3 ft at most in height and they would be set at a at a 1 one as necessary to match existing grade. um on the smaller site. And this
is um something that I I was able to look at uh recently. I was able to to to to adjust the northerly edge of this parking area to pull that storm slope totally outside of the of the 25 ft no
touch. We still I did provide a a small area around that for a work area to build that zone, but that would be reveated after the fact once at at the end of construction. Um in order to
offset some of that, we provided um a number of mitigation measures on the site, including the removal of um pavement within the buffer zone shown in orangeish red. It looks a lot better on paper than it does on the scan here. The
colors um of this area here is approximately 2,000 square ft of pavement that we we uh removed. Um we're allowing this area here which is previously disturbed to be reveated. And then um we'll also be removing some
uh which has already been done building and and overhang areas um that were within the 25 ft and restoring those within seed. An additional habitat mitigation feature we're proposing is to
construct a um a pocket wetland system in this back area which would um have wetland species would be dig down to roughly to the groundwater area provide um plantings of wetland species and um
we also proposed a couple u bird box um bird boxes is just to try to um encourage some habitat um growth in this area here. And in addition to that, we're providing a walking path for open space type use around that feature with
some park benches. Um if you go on the site, um what you see there's a there's an existing stone wall that basically um defines this area. the wetland is on the on the on the back side of it and we're
we're proposing to maintain that stone wall as is has a good um barrier to to the to the wetlands on on the other side and also um provides some like I said some habitat and some open space for the use. Uh early on in the development
process, we had looked at using this area as potentially for parking or building, but it it just lended itself to to something a little a little more um conservation oriented and um such.
Um we did have our storm water reviewed by the Fairview consultant. Um he had some minor comments on our mounting analysis, but he agreed that as as it was um designed, we we met the requirements for separation of
groundwater. He did have two minor comments on the the design of the recharge systems basically to add um inspection ports which are shown on this revised plan and also um to modify our detail to show that there's only filter
fabric on the top and sides of these structures to allow for better infiltration into the soils. So my my intent would be to um to issue a a fully revised set of plans that show these comments as well as the the um the
relocation of this slope. I was able to tighten up this pocket here a bit so we don't have any um permanent alteration within the 25 ft no touch. Um so this is my um erosion control plan basically
showing uh straw waddles around the perimeter of the property and then we'd also install a um a silk fence along the the work side of that stone um wall um just as to show that you know there's no work to be done beyond that beyond that
wall. Um we are going before the planning board um tomorrow night for a site plan review. We do have um two special permits with them as well for affordable housing within the structure and um the site is within the water resource uh
district. Um, so we we we have we have had meetings with the town departments and it seems uh very favorable to this project and um look forward to any any questions from from from the commission.
>> Um John, do you have any comments you want to make on this? >> Uh I'll let I'll let the commission comment on this one. >> Questions from the commission? >> John, I have a quick one. Um just curious if that back property is in our
portfolio as a conservation park in the town there. >> What's that? Uh where >> is the the rear property here part of our portfolio and conservation land? >> Yeah, the the rear portion is for park. >> Okay. And does that amusement is that
part of our um is that on our book or is that >> No, that's the select board. the select board own the own the park and they have jurisdiction of it. They have um in the past I put it in our our our synopsis notes but in the past they have allowed
um the previous hot dog stand person have an agreement um they've done it for various other I think easements for the previous owner as well um to my knowledge. So, um, you know, obviously the se that's a question for the select
board if you have any questions regarding the um easement kind of rights and things. Is that what you're getting at? >> No, I just wasn't sure if that was held under our portfolio knowing that that property in the back >> No, it's not us. It's not ours.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Um, it might not be ours, but guess what? It's under article 97. >> It is. It is. So a change in use requires the applicant to go applicant
to go through the article 97 process and has to go through every board in town to get approval to for a change in use. So right now this access provides use to whether there's an easement or not. It's a move point. This access
provides uh provides access for park. That was the intended use in perpetuity. So now that you have a change in use that provides access to you name it. I don't know what this is proposing uh parking lot. That's a change in use and
under article 97 you would have to get approval all the way up through the state legislature. So um I would like an attorney to weigh in on this. >> So town council has has weighed in on it >> but not under under 97.
>> No they have they have looked at it. Town council has looked at this. They're working with the applicant and the town to come up with this agreement and that the select board already approved the agreement and they actually have everything the workings of everything. It's a town it's in town council's hands
right now. They're working on an actual um what was the the word? Was it a lease? Is that what they said? >> Um is that a license agreement? >> It was a license sorry it was a license agreement. Yes. >> But how does that work with article 97? I I don't >> there has to be
>> I don't know. That's a question for town council. >> Yep. So, I need an answer to that before I would even >> um entertain approving this cuz I don't really know if your access is legal right now without article 97 approval. You can do all you want with lease agreements and all kinds of agreements,
but it doesn't circumvent 97. So, um so you're creating a wetland in the back there. So what's going to feed that? >> You going to intercept? >> It'll be it'll be ground it'll be groundwater fed and if there is an overflow which shouldn't see much water
based on our calculations but it would be groundwater fed. >> Okay. So you're basically going to create an isolated wetland back there which is fine. >> Correct. Yeah. >> It was doing a habitat enhancement area back there to offset some of the buffer's homework.
>> Okay. Um another you can go to a grading plan. >> Yes. >> Can you do that? >> So yeah, if you could just zoom in a little bit. So are there any retaining walls? What's the grade change from existing? Right now
>> the the the one retaining wall we're proposing is along the along this property with the existing residence. Um, and that's about 4 ft high just cuz it's a low spot in this back corner here. Um, the other grading areas, um,
like Dave said, we're proposing these these stone slopes, um, one to two to maybe 3 ft high in certain areas over on the corner here, um, down on on the smaller vine. Um those those were that was originally we had these as all block
walls, but when we noticed the amount of larger stone on site from the old foundations and such, they want to try to salvage as much of that as they can and we would use that as more of a natural feature as opposed to concrete block walls.
>> Okay. And uh I assume you have snow storage areas. Yeah, we we we can and um we we would be able to put some of the snow storage back in this corner here. That's a 4 to one slope which would be long and seated. Um we also have
landscape pockets here. And I know on these corners here as well where we would be able to put any snow storage. Once again, if if it um exceeded what we could store on site, the owner would be responsible to to dispose of it off site. I wouldn't want I would put um
we can we typically put notes on the plan. I don't think they're on these right now, but on on the final updated site plans that you know no snow would be dumped directly into the wetland systems, no snow would be dumped on the street and that any snow in excess of the available areas would have to be disposed off site.
>> Okay. Just make sure that word more importantly than this plan because the plow operator is not going to look at this plan. Uh it's going to be the management company under the OM. Yes. >> Make sure it makes it way in there. >> Thank you. >> Uh, any other questions from commission
members? And if not, we can open it up to any audience members or people on Zoom that have questions about this project. Now, it sounds like you will need uh
this hearing continued since you haven't been before at least a definitive sign off from planning. Is that correct? I we would anticipate not receiving many minor like major changes to this, but if
if we had a two week continuous get through the planning board meeting tomorrow night and we could wrap everything up to can get some sort of answer to the to the commissioner um's um comment on the on the chapter 97
um information. Um, I think we would be in good shape to be able to close this at your at your meeting on September 8th. >> Okay. Uh, so, uh, last call for questions or comments. Uh, if not, we can consider a
motion to continue this hearing for, um, file number 250-184. Um, a motion for continuation until the 8th. >> All right. So, we got a motion by Lisa
and seconded by Dan. So, uh, Lisa and Joe, how do you vote? >> I, >> and Dan and Mark, >> I >> and I'll throw in an I. So, the motion carries. So, I don't know if we'll need
a representative on the ETH, but you're you'll be uh >> All right. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. >> Uh next up on our agenda is um
labeled uh again an uh abbreviated notice of resource area delineation at uh file number file number 250-1185. uh which is zero and 50 Lincoln Street. Um and so do we have a representative of
the applicant? And assuming we do, if you can share your screen for the plan from here to represent East Coast Development for the resource elimination of three
parcels sandwiched between [Music] and see on the screen. >> Not quite yet, but it looks like it's coming. >> Okay, >> there we go. Yes,
>> the west to the east, three parcels, one to the north, and these two parcels on the south side. We had Ken Thompson from Five Wetlands in March of 2023. Um, and this office located by on the
ground survey the 24 minus two that were offsite. Uh this represents that the the general slope of the lands goes from the west down to the east to this generalized large portion
of wetlands like it's the back of what is 50. There is also this uh property near flood zone uh about ft east of the wetland that we are looking to have approved. That would be these thoughts.
Um >> that's really all there is for the end. I think all my notes here if there's any questions I would love to answer. >> Uh just for scale. So in the back we have two upland areas and the
approximate acreage of those areas would be what? >> This parcel is about 5 acres right here. Yeah. >> This parcel here is about 11. So the upland is all an up. It was quite a trek to get back to that wet line. I'm just saying >> it's quite a trick to get back.
>> Oh, yes. It looks like So, there's no question no access is coming from Lincoln Street on that. >> No, it's probably all going to be coming from Bay Road with any sort of proposed land use development project. >> But I have no issues with the wetlands.
Um I was actually surprised to find them given it that they were, you know, two two years old. But um the flags were there. I could find some of the nubs, but I made heads or tails of it. Took me a little bit, but found them. >> Okay.
>> Uh >> so >> yeah, go ahead. >> So you just did the I don't know where north is on this plan, but you just So you just did the western limit of the wetland. Where's the eastern limit? So when 10th bright the western limit and
the eastern limit and at the time it was so that you could um divide lot 29. So the eastern limit is actually like all here. So this little bit is the upland area and then all of this is
below and we had it divided and delineated so we can subdivide this piece and give it the 80,000t of upland and then the remainder. So this is now a lot that pass the planning board. Um
that's why it was originally renewed. But for whatever we're trying to do with this piece, we don't need the permission to say okay over here because we can't do anything more over here. Uh yeah, it's not that we're saying. Okay. So, for the record, we need to
make sure that the wetland in its entirety is showing that plan because that's what we're approving. So, should there be flags, John, on that? >> So, the only only flags I'm confirming, Lisa, are the ones that are shown with the KT series
23 through, if you could scroll up a little bit. >> Oh, yes, of course. KT >> KT4. So the only flags I'm confirming with this AN router are KT4 through KT23. So that's all I see on this plan. So that's all I'm confirming. >> That's all we're asking to be confirmed.
>> Okay. So per D's direction on many projects that I've worked on. Uh I would like you to add a note to this plan. It says nothing, you know, in this area has been delineated. Please, so we can remember that.
um when we look at this plan sheet at some point. So that's the limit of the that was the limit of the flag well and that area is unverified or was not delineated however you want to word it >> in the suggested actual web that you
just say that only request confirm were >> oh we're going to do that too I want another plan please cuz I have been directed in the past by D to add such a note and it makes it very clear if somebody just picks up the plan someday
>> yeah Sure. >> All right. Um, so unless there are questions from anyone, uh, we can consider a motion to close the the hearing for this resource area delineation.
So looking for a motion. Uh we have a motion from Joe, second from Mark. Uh and Mark and Lisa, how do you vote? >> Uh I would say pending receipt of a plan that's updated with a note, but then it's an I.
>> Okay. Uh and uh has Dan disappeared again? It looks like he has. >> I'm still here. >> Oh, you're still you are here. You were you were not on my screen. I don't know how it disappeared. All right. So, uh Joe. I >> Joe and Dan I and and I'll throw in an
I. So motion carries um pending that addition of the note. Um and it it actually, you know, if you look at the OAD, the O-rad that we're going to be voting on um
does say that no other resources are confirmed under this, right? I believe you usually put that in there. >> Well, um right. I mean, we can talk about it as soon as we get to it because we have a we have kind of a list of things, but uh we can clarify that
>> on the text of the ORAD itself. Um all right, we have one further uh Well, thank you. U we have one further hearing which is requested continuation but if we can just open uh the hearing
for 49 island road to just to get a plan I don't know if there was a plan in in Google but I didn't Oh >> yeah I didn't see anything
or I don't remember anything on Google Drive. >> I have an empty folder. >> Oh, I maybe I didn't put it in cuz I requested the continuence. >> Yeah, something's in there. >> All right. So, uh
>> the last time we opened, we just opened it with a general overview of proposed project and then continued it because we can't discuss the plans. >> Well, okay. Um, it says here it's for construction of a 36x
16 ft garage. Um, but they're requesting a continuation. So, that's the full extent of the opening. Yes. >> Y. >> So, it sounds like we're looking for a motion to continue. I Yes. 98.
>> So, moved. >> All right. Motion by Dan and seconded by So, yes. Yeah. Do we have a second? >> Uh, we have a second from Joe. Uh, so let's see. Uh, Mark and Lisa, do you
vote? >> I, >> and Joe and Dan, >> I >> I >> and I'll throw in an I. So, this hearing is continued until the 8th of September. We're now on a
request for certificate of compliance file number 250-1122 that is 36 West Main Street. This was a site that was before us fairly recently. They are really going licickety split on that. >> Yeah. This site um is right across from
where 123 meets Oak Street. >> Yeah. >> There's actually two constructions going on. It's not the one that's on Oak Street, but it's the one across the street. Um, yeah, and they've they've made significant progress. Um, and they put in the vegetative I mean the visual
buffer markers uh the other day. And you know, I think everything looks good. I think they still need to remove the road controls, but they're awaiting to make sure that they got they got a certificate of compliance uh before doing that. So, >> well, um I mean, how long has that been
under construction? Just uh a few months? No, it's been it's been in construction for a while. >> Okay. Well, maybe I just didn't see it until a couple months ago. >> All right. So, uh it from your perspective, it's everything is in order and a and a full
>> we received all the closeout information. So, as built and everything, the last piece was just the visual barrier markers being installed and they they did those. >> All right. So, it sounds like a full CLC for file number 250-122.
So, >> sorry. >> Uh, we have a motion by Lisa and Joe. Did you get that second? I >> Mark or Mark Mark got up this second. Okay. So, um Mark and Lisa, how do you vote? Hi.
>> Hi. >> And Dan and um >> I >> I >> and I'll throw in. So the the motion carries. So we are now into
our list of uh first order conditions for trial number. um 250-1181 and that was 260 South Washington Street
which was the facility for uh cold storage. Um so we have mostly standard orders and a couple of
custom orders. Um first specifying for 1 2 3 5 6 and uh one D in section A
uh and then we have in the back or near the end. So John Thomas I thought this was a typo the very first sentence under >> following resources they confirmed and that was through the INRAD right? >> Yes.
>> So I would make that a little clearer cuz I thought it was a typo. So I would say the resource areas under this order were approved in an ORAD and then say that file number because it makes it look like it's either a typo or I would make that clearer statement.
So I would say the resource areas were confirmed through the issuance of an OAD under D file 251171. Um and then the question I had was a uh
prior to construction d confirmation from the applicant that all applicable core permits have been submitted for compliance review. Submitted to who? And which core permits you referring to? The CGP? >> No, it's going to be it's going to be
for the the filling of the isolated wetlands. >> Okay. We're assuming they're federal. >> Yeah. I don't know if they are or not. >> Okay. >> We need to make sure that they're in compliance for for all sorts of uh So, do you want me to spell that out?
>> Well, it says confirmation from the applicant that permits have been submitted. So, permit application. Are we looking for the permit applications or are we looking for the permit from the court? >> All I would be looking for is the the that they filed for a self-verification permit for the isolated. >> Okay.
>> So, >> do you want to you want me to say that? >> Reward that again to be clear. Confirmation from the applicant that all applicable acco federal permit applications have been submitted for review and approval.
That's all. So, ACOM federal permit applications have been submitted for review and approval. >> Is the applicant allowed to participate at all? >> No. >> Arkansas has researched this and and
determined that we don't need any federal mers. >> Okay. So the feds are so our our word on the street right now from the core uh is that every single wetland is federal unless they determine otherwise. Believe
it or not you can I mean you know we challenged that to say well what good is consult with them and they said you will not know if anything is nonfederal unless you file for JD. So everything is assumed under the nexus law right now.
Okay. So John, so maybe we maybe we say that um or or a finding that it's not jurisdictional, >> right? >> Yeah. I mean I think if that was the case, then the feds would have to state that they're not jurisdictional, right?
They would provide a letter or notice. >> Well, they would So the applicant would file a JD. >> Yeah. and the core would issue a determination. >> Yeah, that's typically what happens with federal. Okay. >> So, in the absence of them having to file a permit, maybe they want to do a
JD first to prove that it may not be a federal element. Don't know. So, I would leave it open for them that, you know, proof of an application filing and or proof that it's non-jurisdictional uh a non-jurisdictional federal wetland are
water of the US. Um, that's all I had. >> All right. Um, anyone else have any comments? So, I think with those revisions, uh,
we're happy we can issue this. >> Yeah, I think that works based on what Lisa said. >> Okay. So, um, we would be looking for a motion to approve the orders of conditions for
file number 250-1181, 260 South Washington Street as modified as the draft was modified. >> So, second. We have a motion from Lisa,
seconded by Dan. So, uh, Mark and Lisa, how do you vote? >> I >> I. >> And Joe and Dan, how do you guys vote? >> I. >> And I'll throw in an I. The motion
carries for approval of the modified draft. Um, our next item is the order of resource area delineation
for zero east pod street file number 250-11 82. This was the site that has a tremendous amount of wetlands and a perennial stream
near the street. >> Yeah. Okay, I think you captured everything. >> Yeah, >> thank you. >> So, I make a motion to issue the ORAD for uh 250-1183. Second. >> So, we have a motion by Lisa, seconded
by Joe. Um, Mark and Lisa, how do you vote? >> I >> I >> And Dan and Joe, how do you vote? >> I >> And I'll throw in an I. That motion that OAD carries or the motion for the
approving the OAD carries. Next item is the order of resource area delineation for file number 250-1185 which is 0 and 50 Lincoln Street.
Um, so this is the one we had the question of the flags up front are not or the flags on the east side are not delineated.
Um, and it is noted that the confirmation of resource areas includes flags numbered KT through 4 through KT 23. It doesn't >> Did you say Bra or Lincoln Street? >> Lincoln.
>> We're on Street. >> Yeah, we're on Lincoln Street right now. >> Oh, I thought we >> Oh, I I might I don't know if I took it out of out of order. I might have taken it out of order. Yeah. >> So I we can just continue with Lincoln. >> Yep.
>> Um but this is the one where we had the discussion where only one side of the wetland was delineated. >> So do we want to put a wording change uh uh saying this confirmation relates only
to >> I mean I couldn't put only to the flags. Uh the the confirmation of the resource area um is how about if instead of includes is limited to the flags numbered KT4
through KT23 and >> and does not extend to the east portion of the site. So you want me to say the confirmation of the resource areas is limited to the flags number KT through K through 4 through 23.
>> Yeah. But I think specifying but does not extend to the east side of the site. >> Does not extend to the east uh portion of the site. >> Correct. Yeah. But I mean the
justification is all of that area is developed to the extent possible. So it's just >> well it's going to be its own separate part prop. It currently is its own separate property anyway. My understanding is it's already been subdivided >> the east but actually one of those
parcels still has a small portion of land on Yeah, there's a house. There's a house on it, I think. >> But okay. But that's >> could it be east portion of the site plans? >> It's not just the specific. >> Well, it has it has an actual physical
address, I believe, cuz it has a house on it. >> Yeah. But the the question is the ownership. >> So presum you should take them separately. you should identify those separately because we don't know if they
were going to be combined someday, right? So, you want to say what's at zero and what's at 50. They're two separate lots. Correct. >> Yeah. And well, my point my point being is that I think the if I'm if I'm
if I'm not mistaken, it's only for 29A, 29B, and 30-02. So I don't know if 30-2 can you go on to actually let me see. >> Yeah, I mean they may not have ownership of that parcel that had the small
portion of upland on it. They just delineated it simply because it was contiguous. I just want to make sure it's not the parcel that's applicable to this an Yeah, the assessor didn't have it processed yet.
Let me see the plan that they submitted to >> the body line right here >> somewhere right here. >> Yeah, if you could if you would mind. I I think we should separate these out by address, John. >> Yeah, I I'll do that. The uh map I see.
So, they just subdivided it. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So, it's three parcels. >> It's lot A. So, it's lot 29A. So, I'll say Oh, no. It is part part of that is on there. Okay. >> Yeah. But presumably that that on the bottom of the screen, the parcel to the
to the right that has a tiny bit of upland, that's owned by somebody else. now because there's a house on it. >> That would be the address of 50. >> So why do I say the wetlands >> the wetlands closest to Lincoln Street
were not are not confirmed under this O-r. >> All right, that specifies. >> Is that is that specific enough? >> I think so. >> Yeah, I would still break these down into the three parcels on here. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So >> So I would say, you know, parcel What's
the first one? Sorry, can you scroll up a little? >> 29 A >> 29 A and 30- >> We're not calling that a parcel number. It's just still referenced as back 12 lot 30-02. >> Yeah. >> So for that one, John, I would say that the delineation is limited to the
western edge of the wetland. And and then we have 29B, which is absent, has no wetlands on it. And then 29A is similar to the other one, right? only the western edge
>> was delayed. So I I would write all those out separately because I was >> you know typically you issue the ORAD for one at a time but we got to make it clearance. >> Would you like to add?
>> Yes, please. >> Would you like to add it near the wetlands? >> We typically put it on the lot. Correct. >> Okay. So you want over. >> Yeah. Or underneath the lot number or whatever. Yep. Yep.
>> Thank you. >> Uh it should probably match the ORAD language. So John, what are we saying on there? So I'm saying the confirmation of resource areas is limited to flags number KT4 through KT23 23 on map 12 lot
29A and lot 30-02 it'll put it in the Zoom chat >> share it. >> Okay, that's good. Thank you. Okay. So, you just want to repeat that on the other lot just in case it's ever
sold off at some point separately. One record of each one. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Stop. >> Uh, I think we're good. Thank you. >> Oh, look at you. Oh, talking
>> a hybrid meeting there. John, >> what's that? I I prefer Zoom if you really want to know the truth, but >> I just >> All right. Thank you.
>> So, I'll make a motion to issue the OED for 250-1185 as discussed. Second. >> So, we have a motion by Lisa, seconded by Joe. Uh, Mark and Lisa, how do you vote?
>> I I >> Joe and Dan, how do you vote? >> I I >> And I'll throw in an I. So, the modified U order resource area delineation
um is approved. Our last one is is We're at for file number 250- 1183. Um, is it au >> I keep saying a brew. >> Um,
so, um, all right. So we have the areas noted uh and that's that's an acceptable description to everybody. Five and six >> as discussed. Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> So we consider a motion. >> I'll make a motion to issue profile 250-113. >> Second. >> So we have a motion by Lisa, seconded by Joe. Um, Mark Henley, how do you vote?
>> I I >> And Joe and Dan, how do you vote? >> I. >> And was that was that an I from you, Joe? >> Yes. >> Okay. And I'll throw in an I. The motion carries. And I believe that brings us to
the end of this somewhat long agenda. Yes. And I do have this back and uh >> this my copy. So I I think we're ready
for that. um a dopamine uh increasing part of the meeting the uh motion to adjourn. >> Oh,
everybody feel better. >> All right. >> No, Julia didn't make it. Dan, did you just make it? Dan just made it. First and second. >> First and second. >> All right. Good guys. Good night, everyone. All right. I need I need you
guys to properly motion to adjurnn. Sorry. >> Hopefully you didn't scare the new person away. >> Well, she she don't leave. >> She reassured us. >> We need we need a proper motion to adjourn. >> Good night.
>> Okay. A motion by Dan, second by >> a second. >> Uh second by Lisa. So um >> Mark and Jo. >> All right. Well, then we have to stay here all night because we don't know your
>> All right. Everybody say I and we're set up. >> All right. Thank you. They stop.